- Mar 28, 2012
Yup.Why would I want a 24-105 f4? Wait and see what happens to the price of the superb TS-E 24 II when an overpriced TS-R 24 comes out. I can't wait!
The irony is...the canon FD lenses are well worth looking at again, in this day of adapting vintage lenses to mirrorless cameras.That’s because you were immunised against future rejections from Canon in the FD days However, I agree with you, bring on the bargains !
I'm not sure that the discontinued lenses will be bargains - either new or second hand. Where there is not a direct RF replacement eg Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L USM Macro, they fill a niche that is not catered for.
I think size and weight is a very good reason to switch lenses to newer ones. Sharpness is also often better and AF is even faster (though all my EF L lenses work fine with the adapter).
I am also surprised that they discontinue lenses BEFORE they even announced (yet alone actualy deliver) equivalent lenses (with equivalent focal length and aperture)....I'm very surprised this is happening so quickly. With the release of the 1DX III so recent, I had assumed Canon would start doing this in 3-4 years from now. (i.e. a full DSLR product cycle after their last DSLR body).
I was thinking of selling my 135 F2L... but now, I may just keep it as a momento of my EF days an for the odd chance I ever use it on the R5. With the 85 1.2L being so good... I haven't used it in a very long time...
Whats your experience with the TS-E 24?Why would I want a 24-105 f4? Wait and see what happens to the price of the superb TS-E 24 II when an overpriced TS-R 24 comes out. I can't wait!
That’s because you were immunised against future rejections from Canon in the FD days However, I agree with you, bring on the bargains !
I've never understood the rumours of the demise of EF-M. I'm just speculating, of course, but I don't see the end of EF/EF-s having any relevance to EF-M. It seems to me that Canon's intention for EF-M was always for it to be first and foremost a small and light system, designed to appeal to consumers who wanted something better than a phone but who didn't want to carry a "big camera" and who probably didn't want to spend a whole lot of money on it, and also perhaps as second camera system for enthusiasts and pros who want something better than a phone as a "carry everywhere" camera when they don't want to lug their bigger and heavier gear. As such, Canon never tried to make EF-M a system which had options to do everything you could possibly think of (eg no long macro lenses, no super telephoto focal length lenses, no tilt-shift lenses, etc) and never marketed EF-M as a replacement for EF-s. I don't see how the replacement of EF/EF-s with RF has much relevance to the niche that EF-M is intended to fill. I also think the people saying the EF-M system needs this or that (more fast primes, etc) or the system is dead are missing the point of the EF-M system. If those are the sorts of lenses someone wants to use, the EF-M system is not the right choice. That doens't mean it's not the right choice for other people though, of course. Further, even though RF and EF-m have different mounts, I assume a lot of technology (eg AF systems) still can be relatively easily shared between the systems. (For that matter, I assume DSLRs and MILCs can also share quite a bit of technology too. Nevertheless, I assume (without knowing) it's a bit easier to share tech between RF and EF-m since both are mirrorless systems.) So, personally, I don't see why Canon would discontinue the EF-M system unless they have decided the size of the market niche that system is intended to cater to has shrunk too much. As long as that is not the case, I expect Canon will continue to develop the EF-M system (albeit not in the way, and not at the speed, some people seem to think Canon should).Dare I say it?
EF is *******.
I do wonder if moving forward with this was always the intention or if the pandemic accelerated things. Also curious that it's just EF and EF-S but no EF-M glass as of yet. Given how dark some see the fate of that line, I would have expected to see it on the chopping block too. Perhaps not dead yet?
I disagree. They realize that they have to pick one path (RF) and not two for the same market. They cannot afford to compete with themselves as well as Sony and Nikon.Mass lens discontinuations strike me as being premature. It shows contempt for their DSLR users.
I doubt the 500 f/4L II will ever be a bargain LOL, but I won't be selling mine until I see new gen lightweight <2.5kg release from anyone, be it Canon, Sony or Nikon, which will no doubt be at least 50% dearer than the EF price.
EF-S lenses being discontinued and yet nothing in the pipeline for entry-level and crop sensor shooters. Is Canon going to offer anything for this price point or are they really banking on the entire vlogger and student/casual photographer market disappearing altogether?
That’s because you own one and you think it has more value than it does. Whilst big whites traditionally hold their value well there are realignments in value whenever there is an update or change. You might not think your 500 f4 is comparable to a 100-500 f4.5-7.1, but iso performance is way better now than it was and people have options and most who own R series cameras would buy the RF zoom over the EF prime.I doubt the 500 f/4L II will ever be a bargain LOL, but I won't be selling mine until I see new gen lightweight <2.5kg release from anyone, be it Canon, Sony or Nikon, which will no doubt be at least 50% dearer than the EF price.