Canon Officially Discontinues Three Lenses

[JonAustin]

The 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro was discontinued last year.

Not according to Canon UK, it's still in their current lineup. And it's still very much available for sale. While people still want it (and it is pretty much the sharpest 50mm lens Canon currently sell - which to be fair isn't saying a lot) they'll still make it.

I love mine.

(however I haven't seen the 1:1 adaptor for it offered for sale new for a very long time)

Fair enough. If Canon maintains an online resource showing when its lenses are discontinued, I haven't found it. I'm happy to hear that the lens lives on in other regions, if no longer in the U.S. The source for my comment was The Digital Picture (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=287)

I love mine as well, for what it is, and I agree about its great sharpness (and low distortion, as well).

 

[JonAustin]

Canon finally releases the AHSanford Special.

50mm ring USM 1.4 IS macro 1:1? lol

50mm ring USM f/1.x IS without macro, actually ...

 

[scrup]

Lenses only get discontinued once stock gets low.

They probably still have a boatload of the 50mm 1.8 Micrometer in stock and others that are still on the list.

The 75-300 lenses are bundles with Rebel kits so they will keep on making them.

 

[Loswr]

They probably still have a boatload of the 50mm 1.8 Micrometer in stock

That's a pretty small lens! That must be why they invented nano USM.

 

[leadin2]

More out of curiosity: Has the 35mm 1.4 mark I already been officially discontinued? At least at some online-sites, It is still available for purchase ...

As great as the mark II version might be optically, it is a little bit pricey for me ...

In my opinion, it would be a poor investment to pay for a version I 35mm. Mine was not especially sharp and had purple fringing even at f/5.6. I went with the Sigma Art 35mm 1.4 for a couple of years, thought it much better than the Canon I, but had some reservations about AF on outer points, and I wasn't crazy about the bokeh.

Enter the Canon II, wow, what a lovely lens! If I'm not mistaken, it has already been available refurbished from Canon, and I'd much rather get one of those than a new version I.

Yes, the newer one is pricey, but sometimes it's worth it to save up a while longer and spend a bit more than lay out cash for something that would likely never quite satisfy, leading to buying the version II later anyway.

Perhaps I am the other person who refuses to pay more for mark II.

I was waiting for the price drop on mark I when mark II was announced, but my local Canon website didn't do that. They removed mark I immediately. I believed they stop importing mark I as none of the local stores have any stock. I remembered reading somewhere that mentioned Canon has stopped production on mark I. Just bought one recently from B&H, it was probably the last batch. The lens code indicates that it was from early 2016 batch.

 

[PCM-madison]

I hope Canon is working on a DO replacement. My light travel kit is a 6D + 24-105 F4 L IS + 70-300 DO IS. For me, because the DO lens is smaller, lighter, and less conspicuous than the L zooms, it is a great travel zoom for many trips that are not photography focused. I have also been very happy with the images it makes so long as I shoot in RAW, like this eared grebe I shot earlier today (on a trip to visit my MIL).

 

[Tom W]

I own 2 of the 3, and have owned the third at one time or another.
The 24-105 - still a very good, versatile lens.
70-300 IS - fairly decent lens, but no competition for the L.
70-300 IS DO - an intermediate range lens, with a price tag higher than it's IQ.

 

[PCM-madison]

I agree that the recently discontinued 70-300 DO IS is not a good value when considering MSRP vs IQ. I payed in the current used price range for mine ($500) and consider it to be a bargain at this price. I am fortunate to also own the 70-300 L IS and have compared the DO to the L in real world situations several times. With good light, they give very similar results for me with a very small edge for the L. The difference is larger in marginal light. On balance, the lower size and weight lead me to bring the DO on trips where photography is a minor focus (like my current visit to my MIL) and the L when photography is more important (like hiking trips in a national parks). My hope is that a new DO zoom with improved technology such as found in the 400mm DO IS II would make a new DO zoom a winner for every situation.

 

[neonlight]

(however I haven't seen the 1:1 adaptor for it offered for sale new for a very long time)

From what I can tell, the 25mm extension tube will give 1:1 at half the price of the 1:1 converter. Which gives the better results?

 

[johnhenry]

Gee, I guess I have to go and dump my 25-105 f/4 because its no longer the best.

Just revamping old lenses into new ones is not innovation.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Gee, I guess I have to go and dump my 25-105 f/4 because its no longer the best.

Just revamping old lenses into new ones is not innovation.

Who exactly said that? People still use the Magic Drainpipe and the 50/1.0. And the 400/5.6. And lots of others. Who said that because Canon moved their support on you had to ditch a lens?

 

[ahsanford]

There are a good number more Canon lenses that could and should be "officially discontinued".
First and foremost 75-300 III and 75-300 III USM come to mind, pieces of junk.

Are any of the following officially discontinued ?
* 50/1.8 II (replaced by STM)
* 135/2.8 SF (no replacement)
* 28/1.8 USM (replaced by 28/2.8 IS)
* 28-135 (replaced by 24-105 IS STM "non L")
* 17-40/4 L (replaced by 16-35/4 L)
* 16-35 / 2.8 L II (replaced by Mk. III)
* 200/2.8 L II (replaced by 70-200/2.8 II IS)
* 28-300 L (no replacement)
* 24-70 / 2.8 L (replaced by Mk. II)
* 100-400 L (replaced by Mk. II)
* 70-200 / 4 L (replaced by IS)

Yikes. A few glaring errors above.

The 28 f/1.8 was not replaced with the 28 f/2.8 IS. The 28 f/2.8 IS version replaced the 28 f/2.8. As far as I can tell, Canon sees fit to offer a [fast] and [slow + IS] 28 prime for the FF folks. They are separate product lines for different needs.

And the IS version of the 70-200s did not replace the non-IS version of anything. Canon for a long time wanted 4 price points in the 70-200 L space -- f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS.

And the 200 f/2.8L II was not replaced by a 70-200 -- it's just another option. Some folks love the 200 prime's size and weight compared to the zoom.

And the 17-40L may be on it's way out (someday), but Canon doesn't seem to be in a hurry there. How many folks are snapping that one up when they jump from crop to FF and need a (relatively) affordable UWA zoom option?

- A

 

[LonelyBoy]

And the IS version of the 70-200s did not replace the non-IS version of anything. Canon for a long time wanted 4 price points in the 70-200 L space -- f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS.

Not to challenge, but I'm curious - where did they say that? That seems unusually open for them (and seems like a very cluttered 70-200L range, especially alongside the two 70-300s.

 

[ahsanford]

And the IS version of the 70-200s did not replace the non-IS version of anything. Canon for a long time wanted 4 price points in the 70-200 L space -- f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS.

Not to challenge, but I'm curious - where did they say that? That seems unusually open for them (and seems like a very cluttered 70-200L range, especially alongside the two 70-300s.

Never stated, only inferred from what was offered. They kept all four lenses in production simultaneously and sold them alongside one another.

I believe the IS II replaced the original IS at one point, and the non-IS f/2.8 was eventually obsoleted, but at one point, it was indeed a four price point market offering -- the envy of the industry, IMHO.

- A

 

[PCM-madison]

One more plug for the much maligned Canon 70-300mm DO (hoping for and update), here is a Jamaican Hummingbird shot on a 60D with a high density APS-C sensor and the 70-300mm DO.

 

[BeenThere]

Hi,
I need help about my lens, it is a CANON 300MM F4 L IS USM, i am looking for the FRONT GLASS/FRONT ELEMENT and METAL MOUNT. Please let me know where i can buy any of those parts.
Cheers.

Cesar Legaspi

I'm sending you a PM.

 

[DJL329]

And the IS version of the 70-200s did not replace the non-IS version of anything. Canon for a long time wanted 4 price points in the 70-200 L space -- f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS.

Not to challenge, but I'm curious - where did they say that? That seems unusually open for them (and seems like a very cluttered 70-200L range, especially alongside the two 70-300s.

Never stated, only inferred from what was offered. They kept all four lenses in production simultaneously and sold them alongside one another.

I believe the IS II replaced the original IS at one point, and the non-IS f/2.8 was eventually obsoleted, but at one point, it was indeed a four price point market offering -- the envy of the industry, IMHO.

- A

Actually, the non-IS 70-200mm f/2.8L was not retired. It is still part of the line-up and available for purchase, even direct from Canon.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/91680-USA/Canon_2569A004_70_200mm_f_2_8L_USM_Autofocus.html

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/ef-70-200mm-f-28l-usm

Having four different versions/price points gives consumers a choice based on the features they want/price they're willing to pay, in a popular focal range.

 

[ahsanford]

Actually, the non-IS 70-200mm f/2.8L was not retired. It is still part of the line-up and available for purchase, even direct from Canon.

I stand corrected, thanks.

- A

 

[AvTvM]

Actually, the non-IS 70-200mm f/2.8L was not retired. It is still part of the line-up and available for purchase, even direct from Canon.
...
Having four different versions/price points gives consumers a choice based on the features they want/price they're willing to pay, in a popular focal range.

Correct, the 70-200/2.8 L non IS is also still listed with Canon in Europa and at stores.

But actually i rather believe Canon is still sitting on a large stockpile of unsold 70-200/2.8 L (non IS) lenses ... probably they made some "minimum size production run" ... customers either went for the IS versions or got the f/4 with IS for less money, if budget was tight.

I'd be really surprised, if they still produce that lens currently.

 

[Rachael Alice]

Replacement for every discontinued product (here I mean to say for the lens) is available?