Is the EF purge beginning? The EF 200mm f/2L IS USM is now listed as discontinued

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,436
2,304
Not really. Canon don’t want to be left holding any stock and will take fewer sales then possible to prevent that cost of money being tied up in stock that is a slow seller. As word gets out it is in short supply the price will go up, then as demand drops the price will come down.

Canon will expect that and it is the optimal way of them realizing the maximum they can from the lens. Don’t forget these big whites are made in the same place on the same production line in batches. It takes time and money to switch out the tooling so if they make another batch of 200 f2’s they have to not make something else, and I’m sure they feel capacity is best used making something else.

Yeah, actually that makes more sense. I wonder how much it would have to go up for them to think, "Looks like we unintentionally created a fad, maybe we can make some easy and quick money running off another 50 of these?" Though I wouldn't expect such a thing to happen in the market (much less have Canon decide to exploit it).
 

StoicalEtcher

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
407
349
Yorkshire
Canon probably considered how much it would cost to make a batch of this lens, projected how long it would take to sell the whole batch, and decided its not worth investing in the materials, manual labor, etc required to make it.
Exactly this in my opinion.

And, as PBD says, everything you are producing now means there is something else you're not making right now, so....

Will be a great shame. I do think that for anyone wedded to the EF/OVF system, if you want to own that 'special' lens from new, whatever that might be for you, then now is the time to be buying (if you haven't already).
 

dirtyvu

EOS 90D
Jan 7, 2019
102
86
I got it: RF is the future.
But what about all these affordable EF L lenses like 135 f2, 100 f2,8 macro, 70-200 f4 non IS? How expensive will the 135 f1,4 be?
I know most new RF lenses are better than the EF equivalent ones, but often 50% more expensive.
Sorry, but the bright RF future will be too expensive for many of us, and this in a shrinking market...

They're following the Tesla business model. Release some top end models that are highly profitable to grow and fund development of lower end models. Tesla had to do it because they were cash strapped for so long. Even now, they have only had a handful of profitable quarters that wouldn't have been profitable without the sale of regulatory credits.
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
CR Pro
Nov 7, 2013
3,624
2,784
Germany
I can understand that Canon is clearing up its EF portfolio and discontinues less requested lenses.
But I hope they keep developing bestsellers as long as a R6 or equivalent costs more than a 5D4 or a 6D2. :unsure:
And a R5 would be my goal as I see a R6 as a step backwards.
Right now the R/RF prices keep me away from "the new world".
 
Last edited:

geffy

EOS 90D
Jun 24, 2019
116
77
To be fair the RF version will be much better in every respect tor the same price
 

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,266
2,037
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
I don’t know how much more or little they can improve it from the EF version, it’ll be a difficult task that’s for sure. The EF version is near perfection, IMO.


You can make it shorter because of the RF mount. The lens could also be better balanced.. It would also get the latest AF algorithms. Canon also has new materials to reduce weight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
301
216
Looked at one of these on and off pretty frequently.

Glad I didn't buy one.

Maybe the price will come down in a little while.
I'd be careful buying an EF version myself. No one knows how long spare parts will be available. Canon stopped accepting repairs of the former 200mm f/1.8 L around 24 months after it was discontinued. Of course one can hope that it will last a long time. But its still an expensive lens and the resale value will drop a lot once it cannot be repaired any longer.
 

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,726
2,135
Hamburg, Germany
Patent shows it a little longer if I recall correctly.
Which is a comment made under every patent, because the length given in a patent is 20 mm longer than the actual length, and people compare against the EF version, which need to have 24 mm added to their length to make the comparison apples to apples. Perhaps you or the comment you're recalling already took that into account. But I doubt the lens will be longer.
 

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
301
216
Which is a comment made under every patent, because the length given in a patent is 20 mm longer than the actual length, and people compare against the EF version, which need to have 24 mm added to their length to make the comparison apples to apples. Perhaps you or the comment you're recalling already took that into account. But I doubt the lens will be longer.
That's likely correct! We can hope so. (y)
 

danski0224

EOS R
Apr 24, 2011
1,104
12
Which is a comment made under every patent, because the length given in a patent is 20 mm longer than the actual length, and people compare against the EF version, which need to have 24 mm added to their length to make the comparison apples to apples. Perhaps you or the comment you're recalling already took that into account. But I doubt the lens will be longer.
And that extra 24mm is a deal breaker. It makes the lens so huge and unwieldy.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: EOS 4 Life

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,726
2,135
Hamburg, Germany
And that extra 24mm is a deal breaker. It makes the lens so huge and unwieldy.
I guess this is sarcasm. In which case, you might want to read the post I was replying to.

It was stated that according to a patent, the RF replacement for the lens in the title would be longer than the EF one. And I pointed out that when the relevant factors are taken into account, this is probably not the case.

So I wasn't saying those aspects make the difference between huge or not. Just the difference between being larger or smaller than the EF equivalent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maximilian

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
1,267
1,356
I can understand that Canon is clearing up its EF portfolio and discontinues less requested lenses.
But I hope they keep developing bestsellers as long as a R6 or equivalent costs more than a 5D4 or a 6D2. :unsure:
And a R5 would be my goal as I see a R6 as a step backwards.
Right now the R/RF prices keep me away from "the new world".
A few years ago, I could "easily" afford an EOS 5 DIV + 100-400 for about Euro 4200.
The R5 + 100-500 is Euro 7200...that's 5 DIV, + 100-400 + 24 TSE + 135 f2.
PS: I'm using the EOS R, like it pretty much, but the only RF lens I bought (with heavy discount) is the 24-105 L.
The new price structure has, till now, dissuaded me from, as you said, fully entering the new world.
I know there are good non-L RF lenses (35 and 85 macro), but, since I often spend my vacations in "wet" countries like Western France ,Wales, Scotland, Norway etc..., I need splashproof L lenses.
PS: To be honest, the EOS 5 DIV cost approximately Euro 4200 when it was introduced...so, I remain confident as to the future acquisition of an EOS R5.;)
 
Last edited:

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
301
216
I can understand that Canon is clearing up its EF portfolio and discontinues less requested lenses.
But I hope they keep developing bestsellers as long as a R6 or equivalent costs more than a 5D4 or a 6D2. :unsure:
And a R5 would be my goal as I see a R6 as a step backwards.
Right now the R/RF prices keep me away from "the new world".
Apart from less MPIX its a big step up from the 5DIV if you shoot action or use fast primes wide open. AF is in another league and I love the new control options.

I also want more MPIX - however, due to the special memory card and the need for a new card reader you pay a lot on top for the R5. As I am waiting for the high MPIX "R", the R6 is a great option.

With the R6' fabulous DX sensor I can use Gigapixel AI, when I need more MPIX. Works for me. YMMV.