List of rumored lenses

[Helios68]

An EF-S 22mm f/2 STM lens would be a good reason to replace my heavy EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM with a light EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM

I do not find the EF-S 10-22mm really heavy. But a 22mm with large aperture would be useful for IQ (better CA control) and low light conditions (inside a church, night architecture, handheld use...)

 

[StoneColdCoffee]

Also, Canon- a 14-24 2.8 for under $2500 please.
[/quote]

+1 on that. or a 11-24mm f/2.8..just pleaseeee not the $3000 I keep hearing

 

[lintoni]

Also, Canon- a 14-24 2.8 for under $2500 please.

+1 on that. or a 11-24mm f/2.8..just pleaseeee not the $3000 I keep hearing
[/quote]
The rumoured imminent super-doopah ultra mega wide angle is 11-24 f/4.

 

[Ryan85]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

+1...I don't think it'll happen though unfortently.

 

[Arty]

Maybe I'm just losing hope. I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

I would really like to see a fast, new 50 mm lens with IS and USM.

 

[Joey]

An EF-S 22mm f/2 STM lens would be a good reason to replace my heavy EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM with a light EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM

I do not find the EF-S 10-22mm really heavy. But a 22mm with large aperture would be useful for IQ (better CA control) and low light conditions (inside a church, night architecture, handheld use...)

I don't find the 10-22 lens heavy either - it's one of the lightest lenses in my bag. 385g against 240g for the 10-18, and it has a longer zoom range and wider max aperture - and USM focusing. It's a great lens. If I didn't have it, I might buy the 10-18 for its compact size and IS but since I have the 10-22 and don't miss the IS, I'm sticking with what I have. I certainly wouldn't be thinking of changing for the weight saving!

 

[Joey]

Maybe I'm just losing hope. I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

I would really like to see a fast, new 50 mm lens with IS and USM.

You and me both. Canon's 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 lenses are very old designs (I seem to remember they're closely based on the old FD lenses from before the days of autofocus) and I haven't bought one, hoping for a modern design replacement. When my camera was a T90 I took for granted that I could get really good portraits with backgrounds thrown well out of focus, using the cheapest lens in my bag, my 50mm f/1.4. Now my widest aperture lens is f/2.8 and I want a portrait lens for my crop camera with an f/1.4 aperture but Canon don't make one that I want to buy...

 

[privatebydesign]

Maybe I'm just losing hope. I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

I would really like to see a fast, new 50 mm lens with IS and USM.

You and me both. Canon's 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 lenses are very old designs (I seem to remember they're closely based on the old FD lenses from before the days of autofocus) and I haven't bought one, hoping for a modern design replacement. When my camera was a T90 I took for granted that I could get really good portraits with backgrounds thrown well out of focus, using the cheapest lens in my bag, my 50mm f/1.4. Now my widest aperture lens is f/2.8 and I want a portrait lens for my crop camera with an f/1.4 aperture but Canon don't make one that I want to buy...

Core lens design is a very mature science, things like modern coatings and IS add somewhat, but the actual core design possibilities have been well understood, and made, for a very long time.

As for Canon's 50 f1.4, I can understand people not wanting to buy one, but if they want a fast 50 they are being silly. It is a very good lens that is available secondhand for crazy good value. Mine focuses spot on at 1.4 every single time, it has been sitting in the bottom of my bag for over ten years and has never given me an issue (in the same time I have sent L lenses to Canon over half a dozen times for repair), it weighs next to nothing and at f5.6 and smaller it is sharper than a 100 L Macro (which I also own).

 

[Joey]

Maybe I'm just losing hope. I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

I would really like to see a fast, new 50 mm lens with IS and USM.

You and me both. Canon's 50mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 lenses are very old designs (I seem to remember they're closely based on the old FD lenses from before the days of autofocus) and I haven't bought one, hoping for a modern design replacement. When my camera was a T90 I took for granted that I could get really good portraits with backgrounds thrown well out of focus, using the cheapest lens in my bag, my 50mm f/1.4. Now my widest aperture lens is f/2.8 and I want a portrait lens for my crop camera with an f/1.4 aperture but Canon don't make one that I want to buy...

Core lens design is a very mature science, things like modern coatings and IS add somewhat, but the actual core design possibilities have been well understood, and made, for a very long time.

As for Canon's 50 f1.4, I can understand people not wanting to buy one, but if they want a fast 50 they are being silly. It is a very good lens that is available secondhand for crazy good value. Mine focuses spot on at 1.4 every single time, it has been sitting in the bottom of my bag for over ten years and has never given me an issue (in the same time I have sent L lenses to Canon over half a dozen times for repair), it weighs next to nothing and at f5.6 and smaller it is sharper than a 100 L Macro (which I also own).

Point taken, but may I refer the court to the new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 which if reviews are to be believed is way sharper edge to edge than the Canon - because it's not a Tessar- or Sonnar-based lens but a more complex CAD-influenced design??

 

[davidcl0nel]

I don't want a Sigma 50 Art (its too heavy) from Canon, maybe this is the league of the next 50L (and maybe only 1.4 also!).
I want a replacement for the 50 1.8 or 50 1.4 class, and with IS. Usable and versatile as the 35 IS (i am a very big fan of this), sharp, no moving parts (inner focus), so nothing can break so easy. The 50 1.4 has a very poor design on focus tube and there are many many broken in the world...
85 1.8 is ok, but maybe here also a 85 2.0 IS with less fringing, maybe I would buy this.

 

[fragilesi]

An EF-S 22mm f/2 STM lens would be a good reason to replace my heavy EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM with a light EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM

I do not find the EF-S 10-22mm really heavy. But a 22mm with large aperture would be useful for IQ (better CA control) and low light conditions (inside a church, night architecture, handheld use...)

I don't find the 10-22 lens heavy either - it's one of the lightest lenses in my bag. 385g against 240g for the 10-18, and it has a longer zoom range and wider max aperture - and USM focusing. It's a great lens. If I didn't have it, I might buy the 10-18 for its compact size and IS but since I have the 10-22 and don't miss the IS, I'm sticking with what I have. I certainly wouldn't be thinking of changing for the weight saving!

I guess all things are relative but yes it's also as light as I have.

 

[jeffa4444]

Looking at the EBay prices for EF 50mm f1.8 MK 1 metal mount lenses Canon should slot in a 50mm f1.8 between the MK II and the 50mm f1.4 where there is a big gap on price giving the lens a metal mount clearly there is a market.

 

[Viggo]

So I guess the 35 L II Is no where still.. I was kind of hoping for it in early 2015, but the again, I was hoping for early 2006 (when it already was old), 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 also...

 

[Maximilian59]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

+1000
What will be the kit lens for the coming high megapixel body, if not an updated 24-105/4?

 

[Viggo]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

+1000
What will be the kit lens for the coming high megapixel body, if not an updated 24-105/4?

24-70 f2.8 L IS ? ;D

 

[reso285]

merci beaucoup pour ce list coque nexus 6 coque google nexus 6

 

[Mitch.Conner]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

+1000
What will be the kit lens for the coming high megapixel body, if not an updated 24-105/4?

24-70 f2.8 L IS ? ;D

Probably the 24-70 f/4L IS.

I am hopeful though that a 24-70 f/2.8L IS is around the corner. Not as a kit lens though.

 

[Pixelzoomer]

Thanks for that list!

BTW, there were mentions of replacements for the 45mm and 90mm tilt-shifts too. As I understood it, a 135mm tilt-shift macro (according to the patent info) could be the replacement for the 90mm. Don't know if they made it to any CR #.

 

[Maximilian59]

The rumors need to start materialising as lenses. The newer cameras (before we even get to 45 or 85MP as been rumored here) such as the 6d show up the problems of the EF-17-40mm f4L, EF24-105mm f4L both of which have pronouced chromatic abberations at 17mm and 24mm respectively. As sensors improve the faults of lenses masked at 8, 10, 12 or 18MP now show up and this undermines the system ability to produce great results. Sigma have shown improvement are possible (so has Zeiss at a price) and still remain competitive to Canon pricing.

A 24-105 II L really would be nice, especially mated with a 100-400 II L combo. Very versatile!

+1000
What will be the kit lens for the coming high megapixel body, if not an updated 24-105/4?

24-70 f2.8 L IS ? ;D

Probably the 24-70 f/4L IS.

I am hopeful though that a 24-70 f/2.8L IS is around the corner. Not as a kit lens though.

So there was nothing about a kit lens for the new 5Ds. I am still hoping there will be for the 5DIV. What I would like is a 24-105/2.8L with a 77mm filter thread and IS. This would perfectly fill up my gap between the 16-35/4 and 70-200/2.8. I can't see any reason, why it might be technically a problem to make such a lens. We have the 24-70/2.8L II without IS and the 70-200/2.8L II with IS.
This would be an outstanding zoom in comparison to Nikon, Sony and third party manufacturers. It could be priced to about 1.500-2.000 (Euro or dollars). That is about the price for the existing 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8. And if the image and built quality is on the level of the existing 2.8 zooms, I wouldn't hesitate a moment to buy one.

 

[daleg]

Maybe I'm just losing hope. I've been following this site much longer than I've been a forum member and I don't understand why Canon is so reluctant to develop/release lenses that they should know their customer base keeps hoping for.

I also can not understand why Canon is not updating its popular lenses, e.g 50 mm 1.4, 50 mm 1.2, 100-400 mm and others. Now Canon released USD 7000 (in Europe such lenses cost GPB 7,000). I and many other photographers will never have such lenses. However, Sigma and Tamron are able to release very high quality and affordable lenses. I think that Canon will have to revise its lens pricing strategy. Why we should pay for marginally better quality lenses for double price

I would really like to see a fast, new 50 mm lens with IS and USM.

You and me both... and I want a portrait lens for my crop camera with an f/1.4 aperture but Canon don't make one that I want to buy...

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=canon+50mm+1.0&_from=R40|R40&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.TRS0&_nkw=canon+50mm+1.0&_sacat=0

here's all you need:

the above linked 50mm f1.0L = an 80mm f1.0 portrait lens on a crop body. Add a 1.4x TC and you have a 70mm f1.4 on a full frame body, or a 91mm portrait lens on 1D (non-X or S) body of your choice.

kinda makes an Otus look rather reasonable.