List of rumored lenses

M

muteteh

Guest
scott said:
I want the EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS, but think it will easily be $700 more since it will have IS.

Why is it that so many people want an EF 24-70mm lens with IS ?
 

ronderick

EOS RP
Jul 21, 2010
396
0
47
Taiwan
muteteh said:
Why is it that so many people want an EF 24-70mm lens with IS ?

There's been reports of QC issues with the current EF 24-70mm (focusing problems, etc.).

Also, an H-IS version of this mid-range zoom would give you more control in low-light situations.
 
T

that1guy

Guest
ronderick said:
muteteh said:
Why is it that so many people want an EF 24-70mm lens with IS ?

There's been reports of QC issues with the current EF 24-70mm (focusing problems, etc.).

Also, an H-IS version of this mid-range zoom would give you more control in low-light situations.

Two more reasons:
1-If it was H-IS, it would be even better for video, and video seems to be big for Canon (and growing for that matter).

2-Some people like to use that nice sharp lens stopped down sometimes (say for landscape), but they don't always have a tripod (happens to me all the time); IS could be really handy in a situation like that. It is basically taking one of the most used lenses, and giving it one more tool.
 
S

Sebastian

Guest
ronderick said:
muteteh said:
Why is it that so many people want an EF 24-70mm lens with IS ?

There's been reports of QC issues with the current EF 24-70mm (focusing problems, etc.).

So Canon should design a EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM II. (I'd buy one, BTW, if it's significantly better than the current 24-70...)

ronderick said:
Also, an H-IS version of this mid-range zoom would give you more control in low-light situations.

As I have pointed out earlier on the CR blog, IS doesn't help you one tiny bit if your subject's moving. Yes, that might happen...


Regards,

Sebastian
 
M

Mike79

Guest
PLEASE tell me why Canon are ignoring the calls for an updated 24-70 2.8 (or new 24-105 2.8)? Surely there must be enough demand for this fabled improved lens to be developed!?!?
 

kubelik

EOS R
Aug 11, 2010
824
0
mike, I would suspect that it's because people haven't been clamoring for a 24-70 L IS until fairly recently ... and it's still not clear to me if there's actually a lot of people out there clamoring for it, or if it's just on the CR forums. the 24-70 L is one of the first lenses that anyone who goes full-frame gets, so basically everyone has to decide to upgrade to a 24-70 L IS that costs in the $2K range

I would think that there are three things that determine the timetable for development and release of such a lens:

1. market demand
2. current projects competing for development resources
3. profit goals for original lens to be replaced

unless there is massive and sustained demand for it, canon will probably take its time clearing out the projects it has already planned off its plate before putting a redesign of the 24-70 into the queue.
 
P

pazuzu

Guest
kubelik said:
... I would suspect that it's because people haven't been clamoring for a 24-70 L IS until fairly recently ... and it's still not clear to me if there's actually a lot of people out there clamoring for it, or if it's just on the CR forums. the 24-70 L is one of the first lenses that anyone who goes full-frame gets, so basically everyone has to decide to upgrade to a 24-70 L IS that costs in the $2K range ...

Actually, a 24-70mm 2.8L IS lens has been on wish lists since before 2008 (possibly 2007). If you do a search, you'll see that there has been speculation about that lens for quite some time. Each year it would seem there's some sort of rumor about a fabled 24-70 2.8L IS lens that is in "development" or "pre-production" and is "ready for public release" usually around big events like Photokina yet there has always been disappointment. I had hoped that this year would be different but alas it seems it's another year for big wishes and bigger disappointments.
 
E

Edwin Herdman

Guest
Sebastian said:
As I have pointed out earlier on the CR blog, IS doesn't help you one tiny bit if your subject's moving. Yes, that might happen...
I thought the Hybrid IS of the 100mm macro was specifically designed for that situation - where you are rotating the lens, but not moving it up or down, in order to follow a subject.
 
S

Sebastian

Guest
Edwin Herdman said:
Sebastian said:
As I have pointed out earlier on the CR blog, IS doesn't help you one tiny bit if your subject's moving. Yes, that might happen...
I thought the Hybrid IS of the 100mm macro was specifically designed for that situation - where you are rotating the lens, but not moving it up or down, in order to follow a subject.

No, that would be more commonly referred to as "panning".
Canon's Hybrid IS is designed to compensate accidental camera movement and doing so not only for "shift" movements as the "classic" IS does, but also for rotational movements.


Regards,

Sebastian
 
E

Edwin Herdman

Guest
So maybe not the Hybrid IS, but have you heard of Mode 2 IS? It detects panning and shuts down the IS function in the direction of the intended movement. Some discussion of that here, plus an example image:
http://photo.net/sports-photography-forum/00QCCh

Don't really see any reason this wouldn't work for movies. Image stabilizers are used in some video cameras after all. Hope I'm not misunderstanding what you mean.
 
T

that1guy

Guest
^the reason that I have heard (from Vincent Laforet) that the H-IS is better for video is that it is smoother when it activates and is a little less "jerky". This isn't a problem shooting stills, but when you are shooting video constantly it can make a difference. Hearing him talk about it was the thing that finally got me excited about H-IS. As for the specific type of movement it helps alleviate, I couldn't tell you that.
 
S

Son of Daguerre

Guest
The EF 24-70mm Æ’/2.8L USM is "only" 8 years old. 'Fraid it won't be replaced for a few years.
 
F

Flake

Guest
The 24 - 70mm may only be 8 years old, but it has a significant defect in the field curvature it displays, this is especially noticable on FF. This is Canons flagship standard zoom, it has the IS technology to hand and a redesign is badly needed, I think it's time for a better flagship product regardless of how old the design is.
 

kubelik

EOS R
Aug 11, 2010
824
0
approaching this slightly differently, it's not like Canon even has to officially declare a replacement for the 24-70 f/2.8 L ... they can go ahead a release a new IS version and continue to sell the original. there's probably going to be a significant enough price gap that these will now serve different tiers of the market. so the fact that the original has only been on market for 8 years is irrelevant
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,398
5,161
kubelik said:
approaching this slightly differently, it's not like Canon even has to officially declare a replacement for the 24-70 f/2.8 L ... they can go ahead a release a new IS version and continue to sell the original. there's probably going to be a significant enough price gap that these will now serve different tiers of the market. so the fact that the original has only been on market for 8 years is irrelevant

Makes sense, analogous to their flagship telezoom series, the 70-200's, which are available with and without IS.
 
R

rejames1

Guest
What are the chances of us ever seeing an updated and faster version of the 28-300 L ? I know it's a heavy beast, but I love it!
 
F

Flake

Guest
Not a chance of replacing the 28 - 300mm IS L, it was only released in 2004 replacing the 35 - 350mm version, and is a good performer. How on earth do you think they could improve it realistically?
IS is 3rd generation, and the amount of glass required and pro spec body means it's going to weigh quite a bit.
There are quite a few lenses I'd like to see replaced before this one, the 24 - 70mm f/2.8 L and a new decent performing wide angle too!
 

traveller

EOS R
Jul 22, 2010
895
58
CR Guy, I don't know how you manage to assign your CR ratings to all the rumours that you must be sent. By this I mean that the level of 'background noise' in the rumour mill must be immense. It doesn't take much to think up believable specifications for a possible new lens.

About the only people who are posting truely whacky lenses are Canon themselves... 8-15mm fisheye; 70-300mm f4-5.6 L; and of course the superteles and 'extenders' desparately needed an update.

Not that these lenses aren't welcome, but I'm sure that there are a lot of people who would have suggested other lenses as a higher priority.
 
R

rejames1

Guest
Flake said:
Not a chance of replacing the 28 - 300mm IS L, it was only released in 2004 replacing the 35 - 350mm version, and is a good performer. How on earth do you think they could improve it realistically?
IS is 3rd generation, and the amount of glass required and pro spec body means it's going to weigh quite a bit.
There are quite a few lenses I'd like to see replaced before this one, the 24 - 70mm f/2.8 L and a new decent performing wide angle too!

I don't know how they could realistically improve it really. I rented one for 30 days from lensrentals.com for my honeymoon to the Canadian Rockies and loved it, in spite of the weight. I did find myself wishing many times that it was faster.

I am a simi-pro photographer and am looking into purchasing a good tele-zoom.

I currently own the EF 50mm f/1.2L USM, EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM and the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM. These lenses are mounted on a full frame 5d (mk1) and the 1.6 cropped Xsi. (I'm waiting for the 5D III to be released before I upgrade bodies)

I found the 28-300 L to be a great "all around" lens. I loved the reach of that 300mm (being that I was used to a reach of only 200) and 28mm was wide enough I didn't have to carry additional lenses. I am seriously concidering the new EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM... I just wish it was a little wider to keep from having to swap out lenses mid shoot. I could care less about the yet to be released 70-300 because of the slow speed.

So... I was in "wishfull thinking land" hoping that there might be a faster version of the 28-300 in the works. But I guess that's just a pipe dream. I'll probably end up buying the new 70-200 with an extender... I'll still need something for that mid-range though. I guess I'll worry about that if and when they release a new 24-70.

As for your decent wide angle hopes... I know it's only 16mm, but I really enjoy my EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM.

Keep on clicking...
 

kubelik

EOS R
Aug 11, 2010
824
0
rejames, you are one strong individual if you're hoping for a faster version of the 28-300 ... that thing is already a monster of a lens