List of rumored lenses

[neuroanatomist]

why would canon need to release 35mm f1.4L ?? other than to sell it at higher price, it is perfect already

The 35L could be a little sharper in the corners, and I'd really like weather sealing (and be willing to pay for it!).

 

[NXT1000]

The 35L could be a little sharper in the corners, and I'd really like weather sealing (and be willing to pay for it!).

come on, it is 35mm, wide lens, for a bit more than 1000 EURO, that is a bit too demanding. Of course in real world, if you pay 4000 EURO, you might get a bit better corners. Look at Leica price.

 

[NXT1000]

none I'd say! the f/2.8 is heavy enough and so far as I know there's no current DSLR f/2 zoom. Cost would also be prohibitive just look at the price of the 200mm f/2

i would like f2 lens zoom, i love 200mmf2, the only reason why i did not buy it, because i will die from exhaustion if i have to carry it around.

 

[neuroanatomist]

none I'd say! the f/2.8 is heavy enough and so far as I know there's no current DSLR f/2 zoom.

Not for Canon or Nikon. There are f/2 zoom lenses for m4/3-format bodies (2x crop).

 

[danpekr1857]

Any word on a efs 17-55 is.
The is need updating or sigma will walk all over canon.
Dan

 

[neuroanatomist]

Any word on a efs 17-55 is.
The is need updating or sigma will walk all over canon.

What does Sigma offer that 'walks all over' the current Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS?!?

 

[idigi]

The 35L could be a little sharper in the corners, and I'd really like weather sealing (and be willing to pay for it!).

Just curious: what is weather sealing for on 35L? Do you photograph with your Canon bodies in rain, snow or in sand that current 35L cannot deal with? Or is weather sealing more for peace of mind and primarily for general dust issues?

 

[neuroanatomist]

The 35L could be a little sharper in the corners, and I'd really like weather sealing (and be willing to pay for it!).

Just curious: what is weather sealing for on 35L? Do you photograph with your Canon bodies in rain, snow or in sand that current 35L cannot deal with? Or is weather sealing more for peace of mind and primarily for general dust issues?

I do shoot in the rain and snow with my 7D and weather-sealed lenses. Could the current 35L deal with that? I don't know...and I don't plan to take it out in the rain and test to the point of failure.

Honestly, I use the 35L most frequently on my 5DII for outdoor shooting at night, where the 7D's noise at high ISO would be a problem. So how useful would a sealed 35L be for me today? I've had occasions where I wanted to go out and shoot on a rainy night, but skipped it. Since lenses should significantly outlast bodies, I'm planning for the future, where a 1-series body is something I'll likely have.

 

[Heidrun]

Anybody heard anything about the lenses 14-24 L and 24-70 L mk II

 

[krboynton]

14-24 goes in the zoom list

Done

Also add the 15-50 ;D

Done.

And wasn't there some rumor about the 50 1.4 II being an L series lens?

I try to keep this list as objective as possible but I highly doubt this one. I think there is only one mention regarding this and it had to do with the debunked rumor about Canon getting rid of the non-L EF-lenses. I believe there is a market for an upgraded consumer grade 50 1.4. I also believe that Canon can improve on and keep the 50mm L-series as a 1.2.

I wouldn't be so sure. Canon has developed a sub-L build quality with the L label (100mm f/2.8L MACRO). Nikon has gotten away from their "non-L" style lenses and Canon is doing the same. If you want an inexpensive lens, buy an inexpensive camera that takes EF-S, a line that will continue to build. I would be shocked if any prime lens is unveiled that is not at least an 'L' in name.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon has developed a sub-L build quality with the L label (100mm f/2.8L MACRO).

How is the build quality of the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS 'sub-L'? Mine feels quite solid, definitely a step up from my EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. The 100L Macro is weather-sealed, many of my other L lenses are not. If you think it's 'sub-L' because the barrel is 'engineering plastic', well, most black L lens barrels are the same material.

the debunked rumor about Canon getting rid of the non-L EF-lenses.

How and when was the idea that Canon is done with non-L EF lenses debunked? The only non-L EF lens released since the launch of the first Canon APS-C camera was the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS lens, and it's pretty well known that the cost savings from EF-S telephoto lenses are a diminishing return. There hasn't been a new non-L EF prime lens since well before the D30.

 

[Eagle Eye]

EF 10-200mm f/2.8L Macro. IT'S COMING.

 

[ions]

Canon has developed a sub-L build quality with the L label (100mm f/2.8L MACRO).

How is the build quality of the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS 'sub-L'? Mine feels quite solid, definitely a step up from my EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. The 100L Macro is weather-sealed, many of my other L lenses are not. If you think it's 'sub-L' because the barrel is 'engineering plastic', well, most black L lens barrels are the same material.

the debunked rumor about Canon getting rid of the non-L EF-lenses.

How and when was the idea that Canon is done with non-L EF lenses debunked? The only non-L EF lens released since the launch of the first Canon APS-C camera was the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS lens, and it's pretty well known that the cost savings from EF-S telephoto lenses are a diminishing return. There hasn't been a new non-L EF prime lens since well before the D30.

I'm curious to hear how the 100L is sub L quality too.

 

[PXL_Pusher]

Canon has developed a sub-L build quality with the L label (100mm f/2.8L MACRO).

How is the build quality of the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS 'sub-L'? Mine feels quite solid, definitely a step up from my EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. The 100L Macro is weather-sealed, many of my other L lenses are not. If you think it's 'sub-L' because the barrel is 'engineering plastic', well, most black L lens barrels are the same material.

the debunked rumor about Canon getting rid of the non-L EF-lenses.

How and when was the idea that Canon is done with non-L EF lenses debunked? The only non-L EF lens released since the launch of the first Canon APS-C camera was the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS lens, and it's pretty well known that the cost savings from EF-S telephoto lenses are a diminishing return. There hasn't been a new non-L EF prime lens since well before the D30.

I'm curious to hear how the 100L is sub L quality too.

It's funny how something can be perceived as "cheap", or as stated above, "sub L" quality based on build material and weight alone. The truth is, as 95% of the photographers on this site will tell you, a lens doesn't gain it's classification into the "L" series based on build quality alone. Otherwise you could take the components from a 18-55 f/4.5-5.6 and assemble it within a 2lbs. weather sealed housing, and call it an "L"....

In my opinion, its the physics behind the optics and the image that it can produce in combination with rigidity and build quality that classifies the lens. Don't get me wrong... the build quality is most definitely important in a L - series lens, being their professional line and all. I just find that what they did with the 100mm 2.8L is perfectly adequate.
Can you drop it from 5ft onto concrete and still use the lens? Probably not, and i'm most certainly not willing to test that. BUT - it does have some nice weather sealing that has held up to light/moderate rain on my 7D just fine, and that in combination with the fantastic images I can capture classify it as an "L- Series" lens for me.

 

[Edwin Herdman]

Plastic has improved shock absorbing qualities over metal, so I'd not be surprised if it actually did well in that respect. It doesn't conduct heat as readily either, which is important too (i.e. preventing fogging and sweating).

This whole "metal versus polycarbonate" debate reminds me of people talking about handguns. "I wouldn't buy one of the new plastic guns..." but of course they're used everywhere, and lighter too.

 

[rocketdesigner]

Plastic has improved shock absorbing qualities over metal, so I'd not be surprised if it actually did well in that respect. It doesn't conduct heat as readily either, which is important too (i.e. preventing fogging and sweating).

This whole "metal versus polycarbonate" debate reminds me of people talking about handguns. "I wouldn't buy one of the new plastic guns..." but of course they're used everywhere, and lighter too.

FWIW, Yes the Glock 9mm is virtually all plastic, and it is the most widely used handgun - including law enforcement (and yours truly). It is virtually indestructible.

 

[kubelik]

Plastic has improved shock absorbing qualities over metal, so I'd not be surprised if it actually did well in that respect. It doesn't conduct heat as readily either, which is important too (i.e. preventing fogging and sweating).

This whole "metal versus polycarbonate" debate reminds me of people talking about handguns. "I wouldn't buy one of the new plastic guns..." but of course they're used everywhere, and lighter too.

FWIW, Yes the Glock 9mm is virtually all plastic, and it is the most widely used handgun - including law enforcement (and yours truly). It is virtually indestructible.

I think that's exactly the point Edwin was trying to make.

I'm another who has no problem with the build quality and materials used in the 100mm f/2.8 L Macro. I appreciate the reduced weight, not because I don't like carrying much weight around, but because it balances on the camera well. the image quality is fantastic and the AF works extremely well, and that's the number 1 and 2 things I care about in my lenses.

 

[Nickbroberts]

Having studied materials at university, I would consider engineering polymers to generally be superior materials for lens barrel and camera construction to metals for most uses - and the 100 L macro certainly doesn't feel insubstantial to me. The only L lens I've owned that does feel lighter than I would expect, but is not flimsy, is the 70-200 f4 L IS, and the only L lens I've had that's fallen apart is my ancient and metal-barrelled 20-35 f2.8 L, and that only after it was dropped - and it used to belong to a press photographer in its prime, anyway, so it's had a hard life.

 

[Joseph]

Since the lens rumors tend to pile up and get lost in the archives (apart from the fan favorite 24-70 f/2.8L IS), I thought I'd collect the lenses that get most mentions. Inspired by a post by user [Canon 14-24].

I haven't included some of the more obvious CR1 fakes. Feel free to contribute or correct my mistakes.

PS: Yeah I am bored & obsessed & love CR


Updated July 23, 2010
- Added EF/EF-S Mystery f/2 zoom. The information regarding this is sketchy at best but there are a number of posts about it. Thanks [pierlux].

Updated July 21, 2010
- Added EF 16-50 f/4L H-IS.
- Moved 14-24 f/2.8L to Zooms. Thanks [Justin].


Primes & Macros

EF Mystery prime
Last rumor: July 14, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/this-that/

EF/EF-S 30/35 f/1.8
Last rumor: May 20, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/new-30-f1-8-type-prime-cr1/

EF 35 f/1.4L II
Last rumor: April 24, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/ef-35-f1-4l-discontinued-2/

EF 50 f/1.2L II
Last rumor: May 28, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/50l-85l-135l-to-get-upgraded-cr1/

EF 50 f/1.4 II
Last rumor: June 19, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/backorders-telling-tales/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/lenses-cr2/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/03/ef-50-f1-4-ii-usm-cr2/

EF 60 f/2.8 IS Macro
Last rumor: July 6, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/lenses-lenses-lenses-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/more-60d-conflicting-information-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/ef-60mm-f2-8-is-macro/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/1ds-mark-iv-lenses-cr2/

EF 85 f/1.2L III
Last rumor: May 28, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/50l-85l-135l-to-get-upgraded-cr1/

EF 135 f/2L IS
Last rumor: May 28, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/50l-85l-135l-to-get-upgraded-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/05/ef-135-f1-8l-is-cr1/

EF 200 f/4L IS Macro
Last rumor: July 6, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/lenses-lenses-lenses-cr1/


Zooms

EF/EF-S Mystery f/2 zoom
Last rumor: February 16, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/canon-ef-s-17-55-f2-is-patent/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/01/predictions-for-2010-part-2-lenses/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/11/a-canon-first-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/09/from-the-archive/

EF 14-24 f/2.8L
Last rumor: April 14, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/ef-14-24-coming-in-2010-cr1/

EF 16-50 f/4L H-IS
Last rumor: July 20, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/new-f4l-ef-zoom-cr1/

EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS
Last rumor: July 6, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/lenses-lenses-lenses-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/more-60d-conflicting-information-cr1/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/a-tale-24-70-f2-8l-replacement/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/backorders-telling-tales/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/04/1ds-mark-iv-lenses-cr2/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/03/1ds4-5d3-lenses/

EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS
Last rumor: July 9, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/07/new-lenses-cr1/

EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM II
Last rumor: June 3, 2010
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/06/making-sense-of-small-tidbits-of-info/

Beautifully built list !!!!

 

[Joseph]

Canon has developed a sub-L build quality with the L label (100mm f/2.8L MACRO).

How is the build quality of the EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS 'sub-L'? Mine feels quite solid, definitely a step up from my EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. The 100L Macro is weather-sealed, many of my other L lenses are not. If you think it's 'sub-L' because the barrel is 'engineering plastic', well, most black L lens barrels are the same material.

the debunked rumor about Canon getting rid of the non-L EF-lenses.

How and when was the idea that Canon is done with non-L EF lenses debunked? The only non-L EF lens released since the launch of the first Canon APS-C camera was the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS lens, and it's pretty well known that the cost savings from EF-S telephoto lenses are a diminishing return. There hasn't been a new non-L EF prime lens since well before the D30.

I'm curious to hear how the 100L is sub L quality too.

It's funny how something can be perceived as "cheap", or as stated above, "sub L" quality based on build material and weight alone. The truth is, as 95% of the photographers on this site will tell you, a lens doesn't gain it's classification into the "L" series based on build quality alone. Otherwise you could take the components from a 18-55 f/4.5-5.6 and assemble it within a 2lbs. weather sealed housing, and call it an "L"....

In my opinion, its the physics behind the optics and the image that it can produce in combination with rigidity and build quality that classifies the lens. Don't get me wrong... the build quality is most definitely important in a L - series lens, being their professional line and all. I just find that what they did with the 100mm 2.8L is perfectly adequate.
Can you drop it from 5ft onto concrete and still use the lens? Probably not, and i'm most certainly not willing to test that. BUT - it does have some nice weather sealing that has held up to light/moderate rain on my 7D just fine, and that in combination with the fantastic images I can capture classify it as an "L- Series" lens for me.

You know , there are several metal alternatives out that are more durable than the current metal housings on some of the L series lenses - I love the lighter weight on some of the newer lenses -

CANON LISTEN UP !!!! It would be awesome for Canon to put serious consideration into making alternative L series lenses , built around higher quality , lighter weight materials . I would pay more for a light weight version of my 24-70mm 2.8L , that damn things torques down on my fingers and wrist like crazy in a long day of shooting - which I have to do all hand held with a 1D body , flash frame and a 580 on top of it.

Think about it !