Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]

[Zv]

I'm so hoping for the rumored 50mm 1.8 IS to appear, if it's like the 24/28/35 IS lenses I'll be happy. Also wouldn't mind an updated 85mm 1.8 (IS??).

The 100-400 update was meant to be announced after the 200-400 started shipping, wasn't it? That's one that sounds like it was delayed.

I reckon the 35mm 1.4 II was also delayed and is also on the horizon. Possibly those 45 and 90mm TS lenses and hopefully something at the wide end will also appear soon too!

Finally, something worth getting out of bed for!

 

[Woody]

Everyone thus far has forgotten to include the 16-50/L IS that was meant for this year:

2010: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=16.0 EF 16-50 f/4L H-IS
2013: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15455.0 14-24 f/2.8L, EF 16-50 f/4L IS

2012: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=7362.0 14-24 after the 200-400.

I hope the above CR2 rumors (except for the 2010 reference) come true. Some awesome ultrawide FF zoom lenses are what Canonites need now: 14-24 f/2.8 and 16-50 f/4.

 

[pj1974]

I give somewhat more weight to a CR2 rumour than a CR1 (as should be!)

If there is a rumour of 'lots of new lenses coming in 2014' (from Canon) - that gets me mildly excited.

Looking forward to a Canon EF 50mm USM being one of them - hopefully with aperture between f/1.4 & f/2 and IS to boot! IQ to be very good, wide open.

Let's see. That would round out my lens arsenal nicely.

I appreciate that others might want the 14-24mm f/2.8 (I have the Sigma 8-16mm for my 7D, which is great, high quality IQ - sharp & plenty of contrast corner to corner), etc

Looking forward to a CR3 on this one end of 2013 / early 2014... hopefully! Please please please Canon provide us with a great 50mm fast prime... similar to the 35mm f/2 USM IS.....

Paul

 

[wayno]

I'd like to see one high quality prime between 16 and 20mm that is razor sharp from corner to corner when stopped down a little bit and is small and relatively inexpensive. It doesn't have to be fast, but it has to be razor sharp in the extreme corners around f8. Something like a sharper version of the Zeiss 18mm f3.5 with AF would be perfect to me.

Who wouldn't ? I'd be happy with 18mm or 21mm f5.6 and be done with it!

 

[sushyam]

I am waiting and hoping for the 400 mm/f5,6 mkII. with IS and the EF S 17-55 f2.8 IS

 

[Grumbaki]

Bring out the 14-24 and be done with it.

That's reqasonnably the only one I'd be in the market for...except if some "Canon noctilux"was in the pipeline...but with that trend of "IS + reduced aperture" lenses...

 

[dstppy]

Canon 300mm f/4L IS MkII . . . with sprinkles on top.

 

[Zv]

I'd like to see one high quality prime between 16 and 20mm that is razor sharp from corner to corner when stopped down a little bit and is small and relatively inexpensive. It doesn't have to be fast, but it has to be razor sharp in the extreme corners around f8. Something like a sharper version of the Zeiss 18mm f3.5 with AF would be perfect to me.

Who wouldn't ? I'd be happy with 18mm or 21mm f5.6 and be done with it!

Wouldn't be very good at AF with that narrow an aperture. Remember the centre AF point on the pro camera bodies and some prosumer ones becomes a diagonally cross type point at f/2.8. Then there's viewfinder brightness and the fact the f/5.6 is a bit S___ on crop and you can see why most primes and most lenses in general (and excl superteles) aren't made with narrow apertures.

I think f/2.8 is a decent compromise and you can see that trend with the 24 and 28mm IS primes. They have very good corner sharpness too.

 

[Canon 14-24]

What should be released:

Canon 14-24 2.8 L
Canon 17-50 L
Canon 16-35 IS 4.0 L
Canon 35 1.2 L
Canon 50 1.4 II / IS
Canon 70-400 / 100-400 II L
Canon 135 1.8 / 2.0 IS L

 

[Woody]

To summarise:
14-24L
16-50L
35/1.4
45 TS/E
50/1.8
85/1.8
90/2.8 TS/E
135/2
... makes 8 lenses. No big zooms. I wonder if someone just went through and counted up all of the patent and other rumors for Canon this year and created a new rumor?

I like the list above. Makes a lot of sense.

 

[RGF]

To summarise:
14-24L
16-50L
35/1.4
45 TS/E
50/1.8
85/1.8
90/2.8 TS/E
135/2
... makes 8 lenses. No big zooms. I wonder if someone just went through and counted up all of the patent and other rumors for Canon this year and created a new rumor?

I like the list above. Makes a lot of sense.

14-24 would interst np e a lot

Not mentioned is 100-400 replacement as well as long macro (180 replacement)

I would be surprised to L versions of both the 14-24 and 16-50. Latter seems like an odd focal length for an L lens.

 

[Woody]

I would be surprised to L versions of both the 14-24 and 16-50. Latter seems like an odd focal length for an L lens.

Surprised by 16-50 f/4L (~3x zoom) too. But it's a CR2 rumor and sounds like a plausible replacement to 17-40 f/4L (~2.3x zoom). If it's true, I'm in lens heaven! That's all I need when I travel with my FF camera! As long as its price stays below US$2k, I'll be the first in line.

 

[Grumbaki]

I would be surprised to L versions of both the 14-24 and 16-50. Latter seems like an odd focal length for an L lens.

Surprised by 16-50 f/4L (~3x zoom) too. But it's a CR2 rumor and sounds like a plausible replacement to 17-40 f/4L (~2.3x zoom). If it's true, I'm in lens heaven! That's all I need when I travel with my FF camera! As long as its price stays below US$2k, I'll be the first in line.

This focal lenght makes much more sense than 16-35 and 17-40 lineup. 14-24 to complete the zoom holy trinity and 16-50 as the holy grail of photojournalism.

 

[sanj]

I need the 800 II most. Then 16-35 replacement.

 

[AvTvM]

You can only speak for yourself. As far as myself is concerned, I think that the logo "Canon" means the foremost quality possible, and the red ring is almost the equivalent of the Holy Grail. You see, there's a reason why they say: You get what you pay for!!!!

ROFLMAO

As long as canon has enough customers like you, we won't get better lenses, reasonable prices or fully comprtitive sensors from them.

 

[Eldar]

Still no comments or expectations for DO lenses?

 

[Roo]

14-24L please

 

[AvTvM]

Still no comments or expectations for DO lenses?

I hope we won't ever see another DO lens or Canon cameras with pellicle mirror or any other optical dead end.

Thanks, but no thanks. 70-300DO ... one of the most grossly overpriced and underperforming Canon lenses ever.

The Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM Lens circular aperture makes out of focus points of light very round for a 6-blade aperture, but I don't care for the way the DO makes points of light into rifle target-like bokeh. Here is an example ...

The bullseyes do not show up often in real use, but a DO-caused bright, blurry halo shows itself more frequently. It shows up in out of focus areas - especially when the 70-300 DO's aperture is opened up. Some like it and call it dreamy - I personally don't like it. Here is an example ...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-70-300mm-f-4.5-5.6-DO-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


And the 400DO is a poor performer as well.

Contrast is the Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM Lens' optical shortcoming - which also hurts the apparent sharpness performance. I found that most of my shots needed a healthy contrast boost in post-processing (or a positive in-camera contrast setting). I could easily tell which image was taken with the 400 DO when looking at comparative shots on a monitor. ...
Even the Canon 100-400mm L has better contrast when the vignetting in the full frame corners at 400mm does not get in the way.

 

[chromophore]

Here's what you're going to see:

1. Another EF-S 18-135/3.5-5.6 IS consumer-grade zoom.
2. And another EF-S 70-300/4.5-5.6 IS zoom.
3. Some sort of insanely expensive, slow aperture EF wide- to normal non-L prime with added IS, priced around $700-900, like an EF 50/2 IS STM for $800.
4. An incremental update to some already well-regarded L lens that nobody really needs to have updated and even fewer people can actually afford, like the EF 200/2L IS...at 150% of the price.
5. Maybe we'll get a new EF 135/2L II, no IS, for $1800.
6. EF 24-70/2.8L IS, weighing in around 3.5 pounds and costing $3500, just to p*ss off all the people who bought the 24-70/2.8L II.
7. A completely new but also completely redundant design, like a 35-135/4L IS zoom.
8. A 400/5.6L IS...for $3000.

Or any one of those could be replaced by a new 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS II that is priced at absurd levels, say $4200.

Yeah, I'm definitely exaggerating, and sort of joking...but to be honest, I do NOT see Canon moving toward meeting the demands of fast aperture prime users. They are ALL about the zooms, and they are all about slow aperture designs that have looser tolerances that they can slap IS units on, and mark up at 1.5-2x the cost. Their thinking is that photographers don't need fast apertures anymore--after all, aren't the sensors good enough? (And no, they aren't.) When was the last time you saw ANY f/1.8 or faster design announced for production?

You know what I want to see them do? I want to see them bring back the 50/1.0L. Remind the world why the EF mount was made to be what it is. I want to see them push the envelope and see what could be done with today's manufacturing techniques and materials. You know your stuff is outdated when even a company like Sigma can beat your 35/1.4L for bokeh quality, corner sharpness, and secondary spectrum control. Then design an affordable series of lenses with emphasis on durability, like a 50/1.4 II, or a simple 50/1.8 that isn't plastic.

Canon used to be the undisputed leader of designing novel AF lenses. This is the company that gave us the TS-E 17/4L, 50/1.0L, 85/1.2L, MP-E 65/2.8, 135/2L, 200/1.8L, and 400/4L DO IS, among other amazing technologies. But all we see these days are uninspiring, conservative, incremental designs. Nothing that pushes the envelope, nothing that makes us feel like we just *have* to try this lens because it will let us get the shot that no other lens can.

 

[eninja]

More pancakes with stm please!!!

28mm pancake. So slim I could die. haha.