Count me in for these:
1. 135 f2 IS
2. 85L f1.2, faster AF
3. 14-24 f2.8 or 16-35 f2.8 III - good as Nikon 14-24 or better
1. 135 f2 IS
2. 85L f1.2, faster AF
3. 14-24 f2.8 or 16-35 f2.8 III - good as Nikon 14-24 or better
Upvote
0
dash2k8 said:Canon needs to step up its game. Sigma has made a killing recently with its cheaper but better alternatives (35mm f1.4 and the 18-35mm f1.8, and perhaps the 24-105mm after tests come out). Canon cannot hope to maintain a higher price tag for lenses with equal or lesser quality. I can understand a Canon costing more than a Sigma, but at least the sharpness, distortion, etc etc have to be the same. The red ring along isn't going to fool customers into paying extra anymore.
dilbert said:And with the 16-35, 17-40 and 24-105, Canon means crap corners at the wide end.
AvTvM said:8 lenses .. well let's see:
EF-L
EOS 70-200/4 L IS Mk. II @ USD/€ 1,790
A hypothetical EF 28-300 F2.8-4L IS, would have a lot of glass, and could weigh 2 kg and cost over $ 3000. I think it makes more sense an EF 28-200mm F4 IS, which could cost about $ 1000, and would be much more portable. There is market for lenses like the EF-S18-250mm, although I do not get excited about this type of lens.RGomezPhotos said:Wishlist:
EF 28-300mm f2.8 - f4
That's pretty much it for me. The 28-300mm f3.5L is awesome. But it's serious bank and size. I don't need 'L' for lower paying events. I LOVE the EF-S 18-200. But I want to get away from crop cameras for simplicity's sake.
ajfotofilmagem said:A hypothetical EF 28-300 F2.8-4L IS, would have a lot of glass, and could weigh 2 kg and cost over $ 3000. I think it makes more sense an EF 28-200mm F4 IS, which could cost about $ 1000, and would be much more portable. There is market for lenses like the EF-S18-250mm, although I do not get excited about this type of lens.RGomezPhotos said:Wishlist:
EF 28-300mm f2.8 - f4
That's pretty much it for me. The 28-300mm f3.5L is awesome. But it's serious bank and size. I don't need 'L' for lower paying events. I LOVE the EF-S 18-200. But I want to get away from crop cameras for simplicity's sake.
Yes, that is why I advocate good APS-C cameras, and good EF-S lenses can be smaller, lighter, and cheaper. A 18-200mm lens on APS-C has a range equivalent to 320mm and is still very mild compared with existing 28-300L.RGomezPhotos said:ajfotofilmagem said:A hypothetical EF 28-300 F2.8-4L IS, would have a lot of glass, and could weigh 2 kg and cost over $ 3000. I think it makes more sense an EF 28-200mm F4 IS, which could cost about $ 1000, and would be much more portable. There is market for lenses like the EF-S18-250mm, although I do not get excited about this type of lens.RGomezPhotos said:Wishlist:
EF 28-300mm f2.8 - f4
That's pretty much it for me. The 28-300mm f3.5L is awesome. But it's serious bank and size. I don't need 'L' for lower paying events. I LOVE the EF-S 18-200. But I want to get away from crop cameras for simplicity's sake.
I could live with f4 if I got 300mm. 200mm isn't enough for a staged events. I'd get a 7D just so I could get really good IQ with the EF-S 18-200mm... One of Canon's best lens despite not being 'L'....
ajfotofilmagem said:Yes, that is why I advocate good APS-C cameras, and good EF-S lenses can be smaller, lighter, and cheaper. A 18-200mm lens on APS-C has a range equivalent to 320mm and is still very mild compared with existing 28-300L.