More chatter on an EF 11-24 F/4L coming soon

[ahsanford]

I don't put too much stock into CanonWatch, but they are claiming to have a source saying that an EF 11-24 F/4L lens is happening:

http://www.canonwatch.com/ef-11-24mm-f4l-coming-probably/

Some of you in a recent poll implied that this forum community's desire for a Nikon 14-24 F/2.8 clone was less based on that lens's spectacular sharpness and more based on the opportunity the 14mm wide end on that zoom might offer. So I'd imagine -- were this rumor true -- some folks would be super duper happy about this.

But even if this picture was not a fake, no front filterability (without a comically large aftermarket outrigger) would be DOA for me. I'll happily enjoy my 16-35 F/4L IS and call my UWA needs sated.

- A

 

[lintoni]

I don't put too much stock into CanonWatch, but they are claiming to have a source saying that an EF 11-24 F/4L lens is happening:

http://www.canonwatch.com/ef-11-24mm-f4l-coming-probably/

Some of you in a recent poll implied that this forum community's desire for a Nikon 14-24 F/2.8 clone was less based on that lens's spectacular sharpness and more based on the opportunity the 14mm wide end on that zoom might offer. So I'd imagine -- were this rumor true -- some folks would be super duper happy about this.

But even if this picture was not a fake, no front filterability (without a comically large aftermarket outrigger) would be DOA for me. I'll happily enjoy my 16-35 F/4L IS and call my UWA needs sated.

- A

The rumoured Sigma 14-24 f4 OS Art is said to have an 82mm filter thread...

http://sigma-rumors.com/2014/08/sigma-14-24mm-f4-dg-os-art-around-corner/

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Right after the 100-400mm L MK II in 2035.

 

[tron]

Right after the 100-400mm L MK II in 2035.

Don't be so cruel. It may hit the shops in 2028 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

 

[pj1974]

I don't put too much stock into CanonWatch, but they are claiming to have a source saying that an EF 11-24 F/4L lens is happening:

http://www.canonwatch.com/ef-11-24mm-f4l-coming-probably/

Some of you in a recent poll implied that this forum community's desire for a Nikon 14-24 F/2.8 clone was less based on that lens's spectacular sharpness and more based on the opportunity the 14mm wide end on that zoom might offer. So I'd imagine -- were this rumor true -- some folks would be super duper happy about this.

But even if this picture was not a fake, no front filterability (without a comically large aftermarket outrigger) would be DOA for me. I'll happily enjoy my 16-35 F/4L IS and call my UWA needs sated.

- A

We live in exciting times… a 11-24mm f/4 L would be a very welcome lens within Canon’s already significant arsenal of lenses (Canon have done a great job with the recent 16-35mm f/4 L USM).

That’s why I am so happy with my Sigma 8-16mm. On my Canon 7D, it produces images at the FF equivalent of a stunning 12.8mm! In addition, my Sigma ultra wide angle (UWA) lens is terrifically sharp – even wide open at 8mm. And it has very low (and conveniently correctable) CA’s. Much less than my previous lens, the Sigma 10-20mm.

Naturally I admit that my Sigma 8-16mm is not f/2.8. But for 99% of my UWA photos, I do not need f/2.8. Now I certainly wouldn’t sneeze if IS would become available in a new APS-C UWA. That would possibly be the only reason I would upgrade my current UWA lens. But at this stage, I’m very happy – and when light is low (or I want to undertake certain challenging photos), I use my trusty Manfrotto tripod to ensure the most superior results.

Looking forward to what Canon may come out with.. even though the only lens I’m really interested in now, is an updated EF 50mm IS USM…..

Regards.... Paul

 

[tron]

I would still miss a coma free 16-35 2.8L III for astrophotography...

The reason being is that anything wider has a bulbous element which cannot be protected much from light (in contrast to a flat front elememt lens with a hood...

That and the need for a 2.8 aperture...

 

[Random Orbits]

I would still miss a coma free 16-35 2.8L III for astrophotography...

The reason being is that anything wider has a bulbous element which cannot be protected much from light (in contrast to a flat front elememt lens with a hood...

That and the need for a 2.8 aperture...

+1. I'd love the see a 16-35 f/2.8 III. I'd rather bring a 16-35 and a 14 prime (or this 11-24).