More Mentions of 2014 Being the Year of the Lens [CR1]

[100]

“Firstly, a new worlds widest full frame zoom lens (nor sure what this could be)”

There is a 16-35 and a new 14-24 or 12-24 has a big overlap so it would compete with the 16-35. What if they figured out a way to make something like a high quality 10-16 for FF?
An addition on the wide end without overlap is commercially probably the best option, and making money is Canons primary goal.

 

[Woody]

“Firstly, a new worlds widest full frame zoom lens (nor sure what this could be)”

There is a 16-35 and a new 14-24 or 12-24 has a big overlap so it would compete with the 16-35. What if they figured out a way to make something like a high quality 10-16 for FF?
An addition on the wide end without overlap is commercially probably the best option, and making money is Canons primary goal.

Hey, I like that! EF 10-16 will make a perfect combo with EF 16-50 f/4 IS. Now if the 10-16 lens does not have a bulging front element, that will be even more attractive.

 

[tron]

Actually, 2010 was going to be the year of the lens.

I followed the link above and the lens list that followed were CR's predictions, not based on any CR2 type of rumors.

Fine, but this is not a CR2-type rumor, either...

They play it safe 8)

 

[tron]

“Firstly, a new worlds widest full frame zoom lens (nor sure what this could be)”

There is a 16-35 and a new 14-24 or 12-24 has a big overlap so it would compete with the 16-35. What if they figured out a way to make something like a high quality 10-16 for FF?
An addition on the wide end without overlap is commercially probably the best option, and making money is Canons primary goal.

Hey, I like that! EF 10-16 will make a perfect combo with EF 16-50 f/4 IS. Now if the 10-16 lens does not have a bulging front element, that will be even more attractive.

In addition the 14-24 would compete with the expensive 14 2.8L II. Canon wouldn't like that I guess.
In addition 16-35 2.8 could use an improvement at the corners...

 

[tron]

Not "year of the new sensors"? lol
(like whole new manufacturing process and so on)

Hmmm, unless we saw it happen we would practically consider it as CR0 ...

 

[ewg963]

Give us more rumors!!!

Widest FF zoom lens: 12-24 L f/2.8 USM
Budget high quality lenses: 50 f/1.8 or 2.0 IS USM

I'd take both

+1 on the wide zoom @ 2.8 that is really needed!!!

 

[Nirmala]

10-16mm non-fisheye L now that is something I could get out of bed in the morning for...

 

[infared]

......ta,p,tap,tap,tap......um...Canon....we're ALL here....waiting...(as the photography world explodes around us from all other manufacturers). Yawn.

 

[TrabimanUK]

Widest FF zoom lens? 10-24? Go on, give us a whole 2mm more than Sigma! (and better IQ and hopefully not at L prices, though that would just be wishful thinking of course).

oh AND GIVE US A 100-400mm UPGRADE! (please)

 

[dhr90]

What, no rumours about a 1500mm f5.6 with built in 1.4x converter?
Probably a global market of less than 10, but I can day dream can't I? ;D

 

[TrabimanUK]

What, no rumours about a 1500mm f5.6 with built in 1.4x converter?
Probably a global market of less than 10, but I can day dream can't I? ;D

Funny you should say that, but I heard a mention of a 1400mm f5.6 IS floating around last year. No built in 1.4x or 2x though. Of course if you can afford it, you can afford the staff to carry it for you and to bring the things closer to you

 

[bseitz234]

What, no rumours about a 1500mm f5.6 with built in 1.4x converter?
Probably a global market of less than 10, but I can day dream can't I? ;D

Funny you should say that, but I heard a mention of a 1400mm f5.6 IS floating around last year. No built in 1.4x or 2x though. Of course if you can afford it, you can afford the staff to carry it for you and to bring the things closer to you

I can see it now... "Smithers, fetch me that grizzly bear. Oh, he cannot be too far from the river. Bring the river closer as well."

 

[StudentOfLight]

I think most know what lens I want.

You've made no secret of your desire for a 40mm f/2.8 MkII.

Black or white?

1) Definitely black! Of that there can be no doubt ;-)
2) Internal focusing optics
3) A 2cm wide focus ring that is calibrated to be butter-smooth.
4) Must also include rear-dust gasket and be fully weather sealed with front filter.
5) Less than 40% heavier than the 40mm mk-I

 

[StudentOfLight]

“Firstly, a new worlds widest full frame zoom lens (nor sure what this could be)”

There is a 16-35 and a new 14-24 or 12-24 has a big overlap so it would compete with the 16-35. What if they figured out a way to make something like a high quality 10-16 for FF?
An addition on the wide end without overlap is commercially probably the best option, and making money is Canons primary goal.

Hey, I like that! EF 10-16 will make a perfect combo with EF 16-50 f/4 IS. Now if the 10-16 lens does not have a bulging front element, that will be even more attractive.

In addition the 14-24 would compete with the expensive 14 2.8L II. Canon wouldn't like that I guess.
In addition 16-35 2.8 could use an improvement at the corners...

Yes and no. A 14-24 zoom would be larger and heavier than the 14mm prime and if it were optically equal or superior then it would simply be priced higher than the prime.

 

[tron]

“Firstly, a new worlds widest full frame zoom lens (nor sure what this could be)”

There is a 16-35 and a new 14-24 or 12-24 has a big overlap so it would compete with the 16-35. What if they figured out a way to make something like a high quality 10-16 for FF?
An addition on the wide end without overlap is commercially probably the best option, and making money is Canons primary goal.

Hey, I like that! EF 10-16 will make a perfect combo with EF 16-50 f/4 IS. Now if the 10-16 lens does not have a bulging front element, that will be even more attractive.

In addition the 14-24 would compete with the expensive 14 2.8L II. Canon wouldn't like that I guess.
In addition 16-35 2.8 could use an improvement at the corners...

Yes and no. A 14-24 zoom would be larger and heavier than the 14mm prime and if it were optically equal or superior then it would simply be priced higher than the prime.

How much more than the current price of 14 2.8L II would be enough? The Nikon 14-24 2.8 costs less than that, not more. Even with a higher price it would have a 15-24mm additional range... 14 2.8 II would still be redundant...

 

[Famateur]

Not "year of the new sensors"? lol
(like whole new manufacturing process and so on)

LOL...If Duffman was a Canon exec:

"New...feelings sensors...brewing in Duffman Canon! What...would Jesus Sony do?"

ROFL! Gold! ;D

;D

 

[Zlyden]

Looks like Canon´s business development department reads Canonruomors.com after all

If this is true, then I'm among those who want more "budget high quality lenses" for EOS M.

"Dear Santa Canon, for 2014 we need at least some small and light telephoto zoom like "EF-M 55-250/4-5.6 IS STM". Please, make it as good as EF-M 11-22 you brought us this year (my impression so far is that it behaves better in the corners than both EF-S 10-22 and EF 17-40, thank you!). Or, if you have other plans to make a tiny lens called "EF-M 70-200/2.8 IS"-- I'm not the one who will object..."

 

[Harv]

I don't want to wait until 2014. I want a new and improved 100-400..... NOW.

 

[Don Haines]

What, no rumours about a 1500mm f5.6 with built in 1.4x converter?
Probably a global market of less than 10, but I can day dream can't I? ;D

Cool.... but then we would have a debate over if we should put a 270mm filter on the lens to protect it.

 

[Don Haines]

I don't want to wait until 2014. I want a new and improved 100-400..... NOW.

I agree.... there are 10,000 geese on the bay behind my house mocking my lack of a quality long lens