New Canon 70-200mm Lenses Coming in Early June [CR3]

[jolyonralph]

I wonder if the new 70-200 2.8 will be as much of a leap as the 24-105 II was

 

[ahsanford]

I wonder if the new 70-200 2.8 will be as much of a leap as the 24-105 II was

"Leap" = nice. [cue laugh track]

Zero chance, IMHO. This is a flagship piece of kit Canon has never "rev'd for the sake of rev'ing". To my knowledge, other than some bokeh fanatics feeling some magic was lost since the original IS version, these sorts of lenses consistently step forward performance-wise.

As I said earlier in the thread, Canon typically doesn't 'II' or 'III' an L lens without it being a big step forward. The 24-105 f/4L IS II is very much the exception to the rule.

And this one -- a staple pro instrument -- I'd bet good money on it being stellar to the point that Mk II people pull out their CCs and snap one up. In no uncertain terms, I'm bullish on this one.

- A

 

[cayenne]

I wonder if the new 70-200 2.8 will be as much of a leap as the 24-105 II was

"Leap" = nice. [cue laugh track]

Zero chance, IMHO. This is a flagship piece of kit Canon has never "rev'd for the sake of rev'ing". To my knowledge, other than some bokeh fanatics feeling some magic was lost since the original IS version, these sorts of lenses consistently step forward performance-wise.

As I said earlier in the thread, Canon typically doesn't 'II' or 'III' an L lens without it being a big step forward. The 24-105 f/4L IS II is very much the exception to the rule.

And this one -- a staple pro instrument -- I'd bet good money on it being stellar to the point that Mk II people pull out their CCs and snap one up. In no uncertain terms, I'm bullish on this one.

- A

Am I the only one having a VERY difficult time thinking about what exactly they could improve upon with the existing 70-200 f/2.8, that would be stellar enough to rate ditching the current one and buying a new one?

C

 

[ahsanford]

Am I the only one having a VERY difficult time thinking about what exactly they could improve upon with the existing 70-200 f/2.8, that would be stellar enough to rate ditching the current one and buying a new one?

C

No, but I'd coach to not overly focus on IQ. (That should improve, but yes, many folks here doubt it will be a big improvement.)

It could get lighter. The IS could get more effective or quieter. CPLs could be a lot easier to manipulate with the hood attached. It could have the mythical USM / STM or USM / Nano USM rocker switch some videographers have dreamed of for L lenses. They could jazz up the blade design for better sunstars. It could come in black.

Who knows? Let's wait and see.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Am I the only one having a VERY difficult time thinking about what exactly they could improve upon with the existing 70-200 f/2.8, that would be stellar enough to rate ditching the current one and buying a new one?

C

Or perhaps put another way, perhaps there are non-trivial groups of people who won't touch the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II for a very specific reason -- it's too heavy, ring USM and IS noise doesn't play well for video, MFD is still too far for some wedding applications (I'm competely riffing here), etc.

Perhaps this rev of the 70-200 will eliminate those reasons not to buy it?

- A

 

[Don Haines]

Am I the only one having a VERY difficult time thinking about what exactly they could improve upon with the existing 70-200 f/2.8, that would be stellar enough to rate ditching the current one and buying a new one?

C

Or perhaps put another way, perhaps there are non-trivial groups of people who won't touch the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II for a very specific reason -- it's too heavy, ring USM and IS noise doesn't play well for video, MFD is still too far for some wedding applications (I'm competely riffing here), etc.

Perhaps this rev of the 70-200 will eliminate those reasons not to buy it?

- A

OR.......

There is always the possibility that they are making a whole bunch of very minor changes.... it could be that a special glass is hard to find and gets replaced with a newer element, newer coatings, a stop better IS, more exact machining to get rid of inconsistencies between units and/or to make assembly and testing easier.....

The better machining alone could be enough economic reason to come out with an updated version, and while you are at it, throw in the latest components, glass, and coatings....

 

[Ripley]

While the 70-200G is ok, the 70-200GM is stellar so I'm glad to hear about an L2.8III

 

[infared]

I have the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II version....on a 5DIV. The lens is amazing...I just cannot imagine needing more....Actually less busy bokeh would be nice..but I will take the sharpness instead....its GREAT!!!!
I guess we will see what all the fuss is about! I am guessing that this new lens is for the large files of the 5DR and maybe some new huge megapixel camera that is coming. Mirrorless...I HOPE!!!!!

 

[infared]

Is it not more likely that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM (non IS) gets updated? It's a 1995 design compared to the IS II being a 2010 lens.

Ah..that may be the answer to the mystery. I just can't see Canon replacing the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. Just does not make any sense to me.

 

[monkey44]

I've not shot with the 70-200 2.8, but own the f4 ... and can't even imagine improving it much ... one of the best lenses I've ever owned. So, an improvement on the 2.8 would be hard to figure out. Lots of little fixes add up to a great lens tho, so maybe that, as happens occasionally.

 

[Talys]

Is it not more likely that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM (non IS) gets updated? It's a 1995 design compared to the IS II being a 2010 lens.

Ah..that may be the answer to the mystery. I just can't see Canon replacing the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. Just does not make any sense to me.

If you use the 100-400LII and the 70-200LII, you'll notice a few small things that you really wish were on the 70-200, like:

- Mode 3 Image Stabilization is really nice. It's also possible that a new generation of IS gives one more stop of stabilization.
- The 100-400 tripod collar design is exceptional, providing super-smooth gliding rotation and a foot that you can replace with a third party alternative (eg arca foot).
- The lens hood on the newer little white has a CPL window
- Nicer paint!
- I prefer the MF ring on the 100-400LII, though that's comparing a 10/10 with a 10.5/10

 

[Bahrd]

I know it is not a popular idea here, but wouldn't a mirrorless system with an MF sensor allow Canon to "protect" the EF legacy a little longer?

Do you realize that only TS-E lenses have an image circle big enough for a medium format?

Of course, I do. I am just speculating that making a non-EF mirrorless system would have more sense if there was a larger sensor as well.

 

[scottkinfw]

Dammit Canon, right when I think I could finally go buy myself a nice prime lens this summer, you replace my most-used, most mission-critical lens.

Well, guess that 85mm f/1.4L IS can wait until next year.... My 70-200 f/2.8L IS II is my oldest lens still in service, and the age is starting to show. Have beat it up in all kinds of ways in all kinds of places. Not sure if it ever hasn't smelled like smoke with the amount of fire it has seen.

Why don't you buy Lens Coats on them?

Scott

 

[ahsanford]

OR.......

There is always the possibility that they are making a whole bunch of very minor changes.... it could be that a special glass is hard to find and gets replaced with a newer element, newer coatings, a stop better IS, more exact machining to get rid of inconsistencies between units and/or to make assembly and testing easier.....

The better machining alone could be enough economic reason to come out with an updated version, and while you are at it, throw in the latest components, glass, and coatings....

Yep -- this is the likely guess (that I made earlier): screw the videographers and just make a stellar stills instrument better 10% in a bunch of places. And throw in a CPL hood window. Done.

- A

 

[dboris]

Can you tell me why you say "screw the videographers"?
Why would you consider the 70-200 IS II made for the videographers?

 

[infared]

Is it not more likely that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM (non IS) gets updated? It's a 1995 design compared to the IS II being a 2010 lens.

Ah..that may be the answer to the mystery. I just can't see Canon replacing the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. Just does not make any sense to me.

If you use the 100-400LII and the 70-200LII, you'll notice a few small things that you really wish were on the 70-200, like:

- Mode 3 Image Stabilization is really nice. It's also possible that a new generation of IS gives one more stop of stabilization.
- The 100-400 tripod collar design is exceptional, providing super-smooth gliding rotation and a foot that you can replace with a third party alternative (eg arca foot).
- The lens hood on the newer little white has a CPL window
- Nicer paint!
- I prefer the MF ring on the 100-400LII, though that's comparing a 10/10 with a 10.5/10

At the price of this next lens, I can get out my dremmel an cut a CPL window in the hood of my f/2.8L IS II, and save a bundle.! LOL! ...and what is Mode 3 Stabilization?
I have Arca plate permanently attached to the foot...no biggie, there...
As suggested in this thread, perhaps this is an updated version of the f/2.8L non IS version?
We will soon see apparently!!!

 

[Vern]

didn't read the whole thread to see if anyone mentioned vignetting with the II version. I use a thin B&W polarizer and there are still focal lengths with the II that vignette badly. I would upgrade just to get rid of this - assuming they go with an 82 mm filter, it should be sorted.

 

[criscokkat]

I know it is not a popular idea here, but wouldn't a mirrorless system with an MF sensor allow Canon to "protect" the EF legacy a little longer?

Do you realize that only TS-E lenses have an image circle big enough for a medium format?

True, but if you limit yourself to 40mm width by 32 height just about every full frame lens out there works. There is a lot of wiggle room. One application of that is squarely at the videographers - by having a 30% larger sensor by area you can capture full 35mm while digitally shifting the image for stabilization.

 

[Architect1776]

Is it not more likely that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM (non IS) gets updated? It's a 1995 design compared to the IS II being a 2010 lens.

Ah..that may be the answer to the mystery. I just can't see Canon replacing the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. Just does not make any sense to me.

If you use the 100-400LII and the 70-200LII, you'll notice a few small things that you really wish were on the 70-200, like:

- Mode 3 Image Stabilization is really nice. It's also possible that a new generation of IS gives one more stop of stabilization.
- The 100-400 tripod collar design is exceptional, providing super-smooth gliding rotation and a foot that you can replace with a third party alternative (eg arca foot).
- The lens hood on the newer little white has a CPL window
- Nicer paint!
- I prefer the MF ring on the 100-400LII, though that's comparing a 10/10 with a 10.5/10

I would add the incredible close up capability of the 100-400mm II added to this lens would make it a real winner and by far best in class and unique compared to all other competitors. The 100-400 does the close focus at 400mm not like some so called macro zooms that you only do it at the wide setting.

 

[ahsanford]

didn't read the whole thread to see if anyone mentioned vignetting with the II version. I use a thin B&W polarizer and there are still focal lengths with the II that vignette badly. I would upgrade just to get rid of this - assuming they go with an 82 mm filter, it should be sorted.

That's kind of shocking to hear for something with such a narrow field of view. I'm used to sweating thin vs. thick CPL on wide lenses but not a 70-200.

Can you describe when this happens for you? Presume 70mm + MFD?

- A