New Canon L Primes, but Not Until 2015 [CR2)

[antonioleandro]

All I wish lenswise is that Canon would produce a 14-24mm (or better, a 12-24mm or, even better a 10-24mm) and announce if they will (or will not) produce a new 100-400mm.

I think that Canon´s new 50mm could be a behemoth 50mm f/1.4L just to compete with Zeiss or Sigma, but I would like to see a new 50mm f/1.2L or 50mm f/1.0L just for bragging rights.

[]´s
Leandro

 

[ahsanford]

All I wish lenswise is that Canon would produce a 14-24mm (or better, a 12-24mm or, even better a 10-24mm) and announce if they will (or will not) produce a new 100-400mm.

I think that Canon´s new 50mm could be a behemoth 50mm f/1.4L just to compete with Zeiss or Sigma, but I would like to see a new 50mm f/1.2L or 50mm f/1.0L just for bragging rights.

[]´s
Leandro

I ran (what I thought to be) an interesting poll on the nature of the 14-24 interest in this forum. I asked if people had a choice of the sharpness of Nikon's 14-24 or the focal length of Nikon's 14-24 -- and you could only have one -- what would you choose?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20915.15;viewresults
(See the question for how I phrased it, the specifics do matter.)

75% of respondents said they just wanted a sharper ultrawide than their current 16-35/17-40 options.

25% stuck to their guns that they'd accept the current (lack of) sharpness from their 16-35 lenses applied to the wider 14mm FL.

Keep in mind this was run before the very nice 16-35 F/4L IS was released. But I find it fascinating that (with this limited sample size), the majority of people clamoring for a 14-24 just want a sharper ultrawide. But, based on your comments, I have to assume you'd want the focal length over the sharpness (if you had to choose).

- A

 

[9VIII]

I'd still like to see them best Nikon's 12-24.

14-24?

Good catch.

I have to say, you might just want to go and get the Nikon 14-24 if you want the Nikon 14-24.
Canon's 14mm prime is competitive compared to the Nikon Zoom, and Canon seems fairly set on the 16-35 zoom range. The Nikon 14-24 is already cheaper than the Canon prime as well, and if you're going to get both the prime and zoom from Canon it would probably cost just as much as the zoom lens and a cheap D600 from Nikon.

 

[bellorusso]

It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft. Canon is too conservative but it doesn't mean that the market isn't living while Canon is sleeping on its throne.

 

[9VIII]

I should also note that the 90mm TS is not an "L" lens.
I'm really hoping for a 135mm tilt shift, I already tried to buy the 90mm last winter and supposedly the dealer ordered one but I haven't heard from them since.

 

[Lee Jay]

It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft.

Oh...flashy, overpriced and useless versus dependable, reliable and built to get the job done?

 

[RLPhoto]

I know what prime I want. :

 

[can0nfan2379]

I'd like a 50L 1.2 II without focus shift, would totally buy that with no second thoughts.

 

[PhotoCat]

I hope the non-L 85/2.0 IS is still coming this year! :

 

[antonioleandro]

All I wish lenswise is that Canon would produce a 14-24mm (or better, a 12-24mm or, even better a 10-24mm) and announce if they will (or will not) produce a new 100-400mm.

I think that Canon´s new 50mm could be a behemoth 50mm f/1.4L just to compete with Zeiss or Sigma, but I would like to see a new 50mm f/1.2L or 50mm f/1.0L just for bragging rights.

[]´s
Leandro

I ran (what I thought to be) an interesting poll on the nature of the 14-24 interest in this forum. I asked if people had a choice of the sharpness of Nikon's 14-24 or the focal length of Nikon's 14-24 -- and you could only have one -- what would you choose?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20915.15;viewresults
(See the question for how I phrased it, the specifics do matter.)

75% of respondents said they just wanted a sharper ultrawide than their current 16-35/17-40 options.

25% stuck to their guns that they'd accept the current (lack of) sharpness from their 16-35 lenses applied to the wider 14mm FL.

Keep in mind this was run before the very nice 16-35 F/4L IS was released. But I find it fascinating that (with this limited sample size), the majority of people clamoring for a 14-24 just want a sharper ultrawide. But, based on your comments, I have to assume you'd want the focal length over the sharpness (if you had to choose).

- A

If I had to choose, I would choose focal length. I could even choose an extremely-wide-wide-angle fixed lens (for example, a rectilinear 10mm f/4L) over a less-wide zoom lens.

I have longed for the Canon 14mm f/2.8L II (too expensive) for years, but as I could not justify expending so much money on a lens (I am not a professional photographer, just an amateur), I bought the 17-40mm f/4L (which made me extremely happy for years) and recently, I bought the Sigma 12-24mm, which gave me an entirely new perspective. Since the 16-35mm f/4L IS was released, I am thinking about getting one to replace the 17-40mm, but I will wait until next year to see if Canon releases a wider lens.

 

[Etienne]

I hope the non-L 85/2.0 IS is still coming this year! :

I'll take one of those too!

 

[antonioleandro]

2014 is the Yeah of the Lens!*


*disclaimer: may actually be next year

I'm assuming this has zero bearing on the (rumored) upcoming 100-400mm ii... I'd feel more confident if there reports of the current 100-400mm being discontinued like the 7D.

If anything, it basically confirms the 100-400. It won't be a new 200/300/400mm prime. It wont be an update to the 55-250, 18-135, etc (all just recently done with STM). So, what does that really leave?

Could you explain me how it confirms the 100-400?

 

[tron]

A new 50 L that's "a lot smaller" ?? Makes no sense whatsoever ..

Maybe it will be a 50mm 1.8L IS with the size of 50mm 1.4 and the price of 50 1.2L ;D ;D ;D

 

[chromophore]

Seeing as how Sigma already released a killer 50/1.4 at an extremely competitive price, I don't see how Canon could compete given that their latest offerings show that all they really care about are slow-aperture IS zooms at exorbitant prices. The idea that Canon will release something faster than f/2, patent filings notwithstanding, is not exactly something I have a lot of confidence in.

Canon simply does not care about high-quality fast-aperture primes for photographers. These days, it is all about cinema lenses and cheap consumer-level zooms they can crank out. Everyone keeps holding on...crossing fingers, hopeful that next year will be the "year of the lens." Again, just LOOK at what Sigma made. They have nowhere near the kind of optical expertise or production capability that Canon has, and they made an AF 50mm f/1.4 lens with corner sharpness that is closer to a $3500 manual-focus Zeiss than it is to ANY other such design on the market today. And then they priced it under $1000. I have no particular love for Sigma, mind you (their QC and customer service leave much to be desired). But this is just embarrassing.

Canon used to be a company that pushed the frontiers of optical design. They pioneered many lens technologies that we take for granted today, such as USM AF; fluorite elements; diffractive optics; image stabilization; all-electronic lens-body communication in the EF mount; and ultra-fast apertures of f/1.0 and f/1.2 that still have no equal today. I find it maddening that this is the same company that now seems to cr*p out a new EF-S 18-135mm cheapo zoom every six months, or produces some insane $35k cinema lens that only movie studios will buy, and leaves everyone else in the cold because we aren't their bread and butter.

 

[anthonyd]

It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft.

Oh...flashy, overpriced and useless versus dependable, reliable and built to get the job done?

That's funny, it almost sounded like you called Microsoft dependable and reliable.

 

[HarryWintergreen]

Canon enthusiasts wishing for certain lenses and looking forward to a “year of the lens”, Canon senior management yawning and squinting to their favorite ideas not realizing that these are covered with dust.

 

[KAS]

...I don't see how Canon could compete given that their latest offerings show that all they really care about are slow-aperture IS zooms at exorbitant prices....

Yes you do.

Canon pioneered many lens technologies that we take for granted today, such as USM AF; fluorite elements; diffractive optics; image stabilization; all-electronic lens-body communication in the EF mount; and ultra-fast apertures of f/1.0 and f/1.2 that still have no equal today.

 

[EchoLocation]

It feels like Sony to Canon is like Apple to Microsoft.

Oh...flashy, overpriced and useless versus dependable, reliable and built to get the job done?

1. how is Sony flashy? i don't see how an a7 or a a6000 is flashy(a99 maybe more so)
2. how are the a7's or NEX's overpriced? the NEX series are very affordable and offer great features, at a much cheaper price than the EOS-M(outside of firesale prices.) The a7's are very affordable compared to other full frame options on the market. I bought my a7 at launch with a kit lens for under 2000 bucks(in China.)
3. my a7 isn't useless at all. I don't really understand how such an awesome camera can be dismissed so quickly as useless. My camera is small, easy to use, has lots of dials to change settings, programmable buttons, I love the EVF, and the image quality is superb. None of these aspects seem useless to me.

I do somewhat agree with the Apple Microsoft analogy, and I am actually an Apple hater(the only apple item I own is a 6 year old ipod,) however in this instance, I am greatly enjoying the Apple(Sony) offering while I am waiting optimistically that someday Microsoft(Canon) will copy their new innovations and make something a little more innovative and fresh.

 

[Omni Images]

I'm turning blue here holding my breath waiting for a new version of the 400 F5.6 ... with some up grades, IS and closer focusing like the 300 F4.0 has ...
Sick of hearing about such new lenses being re-worked after a year or so, yet this lens was launched in 1993 !
The saying if it's not broke don't fix it comes to mind ... BUT... Canon could improve it now in leaps and bounds.

So what's going on Canon ?
Stop wasting time on short zooms .. the market is flooded with them.
Get back to basics with these PRIMES

 

[can0nfan2379]

Seeing as how Sigma already released a killer 50/1.4 at an extremely competitive price, I don't see how Canon could compete given that their latest offerings show that all they really care about are slow-aperture IS zooms at exorbitant prices. The idea that Canon will release something faster than f/2, patent filings notwithstanding, is not exactly something I have a lot of confidence in.

Canon simply does not care about high-quality fast-aperture primes for photographers. These days, it is all about cinema lenses and cheap consumer-level zooms they can crank out. Everyone keeps holding on...crossing fingers, hopeful that next year will be the "year of the lens." Again, just LOOK at what Sigma made. They have nowhere near the kind of optical expertise or production capability that Canon has, and they made an AF 50mm f/1.4 lens with corner sharpness that is closer to a $3500 manual-focus Zeiss than it is to ANY other such design on the market today. And then they priced it under $1000. I have no particular love for Sigma, mind you (their QC and customer service leave much to be desired). But this is just embarrassing.

Canon used to be a company that pushed the frontiers of optical design. They pioneered many lens technologies that we take for granted today, such as USM AF; fluorite elements; diffractive optics; image stabilization; all-electronic lens-body communication in the EF mount; and ultra-fast apertures of f/1.0 and f/1.2 that still have no equal today. I find it maddening that this is the same company that now seems to cr*p out a new EF-S 18-135mm cheapo zoom every six months, or produces some insane $35k cinema lens that only movie studios will buy, and leaves everyone else in the cold because we aren't their bread and butter.

I agree the release of L series lenses has been a little stagnant since the massive super tele overhaul and the 24-70II. I'm hoping for more fast lens offerings (ie. 135 1.8L IS, 85 1.2L III, 35 1.4L II etc. )