New EF f/2.8 Wide Angle Zoom in the Works [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

This is the second time in the last month or so that we’ve been told that a new wide angle f/2.8 zoom was in the works. The obvious lens for replacement would be for the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II. which was released in 2007. Fast wide angle zooms are still required by a lot of event photographers as well as people that want to use something lighter, cheaper and easier to use than the EF 11-24 f/4L.</p>
<p>I think it’s possible that the focal length range changes, even if only slightly.</p>
<p>Such an update will not come before the release of Canon’s next L prime, which most people expect to be the EF 35mm f/1.4L II.</p>

 

[tron]

If it has the quality of 16-35 f/4 L IS it will be a very desirable lens...

 

[PureClassA]

With the crazy success of the 16-35 f4, I really wonder how many buyers would be out there for the same wide lens with one extra stop and likely no IS. Landscapers aren't shooting wide open anyway, so the occasions one would really need that extra stop would be pretty rare. Had the f4 not been released, then this would make more sense, considering the lackluster edge performance of the current model, but a lot of those owners have already sold it and moved to the f4. I'm taking this one with a bottle of salt.

 

[tron]

With the crazy success of the 16-35 f4, I really wonder how many buyers would be out there for the same wide lens with one extra stop and likely no IS. Landscapers aren't shooting wide open anyway, so the occasions one would really need that extra stop would be pretty rare. Had the f4 not been released, then this would make more sense, considering the lackluster edge performance of the current model, but a lot of those owners have already sold it and moved to the f4. I'm taking this one with a bottle of salt.

Event photographers and Landscape Astrophotographers. I am intersested in Landscape Astophotograpy. Usually, I use my 14 2.8 L II but the bulbous front element creates problems with side lighting. A 16-35 with flat front element and a hood would help...

 

[Memdroid]

With the crazy success of the 16-35 f4, I really wonder how many buyers would be out there for the same wide lens with one extra stop and likely no IS. Landscapers aren't shooting wide open anyway, so the occasions one would really need that extra stop would be pretty rare. Had the f4 not been released, then this would make more sense, considering the lackluster edge performance of the current model, but a lot of those owners have already sold it and moved to the f4. I'm taking this one with a bottle of salt.

I am in the market for a direct 16-35 2.8 II replacement for the low light event work. This is the weakest lens I have in my bag but it gets a fair amount of use. I tried the F4 IS version via CPS loan, while the lens renders beautifully and is tack sharp but the extra stop in low light is definitely needed.

 

[steliosk]

A replacement of the 16-35 2.8 II was needed.
I'll buy one ASAP to make a great pair with my 24-70 2.8 II and 70-200 2.8 II

Although the 16-35 f/4 is perfect for landscape work, but for me being both landscape and wedding photographer that f/4 is killing me in weddings, and the new Tamron 15-30 doesn't take descend filters for landscape

 

[IglooEater]

I'd get it, but they'd better hurry- the Tamron 15-30 is calling out to me..

 

[iron-t]

This lens does seem to need an update. I had a 16-35mm f/2,8L II and sold it. Its resolution anywhere but dead center was pretty awful. I used it at the longer end most of the time and always regretted not using my Tamron 24-70mm which had much, much better resolution at 24-35mm all the way from wide open to f/11. Now they are both gone and I'm using a Samyang 14mm and Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II with no regrets.

There are people that need this type of lens, without question. It's probably not an enormous market since most photogs will be fine with the f/4 IS and those needing an ultra-ultra wide can go for the 11-24, but it's definitely there.

 

[PureClassA]

Guess I never had occasion to use such a wide on events. 24-70 gets me there. And for Astro, I would thik even 2.8 isn't fast enough. See a lot of folks using 24mm primes (or wider) at 1.4 or 2. I don't really shoot either of these that often so I don't know.

 

[RGF]

I think it’s possible that the focal length range changes, even if only slightly.</p>

Wonder if the focal length change will be towards the wide end. I would like to see 14-30/36 F2.8 that matches the IQ of the 16-35 F4 and the 11-24 F4.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I hope Canon keeps the same number of aperture blades which the current model has...it produces the best sun stars ever.

 

[Mitch.Conner]

I think it’s possible that the focal length range changes, even if only slightly.</p>

Wonder if the focal length change will be towards the wide end. I would like to see 14-30/36 F2.8 that matches the IQ of the 16-35 F4 and the 11-24 F4.

I think they'd limit it to 15-35/40, if nothing else, just to guard their 14mm prime.

 

[rowlandw]

Gee, do you think they'd try a faster aperture like f/2 like Sigma has for their f/1.8 18-35 zoom?
This would differentiate Canon from the awesome Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 (which I own).

 

[luckydude]

I wonder if this is Canon finally trying to compete with the one Nikon lens I'd actually like to own - the 14-24 f2.8
It's pretty sweet for astro stuff:

http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/nightsky/[email protected]

 

[LonelyBoy]

Gee, do you think they'd try a faster aperture like f/2 like Sigma has for their f/1.8 18-35 zoom?
This would differentiate Canon from the awesome Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 (which I own).

Isn't the Sigma really only for use on crop? I doubt Canon will match it for FF.

 

[adventureous]

My 16-35 F2.8II get's used all the time for low light events, and real estate interiors. It is the lens on my camera 90% of the time. The chromatic aberration - purple fringing- drives me crazy and since this is the second go around for this lens, I would hate to see the first edition. It does get me shots that people love, and for low light the 2.8 is hard to beat. Fix the edge resolution-sharpness and color fringing and I'm in.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

With the crazy success of the 16-35 f4, I really wonder how many buyers would be out there for the same wide lens with one extra stop and likely no IS. Landscapers aren't shooting wide open anyway, so the occasions one would really need that extra stop would be pretty rare. Had the f4 not been released, then this would make more sense, considering the lackluster edge performance of the current model, but a lot of those owners have already sold it and moved to the f4. I'm taking this one with a bottle of salt.

+1, in fact I was one of the people that sold the 16-35/2.8L II and bought the newest 16-35/4L IS and no regrets at all. I personally shoot rarely wide open and the IS comes very handy.
People who may go for the new 16-35/2.8L III are the same that uses the current now, people who wants to stop action and need higher shutter speeds.

 

[tron]

Guess I never had occasion to use such a wide on events. 24-70 gets me there. And for Astro, I would thik even 2.8 isn't fast enough. See a lot of folks using 24mm primes (or wider) at 1.4 or 2. I don't really shoot either of these that often so I don't know.

24 is not 16! Also it has to be coma free so Canon 24 1.4 is excluded.

 

[Ladislav]

I hope they are also working on 24-70 L 2.8 IS ... Several times I had temptation to replace the Tamron with 24-70 L 4.0 IS but I don't want to lose the extra stop and I don't want to lose IS by going for 24-70 L 2.8 II. If I have to pay a fortune I want it all. Tamron has advantage in this even I'm not so much impressed with its focus consistency. Compared to what my 100L or 70-300L can do in terms of sharpness and AF speed and consistency, I consider Tamron very often below the bar.

 

[tron]

I got the new Canon 24-70 2.8 II and I did not regret it. It focuses accurately and it is very sharp. I prefer it over Tamron IS but I can understand someone who wants everything in one lens. I guess we will have to wait alot for such a Canon lens.