New f/4L EF Zoom [CR1]

Not open for further replies.

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
  • Jul 20, 2010
    <p><strong>New Lens with the 24-70 IS?
    <span style="font-weight: normal;">This is the 3rd or 4th time I’ve been told about the possibility of this lens.</span></strong></p>
    <p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">An EF 16-50 f/4L H-IS</span></strong></p>
    <p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">Would it replace a 17-40? or be added to the lineup?</span></strong></p>
    <p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">If this was sharp at the corners on full frame, would anyone ever buy a 17-40 or 16-35 II again?</span></strong></p>
    <p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">With such high ISO performance now and obviously improving in the future, is a wideangle zoom at f/2.8 have much of a point anymore?</span></strong></p>
    <p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">Nikon has brought about the 16-35 f/4 VR to mixed reviews, a Canon counterpart makes some sense.</span></strong></p>
    <p><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">Grain of salt on this one, the lens would sell exceptionally well however.</span></strong></p>
    <p><span style="font-weight: normal;"><strong>Rumor Reminder
    <span style="font-weight: normal;">There have been instances when CR1 rumors have become real products, a lot of truths start from stuff like this.</span></strong></span></p>
    <p><span style="font-weight: normal;"><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">Also keep in mind Canon has not been busy with announcements in the last year. There were no lenses announced with the 1D Mark IV (70-200 was at a different time) and T2i.</span></strong></span></p>
    <p><span style="font-weight: normal;"><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">We haven’t seen much in the way of lenses since the 7D.</span></strong></span></p>
    <p><span style="font-weight: normal;"><strong><span style="font-weight: normal;">Big things coming.</span></strong></span></p>
    <p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>


    The 17-40 and 16-35 are very different lenses aimed at different uses. The price differential creates a further dichotomy among users.

    An f/4 wide angle to mid tele like the rumored 16-50 with IS would be supremely useful as a wide angle walkaround. And great for landscapes and close-ups in lower light thanks to its IS.

    Canon would be wise to release a 14-24 f/2.8 at the same time, the true successor to the 16-35 II.

    In this way Canon would distinguish these two lenses more significantly. Many people would want to own both.
    Upvote 0


    EOS M6 Mark II
    CR Pro
    Jul 21, 2010
    I certainly don't think the high ISO ranges of newer cameras negates the need for f/2.8 zooms. Some will always have a preference for the depth of field of an f/2.8 and f/2.8 will always allow you to use a lower ISO and higher shutter speeds relative to f/4.0, which will still allow for incremental improvement in some situations.

    That being said, the performance of the 16-35 f/2.8 II leaves something to be desired.
    Upvote 0


    From the specs of this rumored lens, I'd say it might end up being EF-S, not EF. Effectively for APS-C what the 24-105 is for FF.
    If it was sharp it might replace my EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS, which seems to be quite a lemon (corners don't sharpen up enough even at f5.6), but it would never replace my 24-105, a FL range which I actually prefer over the 17-55.
    If they made it 16-70 f4 (and if Canon would stop being greedy with their current pricing policy), I would definitely get one.
    Upvote 0


    Grumpy said:
    I would appreciate such a zoom, but why start at 16 and not 15?. Then you will have a 24-80 on a APS-C.

    A tad more WA would of course be nice, but if it comes with the quite massive distortion of the 15-85... of course DPP can correct this, but after correction, the effective focal length/viewing angle will be smaller due to the cropping involved in distortion correction. So we probably wouldn't gain too much for all applications were distortions are not acceptable. Add in that this correction also tends to loose resolution in perhaps already not that great corners, and I think we can do without 15mm.
    Upvote 0


    EOS R
    Jul 20, 2010
    Canon is really short of new lenses.
    - 14-24 f/2.8 (or better still, 14-24 f/4L with front threading)
    - 24-70 f/2.8 IS
    - 35 f/2 micro-USM
    - 50 f/1.4 micro-USM

    and cameras:
    - D90 direct competitor
    - EVIL camera

    And MOST importantly, Canon needs to improve on their QC and sensors. They should even try to dabble with in-camera RAW NR like Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus etc.

    Only then can they regain their reputation and market share.
    Upvote 0


    If it's real and it's good, i would change my 17-40 immediatly for a 16-50 L IS (even not Hybrid).
    It would also be the first time that Canon produce an L lens thinking (at least a bit) at the APS-C format (25,6-80 mm), this would be a great news to me in general.

    I agree with Woody in many points but: - new lenses should loose the micro-USM, the new 50 1.4 it's rumored to be USM ring.
    Quote for QC and sensors.
    Upvote 0


    16-50L HIS... This makes some sense as a successor to the 17-40L, but not with hybrid IS. I can see that "normal" angular IS might be useful in very low light conditions.

    But hybrid IS on a wide angle lens? Hybrid IS also compensates for linear movements of the camera. This is important/useful when those movements reach a certain percentage of the object's size. That's why HIS was first included in a macro lens, which can image very small objects. Say you want stability of 1 pixel on a 25mm object at 3000 pixels image height, that makes about 25mm/3000=8 microns camera shake. No coffee today! I could eventually see the usefulness on a close-focusing supertele, shooting 10cm-sized birds

    A wide angle is the last place where HIS belongs. How much do you have to shake the camera to reach a percentage of the size of a tree or a skyscraper? If your skyscraper is 100m tall, the 1 pixel shake is 100m/3000 = 33cm. Even Parkinson himself does not need HIS for that, normal IS will do. In fact, it is all but impossible that the HIS corrects such a large movement.
    Upvote 0


    I post too Much on Here!!
    CR Pro
    Jul 21, 2010
    /dev/null said:
    Even Parkinson himself does not need HIS for that, normal IS will do.

    Well, like most neurological disorders, the name of the disease is derived from the physician who first described the symptoms. So, Alois Alzheimer had excellent memory, and James Parkinson had hands as steady as anyone else.

    Other than that, though, I agree - H-IS on a wide angle?!? No point. Except maybe from a marketing standpoint.
    Upvote 0
    Not open for further replies.