New Kit Lens Coming With New Rebels [CR3]

[AvTvM]

a 16-50/4.0 could easily be done in the same overall size as the 18-55. It might be 100g heavier because of slightly larger front lens. Where's the problem? Price, yes, it might be 10 bucks more direct cost per piece. So what?

 

[Loswr]

a 16-50/4.0 could easily be done in the same overall size as the 18-55. It might be 100g heavier because of slightly larger front lens. Where's the problem? Price, yes, it might be 10 bucks more direct cost per piece. So what?

So in addition to a business degree, you have a Ph.D. in optical physics and years of experience designing lenses?

Oh, and as for '10 bucks, so what?'...what are the differences between the EF-S 18-55 and 55-250 MkI vs. the MkII updates (the two versions that preceded the STM versions)? Cosmetics, for the telezoom a new panning algorithm...and reduced production costs, likely far less than $10 per unit savings. Why would Canon design an updated lens for just a minor savings in production cost? Because a minor per unit savings x millions of units = meaningful increase in profit. Your '10 bucks' may just be the entire margin on that lens sold in a kit. That's what.

But I forgot...Canon is stupid and you know better. I'm just amazed Canon isn't paying you oodles of money as a consultant, you know their markets better than they do, and you know how to design lenses better, too!

 

[Josh Denver]

PS: instead of trying to achieve a smaller kit lens, keep the size and upgrade even one optical quality or IS.

fully agree! a new, wider, constant aperture EF-S 16-50/4.0 STM IS kit zoom with decent IQ would be nice!

You 'fully agree' with keeping it the same size by suggesting an entry-level kit lens that would be larger and heavier...and more expensive. It's sad what passes for logic and business acumen in the AvTvM Universe.

I was clearly suggesting keeping the size to the CURRENT 18-55mm STM IS not ''keeping the size out of mind''.

Yes a 16-55mm would be larger and heavier and more expensive unless they drop IQ A LOT (like the Sony one), so not a viable ''replacement'' to the kit lens. An F/4 constant iris would make it even bigger, a 55mm f4 at the long end has quite a big front diameter.

All these lenses are good optical suggestions but as new lenses aside from the kit lens, or a second option kit for those wanting a higher quality optic.

The 18-55mm STM IS is incredible optically. Very sharp, MFD is crazy, IS is IBIS territory, GREAT cine-like focus ring (altgough fly by wire but it is that good somehow, it's also linear so FF marking are repeatable, unlike the horrible sony FBW rings that predict speed). It's hard to imagine how they'd improve upon it since it's the best in DSLR kit lens class, so I expect a cosmetic change like a new finish, or an IS tweak, coating, PZ port, just to come with the 800D kit.

 

[AvTvM]

Well Neuro, you and the other Canon Defense League buddies here sure worry an awful lot about Canon's profits.

Want to know, what I care for? Bang for *MY* buck and great imaging gear for *MY* needs and wants. interestingly, I find *MY* needs usually are pretty much in sync with millions of other people's needs and wants.

So if Canon manages to deliver on both counts - good products, reasonable prices - you and them don't need to worry about Canon sales and profits.

---------
A bit some more background info [sorry, somewhat OT relative to thread title]

Canon did not do well on both counts [product, price] in the last few years. No decent EOS M body (until finally M5 in late 2016). No great FF mirrorless system on par with or better than Sony A7 II lineup. Therefore, Canon did not manage to sell me anything in all of 2016. Has never happened before in any of the 10 years since I got my first Rebel XT / 350D (2006), my first ever Canon mirrorslapper. At the time it was a very good product and it was sold at a reasonable price. See, how simple it is to convince me and *millions* of other potential customers?

My last Canon camera [5D3] and lens purchases [24-70 II, 50/1.8 STM] were in 2015. If I am honest, 5D3 and L lens were a mistake. Should not have bought. Very good products, BUT they get too little use, because too big & klugdy. That nice little 50/1.8 STM lens works very well on my EOS M and therefore goes along whenever I need selective DOF and/or low light capability.

In 2017 I may buy an M5 from Canon. I like what I see so far, except size - bigger than I would like, especially that bulky hump on top. Would have preferred Sony A6500 form factor. shape. I may also buy EF-M 18-150 if it gets good reviews. Ah yes, AND IF prices are *reasonable*, meaning M5 body clearly less than comparable DLSR (80D).

Again: Canon can do what they want. And I do what I want. Buying or not buying. And telling them, when they do stupid things.

As far as kit zooms go: Don't see any need for yet another EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 ... current version is good enough. But I would be interested in an EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS and I would certainly consider an EF-M 16-50/4.0 if sold in kit with M5 or separately at say € 199,-

Whether Canon *can do* and/or *wants to do* is up to them. I just state what *I* will do or not do.

 

[Loswr]

Well Neuro, you and the other Canon Defense League buddies here sure worry an awful lot about Canon's profits.

I think you're like people who live near airports – so used to the whooshing sound you don't really even hear it anymore, except in your case the woosh is the point flying over your head. It doesn't matter whether or not anyone here cares about Canon's profits, the point is that Canon cares about Canon's profits, and that's what drives their decisions. But it doesn't surprise me that you don't care about what drives Canon's decisions, you live in some fantasy land where the nonexistent amount you've spent on ILC market research yields better data than the substantial amount Canon has and continues to spend figuring out what the market wants.

Want to know, what I care for? Bang for *MY* buck and great imaging gear for *MY* needs and wants. interestingly, I find *MY* needs usually are pretty much in sync with millions of other people's needs and wants.

Fantasy land, again. If millions of other people wanted a high-end FF MILC setup on par with the Sony a7 II system, Sony's a7 II system would be vastly outselling Canon's dSLR lineup. News flash for the ill-informed: it's not.

Again: Canon can do what they want. And I do what I want. Buying or not buying. And telling them, when they do stupid things.

Canon doesn't care whether you buy or don't buy. And yes, you can continue to appear deluded and foolish...no one at all cares about that.

 

[Don Haines]

You know that there is more than one kit lens package with most releases?

Just get the one that appeals to you.... or get the bare body.

 

[AvTvM]

oho, Neuro fully defensive ... in Canon Profits Defense mode ;D

Let Canon worry about their profits. I am sure, they do little else all day long anyways ...

As sensible customers we should be pursuing *OUR INTERESTS* and push our suppliers to cater to us:
* the right gear
e.g. FF mirrorless system, not only mirrorslappers
* good gear
e.g. a sensor that clearly beats those from Sony
* reasonable prices
e.g. refrain from ho-hum iterations of old lenses at 2x the price like 24-105 L II

 

[Random Orbits]

oho, Neuro fully defensive ... in Canon Profits Defense mode ;D

Let Canon worry about their profits. I am sure, they do little else all day long anyways ...

As sensible customers we should be pursuing *OUR INTERESTS* and push our suppliers to cater to us:
* the right gear
e.g. FF mirrorless system, not only mirrorslappers
* good gear
e.g. a sensor that clearly beats those from Sony
* reasonable prices
e.g. refrain from ho-hum iterations of old lenses at 2x the price like 24-105 L II

First, you should prove that complaining here will push Canon to do anything.

 

[Don Haines]

First, you should prove that complaining here will push Canon to do anything.

Exactly!

In another thread going on here, the 1DX2 has a 148 page AF manual. The Neuros of the world will memorize the manual, the average Canon customer would not touch the camera because not only is it huge, it has no automatic mode! We do not represent the typical customer and we are not representative of the bulk of sales.

 

[AvTvM]

First, you should prove that complaining here will push Canon to do anything.

No, that is not the point.

The point is, that WHENEVER somebody here wishes for some BETTER PRODUCT from Canon or points out some DEFICIENCIES in existing Canon products or points out HIGH PRICES by Canon ... or whatever it may be .. anything even slightly critical of Canon or questioning some of their business (mal-) practices ... from a CUSTOMERS point of view ...

THEN immediately the usual Canon Defense League guys jump up and defend Canon and worry about Canon's profits or dismiss any criticism with ever the same variations of demagogic responses ... "Canon knows better, Canon knows best, Canon sells lots of S___, Canon is a big company ... who are you to dare and question them?

This is a forum of photographers and buyers of photo gear. But more often than not it sure reads as if it was a forum of people on Canon's payroll.

PS: I cannot and dont want to prove it, but I am convinced, that this forum is under very close scrutiny by Canon. If enough of us want, wish and demand in forums like these, rather than all the time EXCULPATING Canon and trying to SHUT down any criticism ... then we will get, what we want. Sooner or later. Even with Canon.

 

[AvTvM]

We do not represent the typical customer and we are not representative of the bulk of sales.

says who?? The typical 1DX-2 user? Of course we are representative of the few people left on earth who buy fat and expensive imaging gear rather than just using our smartphones. It is *PEOPLE LIKE US* that f*cking Canon wants to sell their f*cking sh*t to.


PS: any camera should be operable by any photographer [=people who know which technical parameters they need to set for a proper capture] without having to read a 148 page manual first. If a construction guy buys the most expensive and largest power drill available at bricks-r-us he can go ahead and drill a hole in a wall without reading a manual first. Anybody strong enough to lift and hold that damn machine can.

Any photographer strong enough to hold a big fat mirrorslapper and lens to their eye, should be able to capture a photo with it.

We need those manuals only, because the camera user interface is not intuitive and good enough or because things do NOT work they way they should ... ERROR 99 ... what is it? Well, read the f*cking manual!

 

[Loswr]

First, you should prove that complaining here will push Canon to do anything.

No, that is not the point.

The point is, that WHENEVER somebody here wishes for some BETTER PRODUCT from Canon or points out some DEFICIENCIES in existing Canon products or points out HIGH PRICES by Canon ... or whatever it may be .. anything even slightly critical of Canon or questioning some of their business (mal-) practices ... from a CUSTOMERS point of view ...

THEN immediately the usual Canon Defense League guys jump up and defend Canon and worry about Canon's profits or dismiss any criticism with ever the same variations of demagogic responses ... "Canon knows better, Canon knows best, Canon sells lots of S___, Canon is a big company ... who are you to dare and question them?

This is a forum of photographers and buyers of photo gear. But more often than not it sure reads as if it was a forum of people on Canon's payroll.

PS: I cannot and dont want to prove it, but I am convinced, that this forum is under very close scrutiny by Canon. If enough of us want, wish and demand in forums like these, rather than all the time EXCULPATING Canon and trying to SHUT down any criticism ... then we will get, what we want. Sooner or later. Even with Canon.

WOOOOOSHHHH

You continue to totally miss the point. You can wish for anything you want. Wish for a Canon FF MILC. Wish for an EF-M 85mm f/2.4 IS. Wish for Canon to sell them for €99 each. Wish to be a multi-billionaire. Wish for world peace. That's all fine. Where you sound like a blathering idiot is when you claim Canon is stupid for not doing what you personally want, just because you want it.

You are 'convinced' of so many things – 'millions of buyers for a Canon FF MILC', 'millions of buyers for an EF-M 85/2.4 IS' (even though it may not even work on a Canon FF MILC), 'Canon closely scrutinizes these forums', but you don't have a shred of evidence to back up any of your convictions.

We do not represent the typical customer and we are not representative of the bulk of sales.

says who?? The typical 1DX-2 user? Of course we are representative of the few people left on earth who buy fat and expensive imaging gear rather than just using our smartphones. It is *PEOPLE LIKE US* that f*cking Canon wants to sell their f*cking sh*t to.

Seems you not only sound like a blathering idiot, but apparently you can't even comprehend what you read. Or maybe you miss dilbert so much you've decided to imitate him. Or maybe you honestly believe that the typical customer and the bulk of Canon's sales are their high end bodies and L lenses, rather than the Rebel/xxxD bodies and kit lenses. In that case, you don't merely sound like a blathering idiot, you are one.

Props for the ranting, though...at least you're good at something.

 

[Don Haines]

We do not represent the typical customer and we are not representative of the bulk of sales.

says who?? The typical 1DX-2 user? Of course we are representative of the few people left on earth who buy fat and expensive imaging gear rather than just using our smartphones. It is *PEOPLE LIKE US* that f*cking Canon wants to sell their f*cking sh*t to.


PS: any camera should be operable by any photographer [=people who know which technical parameters they need to set for a proper capture] without having to read a 148 page manual first. If a construction guy buys the most expensive and largest power drill available at bricks-r-us he can go ahead and drill a hole in a wall without reading a manual first. Anybody strong enough to lift and hold that damn machine can.

Any photographer strong enough to hold a big fat mirrorslapper and lens to their eye, should be able to capture a photo with it.

We need those manuals only, because the camera user interface is not intuitive and good enough or because things do NOT work they way they should ... ERROR 99 ... what is it? Well, read the f*cking manual!

First point: The vast bulk of sales are rebels and kit lenses. As most of us (at least the ones doing the posting) on this forum are using higher end cameras than the rebels, we are not the typical canon user.

Second point: The AF system on a 1DX is a lot more complicated than a "bricks-r-us" power drill, but keep in mind that those are the rebels of power drills. I can head to the tool crib and pick out a 12" core drill that uses cooling fluid, cutting fluids, hydraulic feed, and programmable rpm and feed rate. It comes with a manual that contains tables for cutting speeds and fluids for various diameters and materials...... Compare apples to apples, not apples to peas.

Third point: criticism. Saying that something is a piece of S___ or ranting causes your criticism to be ignored. If you really want someone to pay attention to your criticism, try offering constructive criticism. For example, a comment such as "have you considered adding a help function to the camera menu to help with selecting AF modes" will be better received than profanities"

 

[hbr]

First point: The vast bulk of sales are rebels and kit lenses.

As most of us (at least the ones doing the posting) on this forum are using higher end cameras than the rebels, we are not the typical canon user.

+1

I haven't bought a kit lens or a Rebel series in about 6 years, so I really don't care what they come out with.

P.S. The only reason I am following this thread is that I am bored and I am enjoying the flame war. Burn Baby, Burn!

 

[AvTvM]

Canon Defense League, all the way.

I experience myself as pretty representative for "regular, non-Pro photo enthusiast" and also for *the bulk of forum users* here. CDL members and fanboys not counted. Time and again I have noticed, that the gear I buy and the gear I would like to buy in addition or in the future is also purchased or desired by many other people.

CDL can claim all day long "it is only you, stupid". Does not make the statement true. It is *me and many, many others*.

But, have fun and enjoy Canon launching yet another iteration of the Canon EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM IS instead of a 16-50/4. This time maybe with a silver and a gold ring around the barrel? Way to go, Canon! So innovative! Multi-million dollar market research and special CDL focus group both clearly indicate massive demand for an EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM Mk. II ...

 

[Loswr]

I experience myself as pretty representative for "regular, non-Pro photo enthusiast" and also for *the bulk of forum users* here. CDL members and fanboys not counted. Time and again I have noticed, that the gear I buy and the gear I would like to buy in addition or in the future is also purchased or desired by many other people.

CDL can claim all day long "it is only you, stupid". Does not make the statement true. It is *me and many, many others*.

I'd agree that you are fairly representative of the many of the forum members here...at least in terms of gear purchases (although not in terms of grasp on reality or desires for future gear). If you liberally count members with >10 posts as active forum participants – people who've self-selected to join and contribute to (or troll in) a forum dedicated to speculating about forthcoming camera gear – that constitutes about 3,000 people. Canon will sell >4,500,000 ILC cameras this year alone.

If you believe that <0.07% of self-selected gearheads are representative of millions of 'typical Canon buyers', you make even dilbert's tenuous grasp on reality seem fairly solid by comparison.

No one is defending Canon here, just explaining reality...which is likely an exercise in futility in your case.

But, have fun and enjoy Canon launching yet another iteration of the Canon EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 STM IS instead of a 16-50/4. This time maybe with a silver and a gold ring around the barrel? Way to go, Canon! So innovative! Multi-million dollar market research and special CDL focus group both clearly indicate massive demand for an EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 IS STM Mk. II ...

If Canon does make an EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 STM IS II, I guarantee they will sell millions of them (not by customers' declarative choice, but merely by virtue of it being in entry level kits). That's actual millions of real people, not the mythical 'millions of buyers' for niche lenses in your fantasyland mind. Very few active CR forum participants will buy one, because most are beyond entry level. Most here don't care about 18-55mm kit lenses. The thread on the 85mm f/1.4L IS has triple the posts of this one, and most of the posts are about the lens itself (vs. this thread where a good portion are your asinine, profanity-laced drivel).

 

[crashpc]

Neuro at his full power. hhhh. Chairman of the Canon league.

Well, who do you Think Neuro, prepares all the features and working parts (on the usability and software scale) to get authorized by marketing and sales department?
Actual photographers, technicians and gearheads. That´s why they let preproduction samples go into hands of "explorers of light" and unfortunately other Canon league members.
It might be exactly this percentage of people.
As you might know, Kodak or Nokia knew better what to do. Look how these ended up.

I myself found it takes even more crippling from Canon to go away. Their offers are right on the edge where I consider Canon systems as best (not by far tho). That doesn´t mean they cannot do better and smight all competition. Instead, they´re $hitting their pants by the wall, instead of going "into the crowd" Sony like, even for a moment.

 

[Loswr]

Neuro at his full power. hhhh. Chairman of the Canon league.

Well, who do you Think Neuro, prepares all the features and working parts (on the usability and software scale) to get authorized by marketing and sales department?
Actual photographers, technicians and gearheads. That´s why they let preproduction samples go into hands of "explorers of light" and unfortunately other Canon league members.
It might be exactly this percentage of people.
As you might know, Kodak or Nokia knew better what to do. Look how these ended up.

I myself found it takes even more crippling from Canon to go away. Their offers are right on the edge where I consider Canon systems as best (not by far tho). That doesn´t mean they cannot do better and smight all competition. Instead, they´re $hitting their pants by the wall, instead of going "into the crowd" Sony like, even for a moment.

Ahhh, now we've heard from another card-carrying member of CHWAC (Canon Haters Without A Clue). So it's your opinion that these 'actual photographers, technicians and gearheads' are the ones making the choices that are 'crippling' Canon's new releases?

"Kodak...Nokia," the rallying cry of CHWACers. Digital imaging was a paradigm shift. Smartphones were a paradigm shift. What currently ongoing paradigm shift, with which Canon is failing to keep up, is spelling out Canon's doom?

I'm amused by your suggestion that Canon is 'defecating by the wall' instead of copying Sony's efforts, which are working out so well for them. And what is it with you CHWACers and your profanity-laced posts? Can't make your points articulately, so you have to fall back on vulgarity? Your attempt was pretty weak, though...I guess that's why AvTvM is your fearless (and clueless) leader. You'll need to use a few more epithets if you want to make him proud.

 

[scyrene]

When I got my first DSLR, it was a very old and battered 300D with the original 18-55 kit lens. And I was stunned by the image quality. Compared to my (original!) iPhone, and point-and-shoot cameras I'd used previously, it was amazing - the crispness, colours, and the shallow depth of field (in combination with the huge APS-C sensor!).

I wouldn't touch that lens with a barge pole now, but it introduced me in a very positive way to the possibilities of digital photography for creativity, not just as a means of recording things. Any new model will do the same for thousands of photographers of the future.

 

[crashpc]

Ahhh, now we've heard from another card-carrying member of CHWAC (Canon Haters Without A Clue). So it's your opinion that these 'actual photographers, technicians and gearheads' are the ones making the choices that are 'crippling' Canon's new releases?

"Kodak...Nokia," the rallying cry of CHWACers. Digital imaging was a paradigm shift. Smartphones were a paradigm shift. What currently ongoing paradigm shift, with which Canon is failing to keep up, is spelling out Canon's doom?

I'm amused by your suggestion that Canon is 'defecating by the wall' instead of copying Sony's efforts, which are working out so well for them. And what is it with you CHWACers and your profanity-laced posts? Can't make your points articulately, so you have to fall back on vulgarity? Your attempt was pretty weak, though...I guess that's why AvTvM is your fearless (and clueless) leader. You'll need to use a few more epithets if you want to make him proud.

How can that be without a clue, when I´m Canon user, and I´ve been there on the dark side and came back? Wonder who doesn´t have a clue.

There is no paradigm shift in a single feature. Canon gets huge part of the cake eaten just because it lacks some standard or doable/awesome features, or even core specs.
Be it 4K,IS,pixel shift, quiet shutter, pure sensor performance, burst rate and buffer dept of (up to now pathetic) mirrorless Canon, connectivity and ease of use, true support of lower end and affordable mid range, firmware updates actually solving things and adding features. I just pulled few out of my butt. I could think of more. On each feature, there are people leaving or not buying some Canon stuff.

It doesn´t take a rocket science to see, and these are for fact. Sometimes spiced(not backed, as you suggest) with a vulgar word, which is not a problem compared to trolling and putting down other people you made guilty of having their own opinions. Wow, what a bravery and useful discussion from ya. I have yet to see that straightening of things and bringing facts you didn´t bring with your strong words.

Whoow, that was a drag (rather for making this post with my first grade english). But at least I enjoyed supporting some other guys opinion on the internet.