New Lenses Coming [CR3]

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/new-lenses-coming-cr3/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/new-lenses-coming-cr3/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/new-lenses-coming-cr3/"></a></div>
<strong>New Lenses Coming

</strong>The announcement dates for the following lenses haven’t been confirmed. However, they will be coming sooner rather than later.</p>
<p><strong>EF-S 18-135 II

</strong>This lens will have a silent autofocus motor geared to video. It will arrive with the new Rebel T4i. This has shown up in a US retailer inventory system. No price for the kit with the T4i.</p>
<p><strong>EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4X

</strong>This highly anticipated lens will be officially announced shortly. The price will most likely be $10,999 USD.</p>
<p><strong>EF 40 f/2.8 Pancake</strong>

I think it’ll be EF, but a 40 f/2.8 Pancake lens is coming. Expect it to be announced either with the 5D or shortly after.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<div class="prli-social-buttons-bar"><a href="http://del.icio.us/post?url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/delicious_32.png" alt="Delicious" title="Delicious" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/stumbleupon_32.png" alt="StumbleUpon" title="StumbleUpon" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/digg_32.png" alt="Digg" title="Digg" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://twitter.com/home?status=RT @prettylink:  [url=http://www.canonrumors.com/]http://www.canonrumors.com/[/url] (via @prettylink)" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/twitter_32.png" alt="Twitter" title="Twitter" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.mixx.com/submit?page_url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/mixx_32.png" alt="Mixx" title="Mixx" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://technorati.com/faves?add=http://www.canonrumors.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/technorati_32.png" alt="Technorati" title="Technorati" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://www.canonrumors.com/&t=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/facebook_32.png" alt="Facebook" title="Facebook" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.newsvine.com/_tools/seed&save?u=http://www.canonrumors.com/&h=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/newsvine_32.png" alt="News Vine" title="News Vine" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://reddit.com/submit?url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/reddit_32.png" alt="Reddit" title="Reddit" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/linkedin_32.png" alt="LinkedIn" title="LinkedIn" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://myweb2.search.yahoo.com/myresults/bookmarklet?u=http://www.canonrumors.com/&=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/yahoobuzz_32.png" alt="Yahoo! Bookmarks" title="Yahoo! Bookmarks" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a></div>

 

[Loswr]

Hmmm...

A new kit lens, quieter AF, but also likely production cost decreases like the 18-55 II and 55-250 II. Yawn.

A lens that's already been announced as being in development. Given the lag from formal announcement (which this would be for the 200-400mm) and actual availablity for lenses in this range (currently 18 months and counting for the 500/600 II lenses), should we be excited about a lens that may not hit the streets for over a year?

A small, flat, inconspicuous lens released with a bulky and far-from-inconspicuous dSLR. Ummm...why?

Overall, while I'm glad there are announcements of lenses, and I acknowledge these are going to make some people happy, I'm not particularly excited, here...

 

[jdavis37]

Hmmmmmmmm $11K USD for the 200-400 1.4X lens.. no wonder it has taken so long to be announced. Took that long to get the nerve to show the price

All joking aside.... this will add creedence to my thoughts perhaps I should consider a D4. D4 + Nikon 200-400F4 = $12800 Add 1.4X TC at about $400 = $13,200

200-400F4 to 5D3 = $14,500

That's getting roughly 5 to 6 fps for a negative $1300!

Hope this 200-400 is worth the price of admission

 

[Loswr]

Nikon 200-400F4 = $12800 Add 1.4X TC at about $400

If I were considering this lens (personally, I'd get the 500/4 ahead of the 200-400/1.4x, I think), the ability to flip a switch to engage the TC, rather than having to unmount and remount the lens on the TC, would be worth a lot...especially having to juggle a lens as heavy as a 200-400/4.

 

[c.d.embrey]

A small, flat, inconspicuous lens released with a bulky and far-from-inconspicuous dSLR. Ummm...why?

Maybe this means that the Canon Mirrorless will be a Digital EOS IX. I'd buy one or maybe two

For those not familiar with the APS Film EOS IX http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_IX

 

[SPG]

A silent autofocus for a t4i is interesting in that it might signal that this camera will have autofocus capabilities in video mode. Not that most pros want AF in video, but it is a nice option to have in some situations.

 

[BXL]

<strong>EF-S 18-135 II</strong>
This lens will have a silent autofocus motor geared to video. It will arrive with the new Rebel T4i. This has shown up in a US retailer inventory system. No price for the kit with the T4i.

Silent autofocus motor? I would prefer USM for a better and faster AF... don't care too much 'bout video.

 

[Cornershot]

I'd have use for a flat lens. There are many jobs in which I want to travel small and light so will slide a second body into a smaller bag profilewise. But even with a 50, it doesn't fit so I have to put the body in alone with a cap. A flat lens would work great here and keep the second camera instantly usable.

 

[c.d.embrey]

Looks like f/2.8 is the NEW f/1.8 for Canon. With higher ISOs being "grainless", f/1.8 lenses may not be necessary for general photography. The introduction of Kodak Ektapress 400 and Fuji Press 400 changed things for Pjs and later for birthday-party-photographers. The EF 24mm f/2.8 would make a great lens for a 4Ti (or maybe a Digital EOS IX ).

 

[Ricku]

Looks like f/2.8 is the NEW f/1.8 for Canon. With higher ISOs being "grainless", f/1.8 lenses may not be necessary for general photography.

Not if you don't like good bokeh.

 

[EYEONE]

I find a 18-135mm II interesting and surprising. The Mk I does have some issues but it's a fine enough kit lens. But, I'm guessing that the "silent autofocus motor" isn't exactly USM or it would be a Mk II. It would just be a 18-135mm USM. Is this hinting at the T4i having full time autofocus while shooting video?

What's the difference between USM and "silent autofocus motor geared to video"?

 

[bdeutsch]

I have no need for super-zooms, so I'm sure my opinion doesn't matter...but that is a *huge* price jump (about 10x) to go from the 100-400 f/4-5.6 plus a separate 1.4x TC, to get a 200-400 f/4 with TC built in. How big is the market for that? You gain one stop at the long end of the zoom and have the convenience of a built-in TC, but lose the 100-200mm range and pay 10x the price.


Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photos

 

[Loswr]

I have no need for super-zooms, so I'm sure my opinion doesn't matter...but that is a *huge* price jump (about 10x) to go from the 100-400 f/4-5.6 plus a separate 1.4x TC, to get a 200-400 f/4 with TC built in. How big is the market for that? You gain one stop at the long end of the zoom and have the convenience of a built-in TC, but lose the 100-200mm range and pay 10x the price.

'Superzoom' means means a >5x zoom range. 200-400mm is a 2x zoom range, not even as great a zoom range as the 16-35mm.

The market is small, so the price is high. The 100-400mm is a prosumer-class lens, and has a <$2K price tag to match. The 200-400mm f/4 + 1.4x is in the supertele camp, and should be compared to the 400/2.8, 500/4, etc. When you compare the IQ, AF performance, and build of the 300/2.8 IS II to the 300/4 IS, that's the analogous comparison to the 200-400mm vs. 100-400mm - you're paying a lot more, and getting a lot more lens.

 

[c.d.embrey]

Not if you don't like good bokeh.

It may surprise you to learn that most people don't give a Flying Eff about bokeh. Didn't you see the words "general photography" . When was the last time you heard people raving about the creamy bokeh off a Pulitzer Prize winning News Photo. Or heard "Oh WOW, that paper-thin-DOF really makes those Birthday Party shots ROCK!!!"

 

[Loswr]

Not if you don't like good bokeh.

It may surprise you to learn that most people don't give a Flying Eff about bokeh. Didn't you see the words "general photography" .

Well, heck, then...let's all just get point-n-shoots for "general photography".

 

[EYEONE]

I have no need for super-zooms, so I'm sure my opinion doesn't matter...but that is a *huge* price jump (about 10x) to go from the 100-400 f/4-5.6 plus a separate 1.4x TC, to get a 200-400 f/4 with TC built in. How big is the market for that? You gain one stop at the long end of the zoom and have the convenience of a built-in TC, but lose the 100-200mm range and pay 10x the price.


Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photos

Well, a couple of reasons I think:
-The 100-400mm was released in 1998. (It's not a superzoom either)
-The f4 while "only a stop" needs a lot more glass than a 5.6. Look at it, it's huge and heavy. Plus, it looks to be internal zoom.
-The 200-400 will be newer and much better. It will likely be sharper with the 1.4x than the 100-400 is without it.
-Plus it has the 1.4x which does cost something.

All that said, $10,999 is higher than I expected.

 

[dstppy]

I have no need for super-zooms, so I'm sure my opinion doesn't matter...but that is a *huge* price jump (about 10x) to go from the 100-400 f/4-5.6 plus a separate 1.4x TC, to get a 200-400 f/4 with TC built in. How big is the market for that? You gain one stop at the long end of the zoom and have the convenience of a built-in TC, but lose the 100-200mm range and pay 10x the price.


Actor Headshots NYC | Gotham Family Photos | NY Wedding Photos

Well, a couple of reasons I think:
-The 100-400mm was released in 1998. (It's not a superzoom either)
-The f4 while "only a stop" needs a lot more glass than a 5.6. Look at it, it's huge and heavy. Plus, it looks to be internal zoom.
-The 200-400 will be newer and much better. It will likely be sharper with the 1.4x than the 100-400 is without it.
-Plus it has the 1.4x which does cost something.

All that said, $10,999 is higher than I expected.

$11k is higher than Dr. Evil expected ;D

I dunno . . . I'm still waiting for something 'wow' to come out for lenses in the $500-$1500 range.

Maybe make the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS in black, remove the L and red-ring then charge the DO price? Maybe just a respectable 100-300 f/4 for the po' fo'k . . . .

 

[EYEONE]

Not if you don't like good bokeh.

It may surprise you to learn that most people don't give a Flying Eff about bokeh. Didn't you see the words "general photography" .

Well, maybe I don't know what you mean by your term "general photography" but no matter my camera's ISO performance I'll take the shallower depth of field any day. What you say most people don't "give a flying eff" about is one of my primary concerns.

 

[kubelik]

I really hate Canon's sudden love of the f/2.8 max aperture for primes. what is the point of purchasing a prime if it's just going to do only what your zoom lens can do anyway with more flexibility? a 35mm f/2 pancake would have been nice. a 40mm f/2.8 ... hands up if you really want this lens ... anyone? in all their supposed polling of photographers interests, I guess a lot of us voted for "slow, near-standard focal length prime"?

I bet it'll cost $800 too.

 

[Canon 14-24]

I'm going to guess a Canon EF 40mm 2.8 pancake lens like the Nikon 45mm 2.8 with the possible addition of AF and slightly better optics would range between $499-999! I can see it now...people are going to be scratching their heads to justify the price and will probably be comparing to the 50 1.8!