New Lenses Coming [CR3]

[SiliconVoid]

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.

Actually.. Most people do care about DOF and Bokeh, they just do not fully understand why a photograph attracts their eye. They do not know how to assess the effects nor how achieved it on a consistent basis. You can see it anywhere, go look on Pbase, DPReview, Flicker etc.. they are the pictures that get commented on the most, get put in the photographers favorites folder, have the most impact on the viewer - and for 'most people' those shots were just luck because they do not really understand what they did.
The problem with shooting for that effect all the time is a rather thin DOF (missed focus) - consumer grade lenses that do not have the sharpness at faster apertures (the proverbial 'soft lens') nor better aperture mechanisms that produce the more appealing bokeh. I have read many comments from 'most people' who question why others would pay $1200 for a 50mm f/1.2 L when 'their' 18-55mm kit lens produces sharper images (at f/5.6 of course).

If I had to guess I would say Canon has decided that f/2.8 is a decent compromise for many. Still providing a creative tool for those who know how to use it, yet still providing a better opportunity for most people to get properly focused shots across the majority of their camera models.

 

[wickidwombat]

well when you move over to the nameless system I would be interested in buying your 1D4

No chance. I live in Argentina half the year and their are huge tariffs on imported camera equipment. I can sell my used gear down here and make a profit

That being said, I won't do anything rash... I'm still thinking about the company whose name begins with an S and makes a 120-300/2.8, that with a 1.4 extender is f4 and beats the pants off the 100-400 in terms of IQ. I shall rent it and see.

My ass is twitching.

well if that S 120-300 2.8 is anything like their 85 1.4 It would be worth a serious look

 

[bvukich]

Terry Richardson and Juergen Teller built their Fashion Photography reputations with P&S Film cameras. Juergen Teller is still shooting Ads and Fashion Editorial with his Film P&S Contax G2.

Side note:
A Contax G2 is a rangefinder, not a P&S.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

Oh HELL no Canon. $11,000 for the 200-400?

The 200-400 lens from the company whose name shall remain unsaid costs $7000. I could buy their lens and a D800 and have enough left for some high-priced companionship.

Wow....

Don't worry...they'll have a $5000 rebate with purchase of a T4i body buy Xmas.

 

[michi]

Kinda curious, how many of you would buy a new 50mm 1.4 with fantastic optics? That's the kind of lens I have been waiting/hoping for. Even if it was let's say $500, I would still jump on it. Am I the only one who doesn't have thousands of dollars and would still love to have a great affordable lens like that?

 

[smirkypants]

Kinda curious, how many of you would buy a new 50mm 1.4 with fantastic optics? That's the kind of lens I have been waiting/hoping for. Even if it was let's say $500, I would still jump on it. Am I the only one who doesn't have thousands of dollars and would still love to have a great affordable lens like that?

I have one... it's from a company whose name begins with an S but that I can't say out loud lest I be smitten to smithereens. It's the only reason I would think of buying a 120-300/2.8 from them.

 

[wickidwombat]

Kinda curious, how many of you would buy a new 50mm 1.4 with fantastic optics? That's the kind of lens I have been waiting/hoping for. Even if it was let's say $500, I would still jump on it. Am I the only one who doesn't have thousands of dollars and would still love to have a great affordable lens like that?

in a heartbeat... same materials as the 100 f2.8L same build quality, call it an L but priced lower than the 1.2
still dreaming....

 

[BXL]

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.

Don't think so, because those "new" 2.8 lenses are only replacing the "old" 2.8 lenses. At some point of time, the mid-range primes, like the 28/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 100/2, will be updated as well.

 

[JR]

I am surprised there is no mention of the new 35mm 1.4L mkII in this latest rumor.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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

Even Mr. Bigglesworth fainted and fell out of his lap upon hearing the price.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I am surprised there is no mention of the new 35mm 1.4L mkII in this latest rumor.

more surprising is no mention of a 50mm 1.4 with working AF.

 

[moreorless]

why 40? that's 40 on FF and 65 on crop. huh?

and what are you going to use it on? consumer DSLRs have that ugly prism/flash thing protruding from the body and a pancake would look real ugly on them
a 5D or 1D is so large that a 50/1.8 already looks like a pancake (i.e. no advantage using an even smaller lens)

why 2.8? I understand the 24 and 28, they have IS, they are wide angle. but 40 is in the "normal" range, f/2 would help. even if not the best quality, who cares.
I hope that this is going to be cheap at least.

Unless they are actually planning a EOS-mount mirrorless camera like the new pentax thing. (uhhgly) so a pancake would make sense. still, 30/35 would have been better.

Seems very similar to the existing Pentax 40mm 2.8 limated pancake thats been sold for use on DSLR's not much smaller than a 5D.

The prism and the grip still don't add that much more lenght to a 5D beyond the mount so a slim 40mm 2.8 will potentially save space, the same with most Canon DSLR's.

 

[c.d.embrey]

Side note:
A Contax G2 is a rangefinder, not a P&S.

A Contax G2 is an autofocus camera. "But the AF mechanism in the G-series does indeed use a twin-window system much like that of the older mechanical rangefinders — only in electronic form." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contax_G I talked to a Contax rep at a large Photo-Show when the camera was new. He said that with manual focus you were just controlling the electronic autofocus manually, i.e. not at all like focusing a Leica. He thought it was a Big Step Forward.

Here are two videos of Juergen Teller shooting ads for Marc Jakobs, notice how he treats the G2 like a P&S, no focusing, he just pushes the shutter.

Daisy by Marc Jakobs Daisy by Marc Jacobs film 2

Marc Jacobs Perfume Oh, Lola Dakota Fanning - Behind the Scenes - Marc Jacobs Perfume Oh, Lola - Full Video

 

[DJL329]

Kinda curious, how many of you would buy a new 50mm 1.4 with fantastic optics? That's the kind of lens I have been waiting/hoping for. Even if it was let's say $500, I would still jump on it. Am I the only one who doesn't have thousands of dollars and would still love to have a great affordable lens like that?

+1 The 50mm f/1.4 is my most used lens, but it really needs an upgrade to Ring USM and better build quality. Someone else said they want the same build quality as the 100L macro; I'd settle for the same quality as the 28mm and 85mm f/1.8 lenses (which I also own), as both are solid. The Sigma, with it's 77mm threads is just too large for me to consider. I'd choose the Zeiss over that, even though it's manual focus.

I am surprised there is no mention of the new 35mm 1.4L mkII in this latest rumor.

more surprising is no mention of a 50mm 1.4 with working AF.

(As I've previously stated) I'm hoping Canon is keeping it under wraps to make it a kit lens option for the next 5D, as part of the EOS 25th anniversary (a 50mm prime is what SLRs used to come with, years ago).

 

[pj1974]

Kinda curious, how many of you would buy a new 50mm 1.4 with fantastic optics? That's the kind of lens I have been waiting/hoping for. Even if it was let's say $500, I would still jump on it. Am I the only one who doesn't have thousands of dollars and would still love to have a great affordable lens like that?

Ahhhh.. I had a good chuckle at something you wrote above, michi ;D
"Even if it was let's say $500".
It's much more likely to be closer to $1000 seeing the price of most of Canon's latest offerings! Eg the 24mm f2.8 USM IS and 28mm f2.8 USM IS are around $800. A much faster (eg f1.4!) lens, even without IS would cost around $800 to $1000 is my guess.

I'd be happy with a new 50mm f1.8 that has true (ring) USM (IS could be a bonus) for around $500-$600, or a f1.4 for around $800-$1000 with true USM (IS again, just as a bonus). I had the 50mm f1.8, but sold it - as the focus accuracy & speed as well as bokeh aren't up to my standards.

I want a fast lens (at least f2), around 50 - 60mm, very high IQ wide open, true USM. That is the only real 'gap' in my current lens range I have 4 other lenses: 10-20mm, 15-85mm, 100mm macro and 70-300mm L, so the 'fast quality prime' is the one I'm looking for.

I've seen too many focus issues with the Sigma 50mm f1.4 to be convinced by it. Same (weak, not true full ring USM) with the Canon 50mm f1.4, where many copies are not sharp enough wide open either.

Please please please Canon...

Paul

 

[jdavis37]

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.

If they can sell it at that price they will... not exactly price I was hoping for... given the Nikon 200-400F4 VR2 is $6800 USD I had figured the Canon version would be in the $8900 range. But $11K? Ouch. Just means more than likely I won't be buying.. wasn't fortunate enough to be wealthy. $8000 range and I would have justified it MAYBe but 411k is hard to imagine in good faith. A D4 + 200-400 is less expensive than proposed 5d + Canon 200-400. i'm actually surprised.. course until Canon releases a price it is just rumor but at CR3 have afeeling it will be so!

 

[jdavis37]

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.

It's the $11K I am choking on. Nikon version $6800. Quite the difference!

 

[RC]

Nothing exciting about the lens announcement for me. :'( Where's the 35 1.4 II and anything 50?

Ok, what is with pancake lens? ??? Not the focal length, even though that is weird unless its an EF-S. Why a stubby little lens? Seems to me something has to be compromised else more lens would be nice and compact. Someone educate me on "pancake" lenses please. Thanks

 

[bvukich]

Side note:
A Contax G2 is a rangefinder, not a P&S.

A Contax G2 is an autofocus camera. "But the AF mechanism in the G-series does indeed use a twin-window system much like that of the older mechanical rangefinders — only in electronic form." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contax_G I talked to a Contax rep at a large Photo-Show when the camera was new. He said that with manual focus you were just controlling the electronic autofocus manually, i.e. not at all like focusing a Leica. He thought it was a Big Step Forward.

Here are two videos of Juergen Teller shooting ads for Marc Jakobs, notice how he treats the G2 like a P&S, no focusing, he just pushes the shutter.

I know it has autofocus. So does a 1Dx. Neither are P&S cameras.

 

[Marsu42]

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.

More than that, if it has af in video it has af in live view too - and that's good news, because the contrast af of the 60D is so broken I seldom use live view to take pictures, and if only with quick af which is tiresome because the mirror flips at each focus action.