Next L Lens From Canon Will be a Prime [CR2]

[Berowne]

If they are attempting to replace the 50mm f/1.2, why not go all the way and introduce a new f/1.0 or f/0.95 (with optimal sharpness and focusing capabilities, of course)? It's time for Canon to introduce another revolution, not just an evolution. They've certainly proven that they can do this on the wide end (ie 11-24), but it would be great to see this innovation in the form of a new extreme-aperture lens.

The reason the 50mm f/1.2L is f/1.2 is because by making it f/1.2 Canon was able to significantly increase sharpness and focusing capabilities and reduces artifacts over the 50mm f/1.0. 50mm f/1.0 requires a massive amount of glass to move around and there is not much way to get around that as it is physics.

Personally I would like to see an 85mm f/1.4L, basically redo the 85mm f/1.2L II with the improvements they made in the 50mm f/1.2.

The 50/1.0 has quite the same Dimension as the 85/1.2.

 

[Ruined]

If they are attempting to replace the 50mm f/1.2, why not go all the way and introduce a new f/1.0 or f/0.95 (with optimal sharpness and focusing capabilities, of course)? It's time for Canon to introduce another revolution, not just an evolution. They've certainly proven that they can do this on the wide end (ie 11-24), but it would be great to see this innovation in the form of a new extreme-aperture lens.

The reason the 50mm f/1.2L is f/1.2 is because by making it f/1.2 Canon was able to significantly increase sharpness and focusing capabilities and reduces artifacts over the 50mm f/1.0. 50mm f/1.0 requires a massive amount of glass to move around and there is not much way to get around that as it is physics.

Personally I would like to see an 85mm f/1.4L, basically redo the 85mm f/1.2L II with the improvements they made in the 50mm f/1.2.

The 50/1.0 has quite the same Dimension as the 85/1.2.

Exactly, it is a near identical design to the 85L. Meaning the 85L could be similarly improved if it were adapted to the new 50mm f/1.2L design and say dropped down to f/1.4 - greater sharpness, faster focusing, less artifacts. Reverting to the old design would be a step back, the 50mm f/1.0 was obviously inferior to the 50mm f/1.2 in every category except aperture.

 

[Crosswind]

It would be nice to have primes with medium focal legth, fast autofocus and good IS.
* 2.8/24 IS USM (done)
* 2.8/28 IS USM (done)
* 2.0/35 IS USM (done)

* 2.0/50 IS USM
* 2.0/85 IS USM
* 2.8/100 Macro IS USM (done)
* 2.0/135 IS USM
* 3.5/180 Macro IS USM
* 2.8/200 IS USM

Canon clearly worked through this, but wich of the remaining will be next? The fast primes are made by Zeiss.

Has Canon ever announced a lens at NAB? I really hope for a new compact fifty!

 

[epsiloneri]

EF 400/5.6L IS would also be an L prime. Somehow it seems to have fallen out of rumour favour lately, after the new 100-400 I guess.

 

[Berowne]

It would be nice to have primes with medium focal legth, fast autofocus and good IS.
* 2.8/24 IS USM (done)
* 2.8/28 IS USM (done)
* 2.0/35 IS USM (done)

* 2.0/50 IS USM
* 2.0/85 IS USM
* 2.8/100 Macro IS USM (done)
* 2.0/135 IS USM
* 3.5/180 Macro IS USM
* 2.8/200 IS USM

Canon clearly worked through this, but wich of the remaining will be next? The fast primes are made by Zeiss.

Has Canon ever announced a lens at NAB? I really hope for a new compact fifty!

It seems Logical, that a 50/2.0 IS USM will come. But who will buy a niftyfifty for 500€?

 

[dolina]

Film-era L lenses. Year cut off is 2004

Primes
1993 EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
1996 EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
1996 EF 135mm f/2L USM
1996 EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM
1997 EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
1998 EF 35mm f/1.4L USM

Zooms
1995 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
1999 EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
2004 EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

We are entering an era where in old lenses will show their design flaws on high pixel density cameras like the 5DS & 5DS R

I am keen on the 135 replacement and largely given up the 35 for the 40 pancake.

 

[ahsanford]

Comments in-line below:

It would be nice to have primes with medium focal legth, fast autofocus and good IS.
* 2.8/24 IS USM (done)
* 2.8/28 IS USM (done)
* 2.0/35 IS USM (done)

* 2.0/50 IS USM --> a near-certainty to occur (absolutely the most desired lens on this forum by a comfortable margin as no all-around EF 50 prime exists today), but I still think it's "f/nooneknows". We've heard everything from f/1.4 IS to f/1.8 IS to f/2 IS. As this lens is highly likely to be replacing the venerable 50 f/1.4 USM, so an f/1.4 is possible; remember that no 'non-L IS refresh' lens was released at a slower max aperture than the lens it was replacing.
* 2.0/85 IS USM --> a near-certainty to occur as well, but it may be f/1.8 IS as the existing 85 USM is f/1.8.
* 2.8/100 Macro IS USM (done)
* 2.0/135 IS USM --> Unlikely we'll ever see a non-L in this FL again. Canon wants us buying 70-200 zooms or ponying up for a 135 F/2L II (or IS) that will certainly come around before too long.
* 3.5/180 Macro IS USM
* 2.8/200 IS USM --> I thought a straight 200 f/2.8 prime has only been an L lens. This isn't 'non-L IS refresh' material to me.

Canon clearly worked through this, but which of the remaining will be next? The fast primes are made by Zeiss.

Also on the EF non-L midrange prime front are the 100mm f/2 that no one ever talks about and the very well liked 100 F/2.8 non-L macro. I could see the second one being refreshed -- it's a tremendous value today that has it's admirers.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

If they are attempting to replace the 50mm f/1.2, why not go all the way and introduce a new f/1.0 or f/0.95 (with optimal sharpness and focusing capabilities, of course)? It's time for Canon to introduce another revolution, not just an evolution. They've certainly proven that they can do this on the wide end (ie 11-24), but it would be great to see this innovation in the form of a new extreme-aperture lens.

The reason the 50mm f/1.2L is f/1.2 is because by making it f/1.2 Canon was able to significantly increase sharpness and focusing capabilities and reduces artifacts over the 50mm f/1.0. 50mm f/1.0 requires a massive amount of glass to move around and there is not much way to get around that as it is physics. There is no free lunch with lenses where you can have the widest aperture, fastest focusing speed, best sharpness, and least artifacts - everything is a tradeoff.

Personally I would like to see an 85mm f/1.4L, basically redo the 85mm f/1.2L II with the improvements they made in the 50mm f/1.2. It would be nice to have an 85L that focuses as fast as the 50L f/1.2.

Agree. I'm not a pro, but I'm going to assume that pros want reliable workhorses more than they want finnicky racehorses. f/1.2 lenses have nontrivial tradeoffs and are not 100% money-in-the-bank sort of tools.

- A

 

[dolina]

I wonder when these non-L lenses will be updated? Just like earlier lenses I expect new optical formulas and IS added or STM versions.

Arranged by popularity from BH Photo.

EF 50mm f/1.8 II
EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro
EF 28 f/1.8 USM
MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro Photo
EF 100mm f/2 USM
EF 20mm f/2.8 USM
TS-E 45mm f/2.8
TS-E 90mm f/2.8
EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

EF 135mm f/2.8 with Softfocus is not listed on BH Photo.

I wonder when the TS-E will be updated to Ls seeming Nikon came out with their counterparts a few years ago.

I know Nikon updated some of these focal lengths. Just arent sure which ones.

 

[ahsanford]

It seems Logical, that a 50/2.0 IS USM will come. But who will buy a niftyfifty for 500€?

It will not be the new nifty fifty -- it will be a replacement for the 50 f/1.4 USM. And again, we don't know it's f/2. But a 50 prime with...

• IS
• Sharper than the 50L, esp. in the corners (a very simple feat if you've seen tests of that lens)
• Fast + modern + reliable USM AF
• Internal focusing
• Solid build quality on par with a 100L
• Smaller size and weight than the Sigma Art pickle jars

...will sell for a lot more than 500€ (I'd guess $799 or so) and it will still sell like hotcakes. There is no all-around 9 out of 10 sort of autofocusing 50 prime out there, so people from all corners will come for such a lens.

The fact that this very L prime thread was hijacked to talk about it is a testament to how desirous this lens is.

- A

 

[RLPhoto]

As this is not a 50mm IS refresh rumor (which will undoubtedly not be an L lens), if there was a new L lens on offer, I'd guess the one most in need of a refresh would be:

35mm f/1.4L - 17 years old
135mm f/2L - 19 years old

Those aren't the oldest L primes, but they are a strong combination of old and in high demand. My money would be on one of those.

- A

Is the 135mm in need of an update? I haven't heard anything put praise for that lens.

Crudely, there are three camps with the 135L:

• The lens is stellar and does not need modifying.
• The glass is fine but IS would be a great add.
• Sony has a 135 f/1.8 and we don't. Also: Waaaaaah. (My rebuttal? Our autofocus works.)

And deep down, as legendary as lenses like the 135L and 200 F/2L IS have been, old is old: there's always room to improve resolution for higher resolving sensors, reduce flare, reduce distortion, reduce chromatic aberration, reduce weight, improve weathersealing, offer or improve the IS, etc.

The bigger question is whether those improvements are worth putting off my future non-L 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM. And the answer is no. Gimme my 50, dammit.

- A

I like the idea of a 135mm F/1.8L IS. Then I'd have no want for a 70-200II. Even a 50mm 1.4 update with Ring USM will cause money to part from my wallet and no F/2 lens will do for me. A f/2 50mm will only confirm a purchase for the Sigma A 50mm.

 

[dolina]

I like the idea of a 135mm F/1.8L IS. Then I'd have no want for a 70-200II. Even a 50mm 1.4 update with Ring USM will cause money to part from my wallet and no F/2 lens will do for me. A f/2 50mm will only confirm a purchase for the Sigma A 50mm.

Why not make it faster to say... 135/1.4 with IS?

 

[privatebydesign]

If they are attempting to replace the 50mm f/1.2, why not go all the way and introduce a new f/1.0 or f/0.95 (with optimal sharpness and focusing capabilities, of course)? It's time for Canon to introduce another revolution, not just an evolution. They've certainly proven that they can do this on the wide end (ie 11-24), but it would be great to see this innovation in the form of a new extreme-aperture lens.

The reason the 50mm f/1.2L is f/1.2 is because by making it f/1.2 Canon was able to significantly increase sharpness and focusing capabilities and reduces artifacts over the 50mm f/1.0. 50mm f/1.0 requires a massive amount of glass to move around and there is not much way to get around that as it is physics. There is no free lunch with lenses where you can have the widest aperture, fastest focusing speed, best sharpness, and least artifacts - everything is a tradeoff.

Personally I would like to see an 85mm f/1.4L, basically redo the 85mm f/1.2L II with the improvements they made in the 50mm f/1.2. It would be nice to have an 85L that focuses as fast as the 50L f/1.2.

The 50 f1.2 was not a replacement for the 50 f1.0, they were very different. Canon has a long history of both the 50/55 f1.2 and the 50 f0.95.

 

[RLPhoto]

I like the idea of a 135mm F/1.8L IS. Then I'd have no want for a 70-200II. Even a 50mm 1.4 update with Ring USM will cause money to part from my wallet and no F/2 lens will do for me. A f/2 50mm will only confirm a purchase for the Sigma A 50mm.

Why not make it faster to say... 135/1.4 with IS?

It'd be like the Piggly 200mm F/2, smoshed even tighter, heavy and have a massive price tag. It would be a dream item but a f/1.8 135mm is reasonable.

 

[dolina]

The 50 f1.2 was not a replacement for the 50 f1.0, they were very different. Canon has a long history of both the 50/55 f1.2 and the 50 f0.95.

Spiritual successor then.

It would be nice to see a 50/1.2 with better optics. But I doubt it'll happen too soon as it sells too well.

 

[Luds34]

As this is not a 50mm IS refresh rumor (which will undoubtedly not be an L lens), if there was a new L lens on offer, I'd guess the one most in need of a refresh would be:

35mm f/1.4L - 17 years old
135mm f/2L - 19 years old

Those aren't the oldest L primes, but they are a strong combination of old and in high demand. My money would be on one of those.

- A

Is the 135mm in need of an update? I haven't heard anything put praise for that lens.

Crudely, there are three camps with the 135L:

• The lens is stellar and does not need modifying.
• The glass is fine but IS would be a great add.
• Sony has a 135 f/1.8 and we don't. Also: Waaaaaah. (My rebuttal? Our autofocus works.)

And deep down, as legendary as lenses like the 135L and 200 F/2L IS have been, old is old: there's always room to improve resolution for higher resolving sensors, reduce flare, reduce distortion, reduce chromatic aberration, reduce weight, improve weathersealing, offer or improve the IS, etc.

The bigger question is whether those improvements are worth putting off my future non-L 50mm f/nooneknows IS USM. And the answer is no. Gimme my 50, dammit.

- A

I like the idea of a 135mm F/1.8L IS. Then I'd have no want for a 70-200II. Even a 50mm 1.4 update with Ring USM will cause money to part from my wallet and no F/2 lens will do for me. A f/2 50mm will only confirm a purchase for the Sigma A 50mm.

A 135 f/1.8 with IS would be one heck of a "I want" lens as well (Isn't this a rumored Sigma Art?). My worry would/will be the price if/when they refresh this lens.

As for the 50 I agree. It would be tough if the new one is only f/2, kind of a step back. And I agree that I would probably pass on it (despite how bad Canon needs a decent, consumer level 50) if it was that slow. With how good optics/designs are getting, one of last big advantages primes have over zooms is their (more often then not) faster speeds. That is why I have not understood the new 24mm and 28mm, them only being f/2.8.

 

[ahsanford]

As for the 50 I agree. It would be tough if the new one is only f/2, kind of a step back. And I agree that I would probably pass on it (despite how bad Canon needs a decent, consumer level 50) if it was that slow. With how good optics/designs are getting, one of last big advantages primes have over zooms is their (more often then not) faster speeds. That is why I have not understood the new 24mm and 28mm, them only being f/2.8.

But the prior non-L 24 and 28 primes were f/2.8 as well -- Canon simply modernized those prior designs.

I have the 28 f/2.8 IS and I am truly fond of it. It's such a sweet spot of IQ, features and size/weight. It's a perfect walkaround on my 5D3, IMHO. Unless you are shooting a lot of astro or environmental portraiture, I'm hard pressed to think of a need for f/2 or faster in those focal lengths.

- A

 

[lc235]

I literally just purchased the Sigma 35mm Art today -_-. Do you guys think the rumored 35mm L II will make me regret my purchase? :'(

 

[JonAustin]

I am ... largely given up the 35 for the 40 pancake.

Considered the 35/2 IS?

 

[hang your cross]

I'm hoping and wishing for a new 50L. I loved my old one so much. It was my favorite lens. I only sold it for the 24-70 II's versatility. I've been saving up to re-purchase another 50 and waiting for a II to pop up.