No More New Photographic Gear From Canon in 2017 [CR3]

[Antono Refa]

At the moment there is a strong movement in the lens industry / the customer demand that points
into the direction of excellent correction of all aberrations under all conditions - the compromise
is large footprint, large mass and high price. Maybe there is no room for a very usable lens
without the maximum possible correction of optical aberrations at the moment?

I think it's half the story, the other one being sensor resolution.

I've often heard people say they bought the latest & great camera, say a 5DmkIV, they want lenses to match it's resolution to go with it. And that means no distortion, because distortion correction robs them of 10% of the resolution, or whichever optical aberration you can pick.

This means hobbyists expect new lenses to stand up to scrutiny for what used to be medium format standards.

Manufacturers would have a hard time getting customers down that tree.

 

[BillB]

Fair enough. I forgot about nano USM. I was thinking ring USM

Last EF + non-L + ring USM lens was the 24/28/35 IS triumvirate about 5 years ago.

I think mid-grade non-L EF lenses are possibly done getting L-level AF technology. I think the non-L 50 may very well get nano USM.

- A

There haven't been that many fullframe primes of any kind since the wideangle triplets arrived five years ago. There has been the 40mm pancake and the upgraded plastic fantastice, both of which are STM, but I am not sure what that tells us.

It seems to me that there are a couple of possible concepts for a new EF 50mm in the $500-$700 range. One idea would be an upgraded version of the venerable 50mm f1.4, with fixed length, and hopefully some improvement in performance at f1.4. The other would be a 50mm version of the 35mm f2.0 IS.

The 50mm upgrade would create distance from the plastic fantastic with its f1.4, but lack the IS (and IQ at f 1.4) to challenge a future 50mm L. The 50mm version of the 35mm f2.0 IS would distance itself from the plastic fantastic with IS, along with something better than STM, but would be a stop slower than a future 50mm f1.4 L. Either concept would result in a lens considerably lighter than a 50mm f1.4 L.

Using your numbers, it looks to me like either concept would price out around $500 with nano-USM and about $700 with ring USM. I would think IQ at F 2.0 would be very important to the success of either concept.

 

[mb66energy]

At the moment there is a strong movement in the lens industry / the customer demand that points
into the direction of excellent correction of all aberrations under all conditions - the compromise
is large footprint, large mass and high price. Maybe there is no room for a very usable lens
without the maximum possible correction of optical aberrations at the moment?

I think it's half the story, the other one being sensor resolution.

I've often heard people say they bought the latest & great camera, say a 5DmkIV, they want lenses to match it's resolution to go with it. And that means no distortion, because distortion correction robs them of 10% of the resolution, or whichever optical aberration you can pick.

This means hobbyists expect new lenses to stand up to scrutiny for what used to be medium format standards.

Manufacturers would have a hard time getting customers down that tree.

Good point! Maybe the market is driven more by hobbyists searching for better technical IQ and less for equipment which helps to make photographs possible. I am too fascinated how far we can optimize systems today.

In my case I am searching for a to go lens which is portable and flexible. Flexible in terms of good low light capability for mostly static objects + good close focus capability to avoid switching to a macro lens.
Maybe I have to accept that I am NOT the market

 

[dolina]

24-70/2.8 IS
135/1.8 IS
a7S III rival (~12MP body with native ISO better than 819,200) without AA filter

 

[jolyonralph]

Canon won't replace the 50mm 1.4 NON-L. They will have no need to. For those on a tight budget the 50mm f/1.8 is a great lens. When the 50mm f/1.4L IS comes out you can be pretty much guaranteed that the chances of a new 50mm f1/4 (especially one with IS) are almost zero.

 

[JMZawodny]

600mm F4 DO would be fantastic.

+1 I concur.

 

[AJ]

No More New Photographic Gear From Canon in 2017 [CR3]

That's what my wife said to me

 

[JMZawodny]

No More New Photographic Gear From Canon in 2017 [CR3]

That's what my wife said to me

Heh, me too. Will we listen?

 

[AJ]

No More New Photographic Gear From Canon in 2017 [CR3]

That's what my wife said to me

Heh, me too. Will we listen?

CR3 so it's pretty serious

 

[slclick]

24-70/2.8 IS
135/1.8 IS
a7S III rival (~12MP body with native ISO better than 819,200) without AA filter

I'd snag a new Canon 135 in a heartbeat. IS or not, 1.8 or 2.0. As long as it's as good as the current one with better flare control I'm on it. Now if it's too much more than the Sigma forget it since that is an amazing chunk of glass from what I've read and seen.

 

[Antono Refa]

No More New Photographic Gear From Canon in 2017 [CR3]

That's what my wife said to me

Heh, me too. Will we listen?

I listened well, and bought a couple of Sigma Art lenses.

 

[jeffa4444]

!00mm f2L IS USM

 

[James Larsen]

No More New Photographic Gear From Canon in 2017 [CR3]

That's what my wife said to me

Heh, me too. Will we listen?

That's what my bank account said ;D

 

[JonAustin]

... The other would be a 50mm version of the 35mm f2.0 IS.

This. If Canon were to produce such a lens, I suspect it would have to be f/1.8 or faster to meet / exceed the speed of their own f/1.8 STM, but I'd buy one either way.

 

[Ah-Keong]

double gauss

a) 50mm f/1,2L mark II
b) 85mm f/1,2L mark III

retrofocus
a) 50mm f/1,4L IS
b) 135mm f/2 IS
c) 105mm f/1,4L IS