Official-NEW LENSES: Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM and EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 STM

[pj1974]

So… it appears the recent threads / rumours / images are true!

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/05/13/canon-announces-16-35mm-f4l-and-10-18mm-f4-5-5-6-lenses

Looks like Canon *IS* doing some good work with lenses (do you see what I did there?). AND the price seems very reasonable @ $1199 and $299 respectively! (PS.. I’ve heard and seen very good things about the EF-M 11-22mm STM IS.)

I, for one, am not particularly interested in buying either of these lenses at this stage as I have my UWA covered with my very good Sigma 8-16mm on my Canon 7D. But should I ever move up to FF in the future (I might not, I’m very happy with my Canon APS-C bodies), I might be interested in the 16-35mm f/4 IS (I don’t need f/2.8 for UWA).

For me, corner sharpness is very important on my UWA lenses… and my Sigma fits the bill here very well. IS can be handy for low light situations, and yes eg when taking photos without a tripod.

New product announcements always make me happy / excited. I enjoy seeing technology being applied, new innovations, high quality lenses.

So, what do you all think of these actual / real lens specs? Looking forward to seeing this thread grow!
Regards all

Paul

 

[Grumbaki]

The new 16-35L is an interesting option for me. I'm in the market for a UWA but I don't use tripods enough to justify a 17 TSE. 14L is a no go.

If performance follows I might be in for a trip to the shop. Getting used back to f4 as max aperture will be awkward tho...

Waiting on reviews.

PS: extra points for the non extending design. it's kinda OCD but this is a real turn off for me. The only thing I'd change in the 24-70.

 

[wickidwombat]

i think the 16-35 f4 IS is fine if all you shoot is stuff that doesn't move and don't need the faster aperture. Thats not for me

I shoot my 16-35 at f2.8 as often as i do stopped down. here hoping they do a new 16-35 f2.8 with IS and corner to corner sharp but god knows how expensive it will be if they are gonna charge $1200 for this dinky F4...

 

[pj1974]

The new 16-35L is an interesting option for me. I'm in the market for a UWA but I don't use tripods enough to justify a 17 TSE. 14L is a no go.

If performance follows I might be in for a trip to the shop. Getting used back to f4 as max aperture will be awkward tho...

Waiting on reviews.

PS: extra points for the non extending design. it's kinda OCD but this is a real turn off for me. The only thing I'd change in the 24-70.

Yes, I do think the new 16-35mm L will be interesting for many people. The MTF chart http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_16_35mm_f_4l_is_usm
indicates that it’s definitely a sharp corner to corner UWA, yes - also at the wide end - wide open still really quite good.

Indeed - I understand what you mean about being unable to justify a 17 TSE. I initially bought a Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 back when there were only a few options for APS-C UWAs. It served me well for some years - and I bought it new, at a good price (half the price of the Canon 10-22mm). However last year when I tried the Sigma 8-16mm I was sold (and the price of this ultra UWA was lower than when it initially came out). The 8-16mm is definitely sharper, has noticeably less CA - and importantly translates to about 3.5 mm wider (in 35mm / FF format), which is very noticeable.

I expect the 16-35mm f/4 L will have some of the same benefits - sharper (esp in the corners), possibly less CA and has IS (which while not the absolute most necessary feature of a UWA, is certainly useful and even at times highly desirable).

While f/4 is not fast, I don't have a need for a fast UWA. When I want fast, I want really 'fast' (I don't consider f/2.8 'fast') - so I want primes between f/1.4 and f/2. I expect that for many photos that FF shooters will use the 16-35mm f/4 L for, it will be between f/8 and f/11 anyway. And the same for the EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 STM too. (I am still very impressed by the price of the 10-18mm lens... just $299 new... incredible!)

I also prefer lenses that don't extend, but it's not the most important criteria for me (I have some good lenses that do extend, eg the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM, and the Canon EF-S 15-85mm IS USM.

Paul

 

[pj1974]

i think the 16-35 f4 IS is fine if all you shoot is stuff that doesn't move and don't need the faster aperture. Thats not for me

I shoot my 16-35 at f2.8 as often as i do stopped down. here hoping they do a new 16-35 f2.8 with IS and corner to corner sharp but god knows how expensive it will be if they are gonna charge $1200 for this dinky F4...

Yes, horses for courses, wickidwombat. What do you usually shoot at f/2.8 with (low light? Sports, eg I've seen skateboarding with the 16-35mm f/2.8 - or are you trying to get shallow depth of field, though at wide focal lengths, f/2.8 doesn't do much here...)?

For your sake I do hope they'll come out with a new 16-35mm f/2.8 with IS - and good corner sharpness. I expect it will definitely be the high side of $2k. That's a fair premium to pay for 1 fstop at wide angle...

Regards.... Paul 8)

 

[wickidwombat]

low light stuff, bands weddings, events that kind of stuff f2.8 is worth alot more than sharp corners
and yes when a 16-35 f2.8 (hopefully with IS) comes out i don't expect it to be any less than the 24-70 mk11

personally i'd love someone to do a 16-35 f2 with IS i'd pay $4000 for that... don't care how big it is
just the same as i'd love a 35-85 f2 IS to go with it then i'd need 2 lenses and 2 bodies and almost never need to change

 

[sagittariansrock]

low light stuff, bands weddings, events that kind of stuff f2.8 is worth alot more than sharp corners
and yes when a 16-35 f2.8 (hopefully with IS) comes out i don't expect it to be any less than the 24-70 mk11

personally i'd love someone to do a 16-35 f2 with IS i'd pay $4000 for that... don't care how big it is
just the same as i'd love a 35-85 f2 IS to go with it then i'd need 2 lenses and 2 bodies and almost never need to change

I'd be very surprised if they brought out a fast UWA with IS before they launch a fast standard zoom with IS, but I think both will be well-received.
A 16-35 f/2IS? That would be a noctilux zoom!

On another note, I think there 3 parallel threads on the same topic. Maybe the moderators can combine them all in one?

 

[pj1974]

low light stuff, bands weddings, events that kind of stuff f2.8 is worth alot more than sharp corners
and yes when a 16-35 f2.8 (hopefully with IS) comes out i don't expect it to be any less than the 24-70 mk11

personally i'd love someone to do a 16-35 f2 with IS i'd pay $4000 for that... don't care how big it is
just the same as i'd love a 35-85 f2 IS to go with it then i'd need 2 lenses and 2 bodies and almost never need to change

Thanks for the explanation, Wickidwombat… while I do quite a bit of low light stuff, it’s rarely in the UWA range (but more around 50mm). And when I do UWA long exposures, I’m using a tripod anyway – eg nature, or night street settings.

I hear you regarding the ‘extra attraction’ of a f/2 UWA with IS…. That would be great… but yes, a Canon equivalent would also huge and hugely expensive. The Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 is meeting most criteria there (although without IS/OS..) but I’m concerned reading about that lens’ inconsistent / sometimes inaccurate AF at times… I need AF to be spot on…

A 35-85mm f/2 IS would also be great…. Again, it would be huge and expensive… but a great focal range to cover at f/2 with IS. My current ‘2 lens’ travel solution is usually the EF-S 15-85mm USM IS and EF 70-300mm L USM IS. On other occasions I take along my 8-16mm Sigma instead of the 70-300mm L. Though not ‘fast’ lenses, they do very well and I can fit in my shoulder LowePro bag. I’m waiting for Canon to release a fast 50mm prime, hopefully USM IS – like the 35mm. That would complete my lens set!

Regards

Paul

 

[pj1974]

low light stuff, bands weddings, events that kind of stuff f2.8 is worth alot more than sharp corners
and yes when a 16-35 f2.8 (hopefully with IS) comes out i don't expect it to be any less than the 24-70 mk11

personally i'd love someone to do a 16-35 f2 with IS i'd pay $4000 for that... don't care how big it is
just the same as i'd love a 35-85 f2 IS to go with it then i'd need 2 lenses and 2 bodies and almost never need to change

I'd be very surprised if they brought out a fast UWA with IS before they launch a fast standard zoom with IS, but I think both will be well-received.
A 16-35 f/2IS? That would be a noctilux zoom!

On another note, I think there 3 parallel threads on the same topic. Maybe the moderators can combine them all in one?

Yes, I agree with you sagitariansrock, it seems more likely a 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM IS will come out before a 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM IS… but hey, who knows, we could be surprised!

There may be 3 threads on the same topic… this does happen often with ‘big news items’. I did start my thread on the CR forum before the CR Canon Announcement one… I’m glad to be ‘in early’  And I’ve been following the other thread too….

Cheers… Paul

 

[sagittariansrock]

low light stuff, bands weddings, events that kind of stuff f2.8 is worth alot more than sharp corners
and yes when a 16-35 f2.8 (hopefully with IS) comes out i don't expect it to be any less than the 24-70 mk11

personally i'd love someone to do a 16-35 f2 with IS i'd pay $4000 for that... don't care how big it is
just the same as i'd love a 35-85 f2 IS to go with it then i'd need 2 lenses and 2 bodies and almost never need to change

I'd be very surprised if they brought out a fast UWA with IS before they launch a fast standard zoom with IS, but I think both will be well-received.
A 16-35 f/2IS? That would be a noctilux zoom!

On another note, I think there 3 parallel threads on the same topic. Maybe the moderators can combine them all in one?

Yes, I agree with you sagitariansrock, it seems more likely a 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM IS will come out before a 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM IS… but hey, who knows, we could be surprised!

There may be 3 threads on the same topic… this does happen often with ‘big news items’. I did start my thread on the CR forum before the CR Canon Announcement one… I’m glad to be ‘in early’  And I’ve been following the other thread too….

Cheers… Paul

LOL, me too. I checked to see if someone had started a thread right after I got the notification, but there was none (this was before you started this one). So I started one last night because I was just so excited to discuss it.

 

[wickidwombat]

got to agree with alot of what you say paul
I'm also very keen to see what canon do with a 50 f1.8 IS or whatever it will be, even though I have the new sigma 50 i would probably buy the canon too.

I'm keen to have a look at the 10-18 for my parents as i got them a 15-85 which they love so a 10-18 might go very nicely for them on the wider end and it looks compact and light which is another draw.
if its anything like the 11-22 EF-M its going to be a massive winner at $300

I'm glad people are also excited about the 16-35 f4 IS its probably a good option for many and the MTFs do look stellar but i'll wait and keep on with my 16-35 f2.8 II on FF and the 11-22 on EOS-M which i'm using more and more
and infact have ordered a second eos-M from B&H which is currently getting modified into an IR camera, cant wait to play with that and the 11-22!

 

[gshocked]

Hi all,

I think I've missed some piece of information when reading up review and opinions about this lens?
But why are some reviewers asking if this lens is unnecessary? As I posted on another topic a different price point may get people to look at this lens more favorably?

 

[johnhenry]

Wow another wide angle zoom from Canon.

Not sure if being pandered to,

Or being ignored.

In all seriousness, the 10-18 4.5-5.6 is a different version of the 10-22 3.5/4.5 which is faster and has longer range. The 16-35 only complements slightly on the 24-105 f/4.

The only reason I can see for these lenses to exist are as cheaper, mnore profitable versions of lenses they plan to discontinue.