Old L lenses that are still in production

[ahsanford]

History will prove me right. I just provided that list for everyone's convenience.

Possibly -- who knows? But arguably, none of the lenses on your list are even in the top 5 most likely to come next:

I'd contend each of the following are much 'squeakier wheels', in higher demand, etc.:

• EF 200-600 f/5.6L IS USM (give or take -- a somewhat affordable longest zoom to stack up to Nikon's 200-500, Sigma and Tamron's various 150-600s, etc.)

But Canon does work in nutty ways, so who knows?

- A

I must say that this lens has me weak at the knees, I would jump all over it if it came out at a price I could justify, like around $5,000. What do you think it would cost for such a lens?????

This is getting OT. Please see other threads on this topic -- this is one I am aware of:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=28543.0

Undoubtedly price is part of that discussion, but you may have to hunt for it. Also, there's pretty wild speculation on that lens being a constant f/5.6 vs. variable like the 100-400 lenses, which dramatically would impact the size and cost of the lens. It's pretty well tortured in the thread above by those far wiser than I.

- A

 

[Loswr]

This is getting OT.

Wait, there's a topic here? It's one guy's opinion about lenses Canon might or might not release. Undoubtedly history will prove that if you throw enough crap at the wall, some of it will stick.

 

[ahsanford]

This is getting OT.

Wait, there's a topic here? It's one guy's opinion about lenses Canon might or might not release. Undoubtedly history will prove that if you throw enough crap at the wall, some of it will stick.

Okay, Neuro, I meant to say "The rather specific thread I broadened/hijacked has wandered off of the considerably wide road we've been driving down. We should return to madly speculating about lenses based on chronology, competitive activity, astrological signs, the presidential campaign, etc."

- A

 

[Loswr]

This is getting OT.

Wait, there's a topic here? It's one guy's opinion about lenses Canon might or might not release. Undoubtedly history will prove that if you throw enough crap at the wall, some of it will stick.

Okay, Neuro, I meant to say "The rather specific thread I broadened/hijacked has wandered off of the considerably wide road we've been driving down. We should return to madly speculating about lenses based on chronology, competitive activity, astrological signs, the presidential campaign, etc."

- A

Oh, all right then. I'm writing in Mickey Mouse for President, and if he wins then Canon will release an EF 16-600mm f/4L IS zoom for $1000, and history will prove I'm right.

 

[ahsanford]

Oh, all right then. I'm writing in Mickey Mouse for President, and if he wins then Canon will release an EF 16-600mm f/4L IS zoom for $1000, and history will prove I'm right.

Nonsense.

Zero chance that lens has IS.

- A

 

[The Supplanter]

Oh, all right then. I'm writing in Mickey Mouse for President, and if he wins then Canon will release an EF 16-600mm f/4L IS zoom for $1000, and history will prove I'm right.

Nonsense.

Zero chance that lens has IS.

- A

Ha! You two are hilarious!

 

[RGF]

These L lenses were introduced before 2006 and are still in production. They are likely to get a Series II or IS update.

1993 EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
1995 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
1996 EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM
1996 EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
1996 EF 135mm f/2L USM
1997 EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
1999 EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
2004 EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

Both version of the 70-200 already have IS

 

[dolina]

These L lenses were introduced before 2006 and are still in production. They are likely to get a Series II or IS update.

1993 EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
1995 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
1996 EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM
1996 EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
1996 EF 135mm f/2L USM
1997 EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
1999 EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
2004 EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM

Both version of the 70-200 already have IS

There are actually 4 versions currently in-production.

I was referencing a Series II 70-200 without IS that is f/2.8 and f/4.0.

 

[dolina]

I will expound on my original post to dispel the replies that show an utter contempt or simple mean spiritness of which I find baffling. Who dropped you as a baby in boiling water that such veil poison spews forth?

1995 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
1999 EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
- film lens with film optics
- newer 70-200 without IS have come out from other brands after the 90s.

1997 EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
- film lens with film optics
- In 2015 Nikon came out with an equivalent that is PF (Nikon's DO equivalent) that is lighter and smaller

2004 EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM
- In 2010 Nikon came out with an equivalent that is half the weight and price.

1996 EF 135mm f/2L USM
- film lens with film optics
- Earlier than 2009 Sony came out with an equivalent that is 1/3rd stop faster
- newer lenses from other brands have come out after 1996

1996 EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
- film lens with film optics
- newer long Macros have come out from other brands that are either faster or have IS after 1996

1996 EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM
- film lens with film optics
- Could be replaced by a Series III or with IS

1993 EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
- film lens with film optics
- Could be replaced by a Series III or with IS

Now, granted some of these lens are not volume sellers or would not provide a cheap option at the very low end but it does not mean that they will not eventually get an update.

This thread purpose is to give prospective buyers a head's up on which product will be likely to be phased out because they're old and the competition came out with something more suitable to today's technical requirement.

 

[takesome1]

This is getting OT.

Wait, there's a topic here? It's one guy's opinion about lenses Canon might or might not release. Undoubtedly history will prove that if you throw enough crap at the wall, some of it will stick.

Okay, Neuro, I meant to say "The rather specific thread I broadened/hijacked has wandered off of the considerably wide road we've been driving down. We should return to madly speculating about lenses based on chronology, competitive activity, astrological signs, the presidential campaign, etc."

- A

Oh, all right then. I'm writing in Mickey Mouse for President, and if he wins then Canon will release an EF 16-600mm f/4L IS zoom for $1000, and history will prove I'm right.

Mickey will be on the ballot as VP, no write in required his running mate is in the hunt. He will be Goofy's VP pick.
Or maybe Goofette depending on your party affiliation.

 

[Loswr]

This thread purpose is to give prospective buyers a head's up on which product will be likely to be phased out because they're old and the competition came out with something more suitable to today's technical requirement.

Likely...if you were Canon's CEO, perhaps. In most cases, Canon already has something 'more suitable to today's technical requirement'. Your title is mostly apt – old lenses still in production, although you should have specified L lenses since you omitted several old but 'current' non-L lenses.

Of course, to be fair you didn't really give a specific time frame, so in that sense if someone is considering buying a 70-200mm f/4L in 2022, well, you've given them fair warning about the impending replacement.

 

[dolina]

This thread purpose is to give prospective buyers a head's up on which product will be likely to be phased out because they're old and the competition came out with something more suitable to today's technical requirement.

Likely...if you were Canon's CEO, perhaps. In most cases, Canon already has something 'more suitable to today's technical requirement'. Your title is mostly apt – old lenses still in production, although you should have specified L lenses since you omitted several old but 'current' non-L lenses.

Of course, to be fair you didn't really give a specific time frame, so in that sense if someone is considering buying a 70-200mm f/4L in 2022, well, you've given them fair warning about the impending replacement.

Congrats, you have the final word.

 

[slclick]

This thread purpose is to give prospective buyers a head's up on which product will be likely to be phased out because they're old and the competition came out with something more suitable to today's technical requirement.

Likely...if you were Canon's CEO, perhaps. In most cases, Canon already has something 'more suitable to today's technical requirement'. Your title is mostly apt – old lenses still in production, although you should have specified L lenses since you omitted several old but 'current' non-L lenses.

Of course, to be fair you didn't really give a specific time frame, so in that sense if someone is considering buying a 70-200mm f/4L in 2022, well, you've given them fair warning about the impending replacement.

Congrats, you have the final word.

http://ohgo.sh/archive/final-ward-cocktail-recipe/

 

[JohanCruyff]

Oh, all right then. I'm writing in Mickey Mouse for President, and if he wins then Canon will release an EF 16-600mm f/4L IS zoom for $1000, and history will prove I'm right.

Nonsense.

Zero chance that lens has IS.

- A

;D
BTW, there are just ten applications / candidates for major of Rome (Italy), and I think that Mickey Mouse is the right person... sorry, the right mouse at the right place, provided he asks Canon to deliver a 16-600mm F/4, of course.

 

[wsmith96]

History will prove me right. I just provided that list for everyone's convenience.

Possibly -- who knows? But arguably, none of the lenses on your list are even in the top 5 most likely to come next:

I'd contend each of the following are much 'squeakier wheels', in higher demand, etc.:

• EF 16-35 f/2.8L III USM --> it's hard to command a $1,500+ asking when the cheaper/slower f/4L IS lens outperforms it optically...
• EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS II USM (or similar replacement for the current EF-S 17-55)
• EF 50mm f/1.4 II USM (or IS instead of II, it may not be f/1.4, etc.)
• EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS USM --> this was always a 'once Nikon or Canon offers one, the other must follow suit' sort of 'yes we have that' portfolio peacock to show off
• EF 200-600 f/5.6L IS USM (give or take -- a somewhat affordable longest zoom to stack up to Nikon's 200-500, Sigma and Tamron's various 150-600s, etc.)

But Canon does work in nutty ways, so who knows?

- A

I think you are right on two of these lenses. I'm thinking we'll see the updates 50mm and 16-35mm with the announcement of the 5D4, or shortly after it.

 

[j-nord]

I believe the situation will be:

Green = Hammerlock certainty to be refreshed/upgraded (a question of when, not if)
Orange = Possibly up for a new version, but certainly not a high priority
Red = Unlikely to be refreshed/upgraded

Responding to your list and throwing in some older non-L primes as well:

1993 EF 400mm f/5.6L USM - a 'gateway drug' L lens for wildlifers
1995 EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
1996 EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM - all but obsoleted by the quality of the 70-200 lenses
1996 EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM - maybe not 180, but a macro with a larger working distance than we have with the 100mm options
1996 EF 135mm f/2L USM - this is an opportunity more than a must, the current 135L is still great
1997 EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
1999 EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
2004 EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM - hate these lenses, but Canon simply has to offer one

1991 EF 100mm f/2 USM - seems super niche in light all the 70-200s and two 100 macros
1992 EF 20mm f/2.8 USM - 20mm devotees want much faster glass for astro --> future new L lens
1992 EF 85mm f/1.8 USM - a modern/modest 85 that isn't a pickle jar is a must
1993 EF 50mm f/1.4 USM - don't get me started, there are endless threads on this
1995 EF 28mm f/1.8 USM - like it or not, the non-L fast prime (other than 50/85) may be a thing of the past
2000 EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro (non-L) - not everyone needs L quality, IS, etc. with macro

I'll be the first to say this is a total swag based on the overall value proposition / screaming need / 'You gotta have one of those in your portfolio' sort of considerations. (And yes, I deliberately left out the 50mm compact macro for petty reasons.)

- A

I agree with your greens except the 400 5.6. Its already been upgraded: 100-400ii. Unless they upgrade it to a 500 f5.6 IS. Even though the 300f4 seems unlikely in the near future this is probably the lens I would most like to see get refreshed.

 

[AvTvM]

My guess is new versions of the following L lens
* 135/2.0 II - maybe as EF 135 F/1.8

400/5.6, 300/4 are totally obsoleted by 100-400 II (and 70-300L).
70-200 non IS .. Mk. II not going to happen, neither f/2.8 nor f/4
200/2.8 - Mk. III not going to happen

Non-L:
* 50/14 - yes
* 85/1.8 - yes

100/2.0 - would be nice. I liked the lens except the high CA

 

[Don Haines]

My guess is new versions of the following L lens
* 135/2.0 II - maybe as EF 135 F/1.8

400/5.6, 300/4 are totally obsoleted by 100-400 II (and 70-300L).
70-200 non IS .. Mk. II not going to happen, neither f/2.8 nor f/4
200/2.8 - Mk. III not going to happen

Non-L:
* 50/14 - yes
* 85/1.8 - yes

100/2.0 - would be nice. I liked the lens except the high CA

The 23 year old 400F5.6 and the brand new 100-400II have about the same image quality at 400mm. That says a lot for one of the oldest lenses still sold....

If an updated version were to be released, I would be among the first to pre-order. For my purposes, the size and focal length can not be beat, and I really like lenses that are constant length as there is no dust and humidity being pumped through every time I extend or contract it....

Just like the old combo of 400F5.6 and 100-400, if you come out with a new 400II and match it against the 100-400II, the 400II will easily win on IQ and the 100-400II will easily win on sales.... but there is room for both.

 

[AvTvM]

well yes, mileage varies.

Personally, if I get a zoom that is as good as or better than 95% of fixed focals, I will always take the zoom, even if it is a bit larger/heavier. I *guess* (= don't know for sure), that majority of market sees it the same way ... but if Canon ahs ample lens develompent resoruces, I would not mind them douing an EF 400/5.6 as well .. but only AFTER they have produced Ahsanford's 50/1.4 ... first things first! ;D

 

[Don Haines]

well yes, mileage varies.

Personally, if I get a zoom that is as good as or better than 95% of fixed focals, I will always take the zoom, even if it is a bit larger/heavier. I *guess* (= don't know for sure), that majority of market sees it the same way ... but if Canon ahs ample lens develompent resoruces, I would not mind them douing an EF 400/5.6 as well .. but only AFTER they have produced Ahsanford's 50/1.4 ... first things first! ;D

I think you are right about the majority.... zooms outsell primes....far more versatile.... it's the people who have specific purposes/needs that go for primes.....