Old lenses Canon will phase out

[dolina]

The 28-135 USM has already disappeared from Canon's listings.
http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/Zoom/

It's logical replacement is the 24-105 STM, as a junior to the 24-105L

Still being sold on Adorama & BHPhoto.

Some surprise upgrades

2012 EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
2012 EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
2014 EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM

The lens they were supposed to replace are still being sold. Excess stock, perhaps?

2002 EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
2003 EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
2005 EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM ? Where exactly Canon mentioned that 24-105 has been or is about to be replaced? I would not mind a version II of that lens but 24-70 f/4L IS is not a replacement for 24-105.

As you quoted me it appears it is excess stocks.

 

[dgatwood]

You are correct, these lenses are still being sold at BHPhoto/Adorama

End of Life
...
1999 EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
1999 EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III

I don't see that happening. A $1450 big white lens is just not a realistic replacement for a $200 ultralight lens (the non-IS version). I love my 70–300L. I got lots of decent (but soft) photos with the 75–300 III that I used prior to getting that lens, so I'm very familiar with both lenses. There's no comparison in terms of IQ.

On the other hand, the L version is more than twice as heavy, and costs more than seven times as much.

Most folks just getting into photography don't have that kind of money to drop on a telephoto lens. As long as there are price-conscious consumers without absurd amounts of money to burn, IMO, there's room in the lineup for a low-end EF zoom with a long reach. And if Amazon sales are any indication, in spite of its relatively poor IQ, the III remains one of the most popular Canon lenses by sales volume.

So no, I really can't see Canon phasing them out... not without an actual, non-L replacement ready to ship, anyway.

There is a replacement lens, Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_is_usm

It has been out on the market since 2005...

Sorry, I should have said a replacement lens at a comparable price point. Calling a $700 lens a replacement for a $200 lens isn't really that different from calling a $1400 lens is. Even back in 2002, I think the 75–300 III was only about a $250 lens. There's a reason they kept selling the non-IS versions; they felt it was important to maintain a 300mm lens at a $250 price point, even if it wasn't nearly up to the same standards optically.

And for crop cameras we also got the EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_s_55_250mm_f_4_5_6_is_stm

I agree that the 55–250 is a better choice for most crop body users (because even after cropping, it is still likely to be sharper), and at only half again more expensive, it is at least plausible as an alternative.

 

[Marsu42]

There's a reason they kept selling the non-IS versions; they felt it was important to maintain a 300mm lens at a $250 price point, even if it wasn't nearly up to the same standards optically.

This has probably changed because with so many lens reviews online and people getting more into the spirit of high mp digital (cropping), more people realize that cropping from a good 200mm is better than a blurry 300mm. With even affordable higher mp cameras becoming available in the next years, we might see even more mediocre tele lenses being phased out as they cannot cope with the resolution.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

I have owned or currently own the following lenses:
1987 EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye
2012 EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM
2012 EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM
2012 EF 35mm f/2 IS USM
1990 EF 50mm f/1.8 II
1991 EF 100mm f/2 USM
1993 EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
1993 EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
1996 EF 135mm f/2L USM
1997 EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
1999 EF 70-200mm f/4L USM

Personally I'd like to see a EF 135mm f/2L USM replacement come out with IS, a EF 400mm f/5.6L (II) with IS and a good and sharp wide open EF 50mm f/1.8 with IS too.

 

[Marsu42]

Personally I'd like to see a EF 135mm f/2L USM replacement come out with IS

Question is if you'd be still wishing for it if calculating the bulk and weight of such a contraption. IS increases the lens diameter (probably one of the reasons why the 24-70L/2.8 doesn't have it) and of course the price. If you don't want heavy vignetting like on the Tamron 24-70/2.8 the result would be either slower than f2 or damn large.

In combination with the fact that IS is little good for movement and IS isn't really necessary for frame stabilization @136mm (unlike tele lenses), I doubt Canon will ever "update" this lens in such a way.

 

[NancyP]

Two of my most-used lenses are oldies - the 400 f/5.6L and the 180 f/3.5L. No doubt they could be improved, but the image quality is already excellent. And, they are younger than some other lenses I am using, old manual AIS Nikkors on an adapter (50 mm f/1.2, 55mm f/3.5, 105mm f/2.5).