? on why Canon ignored...

[psycho5]

maybe this question has already been asked, but can anyone offer a good explaination why Canon never decided to make any "L" branded EF-S lenses?

Personally, I love my 7D and 60D and own the 16-35ii, 24-70, and the 70-200isii... all L quality but always wondered why Canon ignores building luxury lenses in the crop flavor. The only reason why I own L quality is because of:

f/2.8
build quality
best optics
USM
IS

... of all of these, build quality tops the list!

Lastly,

They go ahead and build the 7D and kit it with a cheap lens, how awful IMHO.... its like if ford decided to put a 4 cylinder in the f-150 raptor.

 

[JR]

Likely only marketing and positionning but your question sparked another question in my mind. I remember when I has the 17-55 2.8 IS on my 7D and I love having the IS for video shooting. Since moving to the 5D mkII, I am a bit frustrated that they dont have an equivalent 2.8 zoom with IS (the 24-70 2.8 I mean) and that the only option for IS would be the get the 24-105 f4 which is a no go for me for indoor shooting.

I agree the 17-55 EF-S is one of the sharpest zoom I ever had and definitively is an "L" quality lens in my book. So you did not get the "L" in the name, but at least you got the IS

I really hope they eventually make the equivalent of the 17-55 2.8 IS for the EF lens on FF...

 

[Cetalis]

Honestly, the only reason there aren't any APS-C L lenses is because Canon's marketing decided not to. Even for FF, there's no clear criteria for what lenses get the L designation. That said, the 10-22, 17-55, and 15-85 are supposedly very good EF-S lenses.

 

[Loswr]

L series lenses are 'professional' lenses. 1-series bodies are 'professional' bodies. So, an EF-S 'professional' lens, which wouldn't work on a 'professional' body, is a non-starter.

I suppose Canon could slap a blue ring, magenta ring, whatever, on a new series of lenses that are 'semi-pro' EF-S lenses with better build and sealing. But consider - among APS-C cameras, currently only the 7D has a reasonable level of weather sealing and high-end build quality. Comparing that to the the sheer number of other APS-C models with lesser build/sealing, it may not make a lot of (financial) sense for Canon to develop sealed lenses for a small image circle camera since the market just wouldn't be there.

I remember when I has the 17-55 2.8 IS on my 7D and I love having the IS for video shooting. Since moving to the 5D mkII, I am a bit frustrated that they dont have an equivalent 2.8 zoom with IS (the 24-70 2.8 I mean) and that the only option for IS would be the get the 24-105 f4 which is a no go for me for indoor shooting.

It's a common fallacy. In fact, the 24-105mm f/4L IS on FF outspecs the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS on APS-C in nearly every way. Consider - in terms of focal length and DoF for the same framing, the FF equivalent of the 17-55mm f/2.8 is 27-88mm f/4.5. So, the 24-105mm f/4 is wider and longer, has 1/3-stop shallower DoF, and still has IS. Going from an APS-C sensor to a FF sensor gains you 1.3 stops of improved ISO noise performance based on total light gathered, meaning you can bump up the ISO on the 5DII by one stop to compensate for the loss of light going from f/2.8 to f/4, and still get nearly 1/3-stop less noise. The only thing you really lose is the functionality of the high-precision f/2.8-sensitive center AF point - in every other way, the 24-105mm on FF will be better than the 17-55mm on APS-C.

 

[psycho5]

@JR

positioning could very well be a huge factor and Canon may think 1.6 crop is only for families and trips to disneyland, but then why even bother making the 7D? kind of pointless without lenses to match in quality.

@cetalis

I love knowing my camera and lens has a very good chance in maintaining performance in katrina-like weather. As a soldier, longevity and durability are equally important as performance. sure the lenses you mentioned are nice, but not after the first dust storm or heavy rain.

@neuroanatomist

professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill.... with that, I dont get paid but still consider pro equipment a necessity and the 7D to me is the smallest "1D" Cannon makes. Furthermore, if apple engineers can make something like the ipad, is there really a need for the 1D to be as big as it is anymore???

 

[psycho5]

L series lenses are 'professional' lenses. 1-series bodies are 'professional' bodies. So, an EF-S 'professional' lens, which wouldn't work on a 'professional' body, is a non-starter.

I wasnt trying to be rude in my last post even if it reads like I was trollin'

but why should the majority of Cannon's customers conform to the small minority of those who are 1D or FF users? I truely believe I am not the only amateur out there who enjoys making great pictures no matter what part of the world or envirnoment I am in. I would only move to FF if Canon decided to put the 1Dx sensor in a body like the 7D... I may then be happy ;D but untill then, the 1Dx is too big and the rumored 36mp 5D3 is a step backwards IMO.

 

[EYEONE]

@neuroanatomist

professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill.... with that, I dont get paid but still consider pro equipment a necessity and the 7D to me is the smallest "1D" Cannon makes. Furthermore, if apple engineers can make something like the ipad, is there really a need for the 1D to be as big as it is anymore???

an Ipad and a Professional grade DSLR are very different animals. The Ipad is strictly electronics which are always getting smaller. But a DSLR has several components that are simply the size that they are. You can't make the Penta Prism any smaller and maintain the coverage and magnification. The sensor must stay the same and for the most part the mirror box must remain the same size.

And all that asside, a DSLR is the size that it needs to be. If it were smaller it would be hard to hold or easier to drop.

The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.

There are so many arguments against what you just said...

But anyway, I believe a qualification of an L-Series lens is that it has to work on every EOS camera. An L-Series EF-S lens would not mount on a EOS film camera. Case closed.

 

[JR]

L series lenses are 'professional' lenses. 1-series bodies are 'professional' bodies. So, an EF-S 'professional' lens, which wouldn't work on a 'professional' body, is a non-starter.

I suppose Canon could slap a blue ring, magenta ring, whatever, on a new series of lenses that are 'semi-pro' EF-S lenses with better build and sealing. But consider - among APS-C cameras, currently only the 7D has a reasonable level of weather sealing and high-end build quality. Comparing that to the the sheer number of other APS-C models with lesser build/sealing, it may not make a lot of (financial) sense for Canon to develop sealed lenses for a small image circle camera since the market just wouldn't be there.

I remember when I has the 17-55 2.8 IS on my 7D and I love having the IS for video shooting. Since moving to the 5D mkII, I am a bit frustrated that they dont have an equivalent 2.8 zoom with IS (the 24-70 2.8 I mean) and that the only option for IS would be the get the 24-105 f4 which is a no go for me for indoor shooting.

It's a common fallacy. In fact, the 24-105mm f/4L IS on FF outspecs the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS on APS-C in nearly every way. Consider - in terms of focal length and DoF for the same framing, the FF equivalent of the 17-55mm f/2.8 is 27-88mm f/4.5. So, the 24-105mm f/4 is wider and longer, has 1/3-stop shallower DoF, and still has IS. Going from an APS-C sensor to a FF sensor gains you 1.3 stops of improved ISO noise performance based on total light gathered, meaning you can bump up the ISO on the 5DII by one stop to compensate for the loss of light going from f/2.8 to f/4, and still get nearly 1/3-stop less noise. The only thing you really lose is the functionality of the high-precision f/2.8-sensitive center AF point - in every other way, the 24-105mm on FF will be better than the 17-55mm on APS-C.

Thanks Neuro for the clarification, I keep forgetting about the APS-C versus FF differential in light capturing sometime...

My comparaison of the 24-105 and the 17-55 was somewhat wrong indeed. I may have confused the facts here that on my FF today, I still feel I need at least f2.8 (on my FF) to properly shoot inside for my specific situation where I need to "freeze" my 20 month old baby girl (she is getting fast!). I tried the 24-105 f4L many time inside but always found i was missing a stop so I dont end-up with an ISO too high...

Also, I naively thought that if the 24-70 2.8L was not IS it was because of some sort of technical limitation or the fact the resulting lens would be bigger and heavier (maybe...). So given they are making a 17-55 for APS-C sensor with f2.8 and with IS, why wouldn't Canon also offer IS for their 24-70 2.8L zoom? Especially with the video benefit it would bring...

Are there technical limitation such that IS might work for a 17-55 focal lenght but when you get to 24-70 at f2.8, it would add to much weight/size?

 

[awinphoto]

@JR

positioning could very well be a huge factor and Canon may think 1.6 crop is only for families and trips to disneyland, but then why even bother making the 7D? kind of pointless without lenses to match in quality.

I do believe up until maybe 3 years ago Canon probably did believe that the 1.6 crop was a "lesser" camera system and wanted to nudge people up the food chain up to full frame... The EF-S system was catered to the 20D and beyond and were geared for that clientele. I think when the 7D was introduced they realized people who were invested in the EF-s system (and frankly those who weren't going to buy a $2500 camera period) needed something to upgrade to and so the 7D was born... Somehow I almost dont think Canon realized how big of a hit the 7D really was. While I would be supprised to see some L-s versions in the future or some other designation for top of the line ef-s series, that probably wouldn't be introduced until after the 7D2 comes out so there's enough of a saturation in the market of APS-C weathersealed 7d cameras out there to match up with the lenses.

@neuroanatomist

professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill.... with that, I dont get paid but still consider pro equipment a necessity and the 7D to me is the smallest "1D" Cannon makes. Furthermore, if apple engineers can make something like the ipad, is there really a need for the 1D to be as big as it is anymore???

Correct, being a professional photographer means you are a paid or commissioned photographer... I make all my living off of photography and my skill set, however I do not use 1d series cameras... That being said, if I was in the position or need for that type of camera for the style of photography I was shooting or shooting for a client whom this gear was needed, then by all means I would have it in my budget to get one. There are professional photographers can make money whether they are using a 1Ds/x or an iphone... It's all about knowing what equipment you need to get your job done and most importantly knowing how to get the most out of what gear you have to get the job done.

 

[Loswr]

@neuroanatomist
professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill....

I was using 'professional' as defined by Canon's marketing department, with no implication intended.

Canon on the 7D: "Made to be the tool of choice for serious photographers and semi-professionals..."

Canon on the 1D IV: "...the EOS-1D Mark IV is the perfect choice for professional photographers..."

 

[wockawocka]

It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.

 

[psycho5]

@EYEONE

well done, case closed indeed. :-X you made great points and I was wrong on some things, maybe everything ... but i still hope Canon will put the 1Dx sensor in a body like the 7D, sustain 8fps, 100% VF, 7D AF, and price it less than 3k for body only.

im kind of pissed off at the rumored 36mp sensor and their stupid FF megapixel war with Nikon

 

[Loswr]

It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.

Really? Which would give you a better result - a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on a T3, or a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on a 5DII? There's a reason for the 'glass before body' maxim.

 

[awinphoto]

The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.

There are so many arguments against what you just said...

But anyway, I believe a qualification of an L-Series lens is that it has to work on every EOS camera. An L-Series EF-S lens would not mount on a EOS film camera. Case closed.

I wanted sooo much to bite my tongue on this comment however I cant... AFTERALL, Clearly, the 7d is an inferior camera... ummmm yep... sounds right to me... <Sarcasm> The 5d2 was always seen as a baby 1ds and the 7d has had a reputation of a baby 1d. This is the point the original poster was referring to... Does the 7D have the quantity of AF points of a 1D, no. Does the 7D have the built in grip and imposing size? no. Does it have audio recording or the 1.3 sensor? No. That being said, it's smaller and more versatile and may get into venues up probably couldn't get into with the 1d without a press credential. The 7D is weathersealed and tough... It has an overall AF system that leaves 5d2 only owner envious, or even nikon D300 owners... From a pro who's used both, both are fine cameras and both have their rightful place in the lineup and markets... To dismiss the 7d so flippantly hints at your ignorance. Once again professional photographers are able to make the most out of their gear to meet their clients needs.

 

[awinphoto]

It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.

Really? Which would give you a better result - a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on a T3, or a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on a 5DII? There's a reason for the 'glass before body' maxim.

Lest we forget the rule of thumb was always to spend 2x the ammount on glass than the body because that's really what will determine the quality of the image... nice comparison btw.

 

[Loswr]

The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.

Clearly, the 7d is an inferior camera... ummmm yep... sounds right to me... <Sarcasm> The 5d2 was always seen as a baby 1ds and the 7d has had a reputation of a baby 1d.

Is the Camry a 'baby Lexus LS'? I'm with EYEONE on this - the 7D is an inferior camera, and it's aimed at a different market. The 1D series has substantially better build quality, durability, AF, IQ, etc. That's not to say that the 7D is not a great camera, nor that's it's not a better choice in many situations.

 

[Cetalis]

@cetalis

I love knowing my camera and lens has a very good chance in maintaining performance in katrina-like weather. As a soldier, longevity and durability are equally important as performance. sure the lenses you mentioned are nice, but not after the first dust storm or heavy rain.

Not all L lenses are weather sealed; is it weather sealed EF-S lenses that you want?

 

[briansquibb]

It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.

Really? Which would give you a better result - a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on a T3, or a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on a 5DII? There's a reason for the 'glass before body' maxim.

Lest we forget the rule of thumb was always to spend 2x the ammount on glass than the body because that's really what will determine the quality of the image... nice comparison btw.

I bought the 7D specifically to use with my 400 f/2.8 IS - and it works like a dream.

 

[RC]

I dido the original comment/complaint. I too want L grade lens for my 7D.

My post from a few days ago:

Re: Realistic wish lens « on: November 09, 2011, 05:54:59 PM »

I don't think it is asking too much for an APS-C version of the 24-105 f/4L. There are plenty of serious crop shooters out here who want HQ lens. Yes, someday I'll get a 5D3 but I'm not getting rid of my 7D.

I want a 15-65 f/4L IS USM! I want IS, weather resistant, constant aperture, and for heck sakes Canon, include the hood and case. Excellent IQ goes without saying. I'm even OK with an EF-S version but prefer EF of course. If this was a 2.8 constant lens that would be even better but I'd be thrilled with a f/4. Furthermore, I think the price (for an f/4) should be about what the 24-105 f/4L is.

Am I missing something? Is this too difficult or pricey to build?

Just last night I bit the bullet and ordered a 16-35 f/2.8L to replace my EF-S 15-85. I want/need weather sealing and a constant aperture. Now I need to save up to for another lens to fill the FL gap. Probably either the 24-105 4L or 24-70 2.8L

 

[awinphoto]

The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.

Clearly, the 7d is an inferior camera... ummmm yep... sounds right to me... <Sarcasm> The 5d2 was always seen as a baby 1ds and the 7d has had a reputation of a baby 1d.

Is the Camry a 'baby Lexus LS'? I'm with EYEONE on this - the 7D is an inferior camera, and it's aimed at a different market. The 1D series has substantially better build quality, durability, AF, IQ, etc. That's not to say that the 7D is not a great camera, nor that's it's not a better choice in many situations.

While I'm not too surprised to hear you take that stance, from a professional photographers POV, they are just tools... There are times when a 1d body is beneficial but there are professionals who have made great works of art or utilize Point and Shoots because of the fact that it's small and light and doesn't draw attention. To be honest I've never lost a shot because I didn't have a 1d body, nor have I failed to get a job done because I didn't have a 1d body... Yes there may be times when having 1 comes in handy, and that's why I have CPS, but to be honest, haven't come to that point. Heck, even national geographic staff photogs use 5d's... I would class them more professional than most...