Patent - EF-S 18-300 f/3.5-5.6

[verysimplejason]

I'd trade 100mm on the long end for 3mm on the wide end - 15-200. I can't believe the only 15mm-xxx zoom is still the 15-85IS. All these 17-xx and 18-xx zooms for the EF-s mount are stupid, frankly. And, yes, that includes the 17-55/2.8 and all the third-party lenses. Even my Canon compacts all start at 24mm or 25mm equivalent, not 27mm or 29mm.

+1 but I want the extra 50mm on the long end. 15-250 sounds about right.

 

[verysimplejason]

There could be design optimizations for video (e.g. parfocal behavior) that give it a major leg up, even if its pixel-level sharpness isn't quite tip-top.

I know Canon often introduces new features in lower-end products, e.g. dual pixel AF in the 650D then 70D, but I doubt the first parfocal lens would be a low end super zoom.

You


Which touches my other point - the assumption is that this is a low-end zoom. Let's not forget that Canon introduced a 28-300 L - a range that was typically dismissed as "tourist class"... This lens could be a shocker in any number of ways...or not.

According to rumor, it's intended "to replace the no-so-good EF-S 18-200 IS". I don't see Canon replacing a low end lens with a high end one.

You did already. 18-135 STM IS is much better than the previous 18-135 IS. Even the 18-55 STM IS is much better than the 18-55 IS II.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

There could be design optimizations for video (e.g. parfocal behavior) that give it a major leg up, even if its pixel-level sharpness isn't quite tip-top.

I know Canon often introduces new features in lower-end products, e.g. dual pixel AF in the 650D then 70D, but I doubt the first parfocal lens would be a low end super zoom.

You


Which touches my other point - the assumption is that this is a low-end zoom. Let's not forget that Canon introduced a 28-300 L - a range that was typically dismissed as "tourist class"... This lens could be a shocker in any number of ways...or not.

According to rumor, it's intended "to replace the no-so-good EF-S 18-200 IS". I don't see Canon replacing a low end lens with a high end one.

You did already. 18-135 STM IS is much better than the previous 18-135 IS. Even the 18-55 STM IS is much better than the 18-55 IS II.

Those lenses being better than their predecessors doesn't make them high end.

Furthermore, both lenses kept the same focal lengths range, which makes it easier to improve IQ.

 

[preppyak]

I know Canon often introduces new features in lower-end products, e.g. dual pixel AF in the 650D then 70D, but I doubt the first parfocal lens would be a low end super zoom.

Cant see them making it parfocal, simply because of the thin margin of error to make that work. It usually makes the lens a lot bulkier and heavier. And raises the price

Which touches my other point - the assumption is that this is a low-end zoom. Let's not forget that Canon introduced a 28-300 L - a range that was typically dismissed as "tourist class".

The EF-S is what makes it a low-end zoom. Even the 17-55 isn't an expensive lens, by L standards. Can't imagine they are gonna drop a $1500+ super zoom that only works with APS-C cameras

 

[Don Haines]

You have to look at the intended market. Super zooms are not about image quality, they are about convenience. This lens will probably cost slightly more than the 18 200... The image quality will probably be about the same. It will sell well.