Some Minor Canon Lens Announcement Clarification

[MaxFoto]

I just want a mark II 50 1.0L, that is all.

 

[Khalai]

I just want a mark II 50 1.0L, that is all.

That lens went with 4000 € IIRC, so I would expect such lens to go over 5000 €. Look at Leica Noctilux 50/0.95 - that lens is absurdly expensive. I'd much prefer 50/1.2L or 50/1.4L with the same performance as 35/1.4L II lens for a reasonable price

 

[ahsanford]

I just want a mark II 50 1.0L, that is all.

That lens went with 4000 € IIRC, so I would expect such lens to go over 5000 €. Look at Leica Noctilux 50/0.95 - that lens is absurdly expensive. I'd much prefer 50/1.2L or 50/1.4L with the same performance as 35/1.4L II lens for a reasonable price

Not to mention the design tradeoffs to pull off a f/1 lens like that. I've seen some testing on that Noctilux, and it's as sharp as cotton balls away from center until f/4 or so.

Canon doesn't need Bugatti exclusive nonsense in the EF portfolio. It needs workhorse tools for everyday photographers. A solid non-L 50 f/1.4 is (IMHO) a gaping hole in the current lineup that should be addressed with high priority.

- A

 

[transpo1]

I'm keeping my feet on the ground, but a new non-L 50 would be gold.

Geez, man...you should tell someone you want a lens like that. Don't keep it a secret!

There's no use saying what you want on this forum- Canon doesn't read it :

 

[SkynetTX]

Unless it has STM. I will post no memes if has STM. I will buy one, unbox it, and smash it with a hammer and share that experience on YouTube.

- A

*subscribed*

Me too! STM is one of the worst ideas of Canon. But a 250mm f/5.6 IS USM Macro would be great.

 

[ahsanford]

Me too! STM is one of the worst ideas of Canon. But a 250mm f/5.6 IS USM Macro would be great.

STM was actually a genius idea -- for beginners and video folks. Remember, there was a 'nothing' AF motor option in the not too distant past that was slow and squeaky, far worse than STM.

In my book: Ring USM > Nano USM* > Micro USM > STM > [Nothing AF motor] > Manual focus**

* Have never shot, but the feedback has been strong with it
** For the focusing experience only -- MF lenses can be brilliant tools, I'm no hater!

And I believe STM gave Canon new patent cover for its higher volume less expensive lenses, which were being knocked off in China.

So STM wasn't a terrible idea at all. It's just a downgrade for stills-only folks accustomed to USM lenses. Like me.

- A

 

[The Supplanter]

Considering this patent is over 3 years old, I'm really hoping for that 100mm f/2 IS lens. Released in 1991, it is long overdue. Would be a wonderful candid street photography lens.

 

[jolyonralph]

It certainly would make sense to replace the 50mm f/1.4, the 85 f/1.8 and the 100 f/2 - which is exactly why Canon won't do it


I think we'll see something like

50mm f/1.4L IS USM
85mm f/1.4L IS USM (already known)
135mm f/2L IS USM (maybe they'll do two 135s, a f/2 and a "f/2" STF, but I think a normal lens is more likely)
200mm f/2.8L IS USM (pointless lens for anyone who has the 70-200 I suppose)

 

[LonelyBoy]

I still think the lenses in august will be stm lenses or lens, either apsc prime or ff buget zoom. I hope for budget ff ultrawide, something similar to 10-18 is stm. Maybe 16-28 f4-5,6 is stm. It could also be cheaper version of 16-50 f 2.8, something like f2.8-4. This would be also high end.

All 24, 28 and 35 is usm are made in japan. So the ff primes like 20, 28 50 or 85 will not be from malasya. All stm ef-m lenses are made in taiwan so i thik it will not be ef-m.

They could produce e.g. 17-35/3.5-5.6 IS STM to compliment their 24-105 IS STM lens as a cheaper UWA zoom for 6D line. There is already 70-300/4-5.6 IS USM II, so that would make a nice budget FF lineup for 6D bodies. Right now, you can either get used 17-40/4L or buy new 16-35/4L IS. Neither of those options are to be considered budget however...

Before the 70-300ii came out I was certain it was going to be STM, to be a matched pair to the 24-105STM.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Unless a price friendly X00-500mm lens shows up, I have what I need, or it already exists. I love primes, but sitting in the dark of a theater trying to quickly change them as I miss opportunities caused me to sell all but a couple primes. While Zooms are not quite as good, missed shots are by far worse. Everyone should have a choioce and get the equipment they need and will use. I'd love to have some of the new primes, but I also know they will sit unused.

 

[snoke]

SKUs list missing one?

2271C005AA, 2273C005AA, 2274C005AA, 2275C005AA.

Where 2272C005AA? What happen to him?

Reformat M20 SKU list:
2209C002AA, 2209C012AA, 2209C022AA, 2209C032AA
2210C002AA, 2210C012AA, 2210C022AA, 2210C032AA
2211C002AA, 2211C012AA, 2211C022AA, 2211C032AA

2209, 2210, 2211
C00, C01, C02, C03

 

[Woody]

Me too! STM is one of the worst ideas of Canon. But a 250mm f/5.6 IS USM Macro would be great.

STM was actually a genius idea -- for beginners and video folks....

In my book: Ring USM > Nano USM* > Micro USM > STM > [Nothing AF motor] > Manual focus**

For entry level cameras like the SL2 and 77D, AF accuracy with STM lenses (including the 50 f/1.8 STM) is very impressive, far better than USM. Micro USM (like 50 f/1.4) lenses are terrible.

This does not happen on advance bodies like the 5D III/IV etc.

 

[In-The-Dark]

Considering this patent is over 3 years old, I'm really hoping for that 100mm f/2 IS lens. Released in 1991, it is long overdue.

+1
Add to that a 50mm non-L, and a 135mm L with IS.

 

[ahsanford]

Me too! STM is one of the worst ideas of Canon. But a 250mm f/5.6 IS USM Macro would be great.

STM was actually a genius idea -- for beginners and video folks....

In my book: Ring USM > Nano USM* > Micro USM > STM > [Nothing AF motor] > Manual focus**

For entry level cameras like the SL2 and 77D, AF accuracy with STM lenses (including the 50 f/1.8 STM) is very impressive, far better than USM. Micro USM (like 50 f/1.4) lenses are terrible.

This does not happen on advance bodies like the 5D III/IV etc.

The EF 50mm f/1.4 with micro USM hunts for sure, but it's consistently faster (total time to lock) than the STM lenses I've shot with.

Your experience may be due to that ancient 50 being somewhat inconsistent copy to copy w.r.t. AF. Some folks here cannot stand the AF on that lens, others have damaged it by pressing on the protruding inner barrel of the lens, while others still (myself) have been fine with it.

STM lenses are modern / consistent / accurate -- don't get me wrong -- but they simply are a step behind USM speed for stills work, IMHO.

- A

 

[LonelyBoy]

Me too! STM is one of the worst ideas of Canon. But a 250mm f/5.6 IS USM Macro would be great.

STM was actually a genius idea -- for beginners and video folks....

In my book: Ring USM > Nano USM* > Micro USM > STM > [Nothing AF motor] > Manual focus**

For entry level cameras like the SL2 and 77D, AF accuracy with STM lenses (including the 50 f/1.8 STM) is very impressive, far better than USM. Micro USM (like 50 f/1.4) lenses are terrible.

This does not happen on advance bodies like the 5D III/IV etc.

The EF 50mm f/1.4 with micro USM hunts for sure, but it's consistently faster (total time to lock) than the STM lenses I've shot with.

Your experience may be due to that ancient 50 being somewhat inconsistent copy to copy w.r.t. AF. Some folks here cannot stand the AF on that lens, others have damaged it by pressing on the protruding inner barrel of the lens, while others still (myself) have been fine with it.

STM lenses are modern / consistent / accurate -- don't get me wrong -- but they simply are a step behind USM speed for stills work, IMHO.

- A

The fragility of microUSM makes it a complete non-starter for me, personally, and STM is fast enough for a lot of my uses. I'd strike mUSM from that list entirely.

And honestly, I don't see Canon using it again.

 

[andrei1989]

i don't know why you all pi$$ on STM..maybe because of the non-mechanical manual focus?

the STM implementation in the 55-250 is amazingly fast! also in the ef-m lenses.

yes, i've used also 70-200 2.8 IS II from a friend, or a 100L macro, they are faster but not by that much as to say STM is the worst

 

[LonelyBoy]

i don't know why you all pi$$ on STM..maybe because of the non-mechanical manual focus?

the STM implementation in the 55-250 is amazingly fast! also in the ef-m lenses.

yes, i've used also 70-200 2.8 IS II from a friend, or a 100L macro, they are faster but not by that much as to say STM is the worst

I have a 100L. "Fast" is not the word I'd use to describe its AF.

 

[neuroanatomist]

quote author=CRguy]
Some Minor Canon Lens Announcement Clarification
[/quote]

Reading this more carefully, I wonder if it means a minor clarification about a lens announcement…or a clarification about a minor lens announcement. Three colors of an EF-M lens sounds like the latter.

 

[rrcphoto]

SKUs list missing one?

2271C005AA, 2273C005AA, 2274C005AA, 2275C005AA.

Where 2272C005AA? What happen to him?

Reformat M20 SKU list:
2209C002AA, 2209C012AA, 2209C022AA, 2209C032AA
2210C002AA, 2210C012AA, 2210C022AA, 2210C032AA
2211C002AA, 2211C012AA, 2211C022AA, 2211C032AA

2209, 2210, 2211
C00, C01, C02, C03

it could be regional.

at times numbers are skipped .. happened in the past.

 

[jeffa4444]

Here is what would make sense for Canon with existing, known coming and possible

EF24mm f1.4L II USM - Existing
EF35mm f1.4L II USM - Existing
EF50mm f1.4L USM - Possible (existing EF50mm f1.4 USM)
EF85mm f1.4L USM - known coming
EF100mm f1.4L USM - Possible as Nikon have the 105mm f1.4

This would give Canon five high performance lenses with consistent maximum f stops which cover a broad spectrum of commonly used fixed focal lengths (converted for video are all T1.3)