The Next L Primes

[Sabaki]

A Google search later, it seems that the last non telephoto primes lenses released, were the 17mm TSE, 24mm TSE and the 100mm L Macro in 2009.

I believe it's fair to say these lenses are extraordinary in performance, with few faults.

But I'm beginning to wonder, just how far Canon can turn up the performance dial for any new prime they intend to release?

When I began photography three years back, a common bit of wisdom I found was that primes are just better than zooms and this was due to the simplified engineering required.
Then along comes 4 zooms, 16-35 f/4.0L IS, 24-70 f/2.8L ii, 70-200 f/2.8L ii & the 200-400 that had reviewers saying something along the lines of "this zoom performs good enough to make me sell any prime lens covered by that range."

I'm paraphrasing there, don't sue me ;D

So back to the subject of what a brand new prime could bring to the table.
1. Sharpness from corner to corner at largest aperture
2. Contrast
3. Autofocus
4. Colour rendering
5. Bokeh/Aperture blades
6. Image Stabilization
7. Size/Weight/Filterability

Canon's latest zooms are a strong indication that the engineering process has become highly refined and that the next primes should truly shine.

I feel that Canon's next L prime should be able to deliver astounding image quality and simultaneously consign issues such as jittery or slow AF, sterile contrast and any fringing to the past.

 

[davidcl0nel]

On current cameras the zoom lenses you said are very good and are really versatile enough to replace a prime lens. But think more than one year in advance, maybe 5 or 10.
It's undoubted, that Canon will bring someday Cameras with more than 22 MP, maybe up to 100 MP in the next xx years. What then? Are the current zoom lenses as good to fill out 100 MP? I think not, but maybe really good primes are...

 

[Antono Refa]

It's undoubted, that Canon will bring someday Cameras with more than 22 MP, maybe up to 100 MP in the next xx years. What then? Are the current zoom lenses as good to fill out 100 MP? I think not, but maybe really good primes are...

It's much easier to make a cheap high resolution sensor than it is to make a cheap sharp-as-the-sensor lens. As example, nobody expects lens prices & sharpness to follow the same curve as processors prices & sharpness.

[Actually, making a modern processor in mass amounts is so hard, most have dropped out of the game, forcing Apple to leave both Motorola and IBM in favor of Apple. Many of the workstations so popular in the '90s have disappeared or become niche, e.g. DEC VAX & Alpha, HP w/ HPUX, IBM w/ AIX, Sun w/ Solaris, etc.]

Which raises two questions:

1. How many photographers would be willing to buy not only a 100MP camera, but glass to match as well?

2. At what point will photographers understand they're stuffing their HDDs with over-sampled images, and what will they do at that point?

[I wouldn't be the least surprised if APS-C sensors already over sample lenses. DxO Mark scores the 200-400mm on the 7D at 10MP, and both the 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM & 600mm F/4L IS II USM at 12MP. This might leave room for FF sensors with up to 36MP, but 50MP or more? I don't see it.]

 

[Sabaki]

It's undoubted, that Canon will bring someday Cameras with more than 22 MP, maybe up to 100 MP in the next xx years. What then? Are the current zoom lenses as good to fill out 100 MP? I think not, but maybe really good primes are...

It's much easier to make a cheap high resolution sensor than it is to make a cheap sharp-as-the-sensor lens. As example, nobody expects lens prices & sharpness to follow the same curve as processors prices & sharpness.

[Actually, making a modern processor in mass amounts is so hard, most have dropped out of the game, forcing Apple to leave both Motorola and IBM in favor of Apple. Many of the workstations so popular in the '90s have disappeared or become niche, e.g. DEC VAX & Alpha, HP w/ HPUX, IBM w/ AIX, Sun w/ Solaris, etc.]

Which raises two questions:

1. How many photographers would be willing to buy not only a 100MP camera, but glass to match as well?

2. At what point will photographers understand they're stuffing their HDDs with over-sampled images, and what will they do at that point?

[I wouldn't be the least surprised if APS-C sensors already over sample lenses. DxO Mark scores the 200-400mm on the 7D at 10MP, and both the 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM & 600mm F/4L IS II USM at 12MP. This might leave room for FF sensors with up to 36MP, but 50MP or more? I don't see it.]

Are you guys saying that the current zooms are good enough for current and maybe next-gen bodies but that they may be shown up on bodies that could end up with many more MP?

 

[Antono Refa]

Are you guys saying that the current zooms are good enough for current and maybe next-gen bodies but that they may be shown up on bodies that could end up with many more MP?

With 12MP one can crop and still print full page. for whatever page size one can reasonable hold in hand (magazine, book, etc).

So what photographers actually need >24MP? Wildlife photographers? Photographers who shoot landscape and ads printed at least as large as living room carpets?

Please enlighten me why would the mass market needs more resolution than what's already available in the stores.

 

[Dylan777]

Looking forward for their 35mm L II

 

[LDS]

Canon's latest zooms are a strong indication that the engineering process has become highly refined and that the next primes should truly shine.

It looks many overlook that a lens is not IQ only - there are other factors to take into account when selecting one - prime or a zoom, for example weight, dimensions, maximum aperture, ease of use.

Sure, the 70-200/2.8 is an excellent lens, but it's also heavy - even if it could become a macro one I would not use something so heavy for "walkaround macro" compared to the much lighter 100/2.8 macro.
Street photographers often prefers primes because are smaller. lighter and faster to use - no temptation to change the focal to "optimize framing" and maybe missing a shot. When shooting portrait also, some bigger lenses may be somewhat intimidating for non-professional subjects.
And when there's a need to work quickly in low-light situation - or really need very shallow DOF, max aperture counts, and it's something you can't achieve with IS alone. Sometimes, it is the difference between returning with a photo, albeit not one with an astounding IQ, or getting no photo at all. "Strangely", there are some kind of photos you can easy sell even if the IQ will not DXOmark people scream....