The Next Lens from Canon Will be an EF-S Prime
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
That Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 cannot even remotely touch the Canon EF-S 17-55. Especially not at f/2.8. That Sigma is a subpar variable aperture consumer zoom. The Canon EF-S 17-55 /2.8 is a brilliant lens. No problem to max out 80D or 7D II sensor with it.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
We'll agree to disagree:
- the EF-S 17-55 is optically excellent (perhaps slightly less so at MFD), but getting a bit old fashioned mechanically and only 17mm on the wide end -it's good, but would benefit from an update
- I'm sure the 24mm f/2.8 is great, but it's a bit long and a bit slow for APS-C: fine as a budget lens, but hardly competition for the Fuji 23mm f/2, let alone the f/1.4, nor even the EF-M 22mm f/2
- the EF-S 10-18mm is very good value for money and is a brilliant selling point for the Canon system, it's optically solid but not outstanding and its build quality is on the cheap side.
Canon EF-S mount -14 glorious years, 22 lenses of which 12 are kit zooms and 3 of the others are 55-250mm f/4-5.6 tele-zooms...
Fuji X-mount - <5years, 23 lenses, of which 11 are primes and over half have an aperture >= f/2.8...
M4/3rd... well, I won't bother going there.
Upvote
0
traveller said:
I must say, even as a very vocal critic of Canon I am absolutely happy with all 3 sets of Canon lenses.
* EF-S
* 17-55 / 2.8 IS = best f/2.8 APS-C standard zoom on entire market. With IS and at a fair price. See no need whatsoever for an update. Mechanics? Perfectly fine with me.
* 55-250 IS STM = best APS-C tele zoom on the market. Better IQ than those crazy expensive Fuji tele zooms.
* 10-18 - performance 99% of Fuji 10-24 but at 1/4 the price
* 60 / 2.8 = excellent macro and portrait lens, and "dirt cheap" to boot
* 24/2.8 = small, dirt cheap, excellent IQ. not really behind Fuji 23/2 [except f/2.8 vs. f/2] ... at 1/3 the price
For everything just use EF lenses, they are less expoensive than those Fuji crop lenses.
Fuji and Sony lens lineup and their absurd high lens prices have really kept me from switching, despite Canon's shortcoming in EOS M bodies.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
The 17-55F2.8 is the default lens on my 7D2.... an update would be awesome!.... but I don't expect it.
Upvote
0
Wrong lens: I was referring to the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM (read my post againAvTvM said:
), which is constant aperture and optically superior to the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC OS Macro HSM C Lens. It's still not as good as the Canon, but it is less than half the price. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx
I'd love to see an EF-S 15-55 f/2.8 IS USM, supplemented with an EF(-S) 50-135 f/2.8 IS USM and an EF-S 10-22 f/2.8 USM. Add a 15mm, 22mm f/1.8 and 31mm f/1.8 primes and I will actually buy into the argument that Canon's APS-C system, supplemented with longer and specialist EF lenses is a comprehensive cmaera system.
Of course, this won't happen, because both Canon and Nikon are sold on the strategy of trying to persuade everyone to upgrade to full frame as soon as they want anything more than a few basic zooms, and they're terrified that selling people lots of APS-C only lenses stands in the way of this.
Upvote
0
Start at 15mm, weather sealing to go with the 7D series bodies would be a great start. Pricing it competitive with the Fuji 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR and the Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm f2.8 Pro Lens would prove a point too...AvTvM said:what update? 4 stop IS, ok. But optical formula? And Mk. II then costing 1999,- ... thanks, but no thanks!Don Haines said:
Or how about something to make people sit up and take notice... or just copy the Samsung 16-50mm ƒ/2-2.8 S ED OIS NX -they'd probably even sell the patents and the toolings to Canon at a knock down price
Upvote
0
traveller said:Wrong lens: I was referring to the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM (read my post againAvTvM said:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx
I'd love to see an EF-S 15-55 f/2.8 IS USM, supplemented with an EF(-S) 50-135 f/2.8 IS USM and an EF-S 10-22 f/2.8 USM. Add a 15mm, 22mm f/1.8 and 31mm f/1.8 primes and I will actually buy into the argument that Canon's APS-C system, supplemented with longer and specialist EF lenses is a comprehensive cmaera system.
Of course, this won't happen, because both Canon and Nikon are sold on the strategy of trying to persuade everyone to upgrade to full frame as soon as they want anything more than a few basic zooms, and they're terrified that selling people lots of APS-C only lenses stands in the way of this.
As was I,my bad... I actually had the original 17-70 (Pre Contemporary and it was very soft) I have no experience with the 17-50 but have many friends who loved it.
Upvote
0
i expect it will be launched with these 2 new bodies and the new kit lens, whenever that will be..next week maybe? 
Upvote
0
If it is an EF-S prime, it is probably a wide angle lens. It doesn't make much sense to make an S specific prime above 50mm, and there is already a 24mm EF-S prime, so my bet is 12mm...
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:AvTvM said:
Right, why would Canon make further investment in APS-C dSLR systems, given that dSLRs outsell MILCs 3:1 globally, and the majority dSLRs sold have APS-C sensors?
I see you continue to put your business degree to good use. :
well neuro, i don't see you pouring money into rebel-land ... neither am i .. why should Canon?
mirrorslappers are dead. nothing a rebel cam do better than an EOS M5. except price ... for now.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
You shouldn't compare the M5 with any rebel. It is playing in a completely different league...
Also, do not forget the huge advantage of OVFs. You can work much, much more efficiently regarding energy consumption - something that MILCs will never be able to offer. I think DSLRs are here to stay. Maybe for another decade or even longer. Just because of this. And a very new, much better battery-type than Li-ion (which will come for sure) would change nothing. DSLRs will stay strong for a very long time.
Don Haines said:
I hope you are so right! Small and superb image quality like the EF-M 11-22mm. Just a bit faster
It would complete the holy trinity on the wide end for my super lightweight, small and high quality EOS M5 travel kit (currently 24IS, 50STM). All fits within a super small, inconspicuous Mantona colt bag (http://ow.ly/fij2308UNJv). And there's still room for a (smaller) third lens! Doesn't even look like a camera bag (at least from a certain distance). Y'know - don't give papaya... when possible! I always try to hide the equipment as good as I can.
Anything bigger like my 8-15L or 100L would require my adaptor 45 backbag (http://ow.ly/13v7308UPg1), which I'm only using for longer trips. Can only recommend it. Very ergonomic and lotsa' space! And you don't even have to lay it down on the ground to grab something from the inside. You have access to every gear part on-the-walk.
Upvote
0
It maybe as long ago as 2 years that I saw in canonrumors or another "rumors site" an item showing that Canon had registered a patent for an EF-S 22mm f2.0 with a few comments about why? I have been looking and looking for it and haven't managed to trace it. Nevertheless, I will be absolutely delighted myself if this is the anticipates new EF-S prime lens.
A 35mm SLR with a 35mm f2.0 lens is beautifully simple compact combination. In passed times I would regularly "play it simple" put my 35mm f2.0 lens on my SLR - very compact compared to my 18-135mm zoom. The 35mm lens gave a very nice angle of view, and f2.0 gathers buck loads of light. Shallow depth of field at f2.0 to f2.8, and on the other hand, at f16, just focusing (manually) at something 10 feet away results in everything from about 5 feet to infinity being in focus.
Yes a 22mm F2.0 for APS-C is the ideal lens for me. Its the lens I want NOW.
Followed by a 56mm or 55mm f1.8. About 88 to 90mm on full frame. Next a 16mm f1.8 or f2.0 (or f2.8) - 24mm on full frame. And finally a 32mm f1.8 to give an equivalent "nifty 50 lens" for APS-C cameras.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a 22mm lens, and I will be very disappointed but not surprised if its a "nifty 50 equivalent".
A 35mm SLR with a 35mm f2.0 lens is beautifully simple compact combination. In passed times I would regularly "play it simple" put my 35mm f2.0 lens on my SLR - very compact compared to my 18-135mm zoom. The 35mm lens gave a very nice angle of view, and f2.0 gathers buck loads of light. Shallow depth of field at f2.0 to f2.8, and on the other hand, at f16, just focusing (manually) at something 10 feet away results in everything from about 5 feet to infinity being in focus.
Yes a 22mm F2.0 for APS-C is the ideal lens for me. Its the lens I want NOW.
Followed by a 56mm or 55mm f1.8. About 88 to 90mm on full frame. Next a 16mm f1.8 or f2.0 (or f2.8) - 24mm on full frame. And finally a 32mm f1.8 to give an equivalent "nifty 50 lens" for APS-C cameras.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a 22mm lens, and I will be very disappointed but not surprised if its a "nifty 50 equivalent".
Upvote
0
