Two Canon Lenses to Be Announced on June 7, 2018

[rrcphoto]

The Canon EF 70-200 f2.8 IS Mark II is the best lens in its class.

it was for quite a few years, i'm not sure you can make that claim now. Both the Sony 70-200 and the Nikon 70-200 2.8's are excellent competitors.

this is also an area that canon usually has bragging rights as being the best, so i'm sure they want to improve themselves over their competitors.

as the race for better camera bodies becomes alot more diminishing returns, the system kits become that much more important.

 

[jeffa4444]

I was believing what CR wrote here , finally no new 70-200 this year, and now another contradicting news.
The problem is I just bought the 70-200 f4 IS yesterday... I was ready to take the v2...
Not happy reader here...

I don't think you should be worried too much, if you know how to use a camera and lenses, the 70-200 f4 IS should give you full satisfaction. I use it most of the time instead of the f2.8 IS II that I find to cumbersome and it never disappointed me. On my 5DSr it is as sharp if not sharper than the 2.8, and none of my clients ever complained.

It's only negative would be the slightly noisy IS.

I was in the same situation when I finally bought the 45 TS-E a few month before the 50mm TS-E was announced. I was a bit pissed in the first place, and the 50 is much better optically than the 45... But, the 45 cost me 750 Euro used like new when the 50 is more than 3 times that, and finally I prefer the 45mm focal for my use, the terrible chroma can mostly be dealt with in post and its a much smaller lens, once again sharpness is a non issue.

I am not so sure I will replace my 45 and 90 TS-E with the newest models. I am not a fan of Ken Rockwell (sorry if I bring his name here ), but he is right about one thing at least, sharpness is only a concern for amateurs. Every modern lens is sharp enough, the real optical problems are elsewhere (chroma, coma, distortion, field flatness) and ergonomics are more important in real use (filter size, size and weight, MFD). I work with Canon, but my personal photography is made with a 4x5 view camera that uses lenses designed mostly in the 1970's and that never stop to amaze me. I use as well Zeiss , Leica and Olympus lenses adapted on my old 5D2, and image quality is not a problem.

One of the problem with the most recent super sharp lenses is they are quite clinical. It's OK for some uses (architecture, macro, landscape, studio) and a lot of professional applications, but they have zero character. IMO, the imperfection of some lenses make them desirable for a lot of other uses, in the creative sense.

I am thinking about buying the 50mm1.2L not because it's super sharp, but because everything else (bokeh and softness) that give the special look. I am not interested in the least in a Zeiss Otus or Sigma Art, my 50 macro f2.5 does the job perfectly if I want a zero distortion, flat field super sharp picture, it cost me 250€ and weighs 280 gramms.

I am sure you will be fully satisfied with your 70-200mm f4 IS, plus you don't know yet how much the new one will cost. Even if you use a 5DSr on a tripod all the time (which is what I do), I am not sure the slight supposed optical improvement would matter that much. On the ergonomic side, to be honest, we are already close to perfection. If only Canon would have been less greedy and include the tripod collar, the world would be perfect...

Your bang on the money regarding the clinical sharpness & less character. In my professional field of cinematography camera & lighting rental we have seen many cinematographers turn to older glass from the 1950s, 60s and 70s plus a huge return in the use of diffusion filters (which soften highlights without destroying sharpness) or black & white nets.
I use quite often on portrait shoots Lee Filters polyester soft / diffusion filters I still get sharp eyes but the highlights have a glow to them (which most models like).
Artistic choice is a great tool.

 

[ahsanford]

Thar she blows, the f/2.8L IS III, courtesy of you know who.

I don't see any obvious tells of what's new. We still have a focus limiter and surely AF and IS switches further around to the left.

One down, one to go.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

I'm with you, these lenses are identical to the current versions, except they have the new mirrorless comms function.
Its not being upgraded for optical performance - just for new body acceptance.

Goodness, no. Canon doesn't 'II' or 'III' it's staple pro items for something trivial like that. This lens is a showpiece performance instrument -- they will not slide out a similarly performing instrument like it's a kit 24-105 lens.

Surely this lens will improve in other areas: sharpness, IS, weight, the lens hood CPL window, possibly MFD, etc.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Why would Canon offer IS for it's 50mm 1.4 when it still sells the 1.2? The only one who would get IS would be an upgrade to the current 1.2.

Because IS is not necessarily on the 'best' spec'd lens, especially when they aren't the big white ones. Canon has shown a proclivity to put IS on the slower lens and leave IS off the faster lens:

24L f/1.4L II vs. 24 f/2.8 IS
28 f/1.8 vs. 28 f/2.8 IS (bit of an exception as the 'fast 28' is an old product Canon hasn't touched in 25 years)
35 f/1.4L II vs. 35 f/2 IS
16-35 f/2.8L III vs. 16-35 f/4L IS
24-70 f/2.8L II vs. 24-70 f/4L IS and 24-105 f/4L IS II
100 f/2 vs. 100 f/2.8L IS (another exception like the fast 28 comment above; also the L is a macro here)

But the times, they are a changin'. The new 85 f/1.4L IS is hopefully the first of many standard and wider FL lenses that are both quick and have IS. Surely we'll see more.

On the 50 front, rumors have swirled for far too long, but the latest one is that we'll get a straight 50 f/1.4 USM II sequel to the non-L 50 f/1.4 USM, which would imply the next 50L might be f/1.4L IS instead of f/1.2L II. But no one really knows. We just have to wait and see.

- A

 

[hendrik-sg]

@ahsanford

If you are more than 25 years old, you will maybe not see the 50 you are waiting for in this life :'(

First 18-55 STM iii to xxii must be released, and 70-200 viii, then canon will notice, that people glue the lenses to their phone and print their pictures directly from the lens on their toilet paper ;D

 

[ahsanford]

I tried the standard 'scale off of the mount' move in PS, and this is what we've got. There's a small projection delta between the two in how they were shot, but largely:

• Just about the exact same size, give or take some small projection/scaling errors on my part.
  
  
• No hinge in the tripod ring, so they've retained the prior setup. You'll still have to dismount to get this one off -- it did not change to the 70-200 f/4L style.
  
  
• Hard to tell for sure if we've got a 77 or 82 filter due to some end projection differences. Common sense says we'd get an 82 here to be consistent with the other f/2.8L zooms, but the width of the two end pieces is nearly identical in PS (as shot).

- A

 

[timmy_650]

My prediction for the 2.8 is they are going to change the filters to 82 and better IS. On a 5Dm3 I think it will perform very similar to the M2. But on the 5DsR you will be able to see the difference and that will be more apparent on the 5Dsrm2 when that comes out in a year or so.

 

[ahsanford]

@ahsanford

If you are more than 25 years old, you will maybe not see the 50 you are waiting for in this life :'(

But they'll surely offer a new 50, even if it's not the new 50 I want.

I also may just snap up a refurb 50L if I get bored of waiting. That said, my old 50 f/1.4 USM can still reel in some good stuff. Took this one on my 'ancient' T1i this weekend while Canon was servicing my 5D3.

- A

 

[Jacen]

That is an awesome picture ahsanford.

I feel your desire about the 50 as while I make most of my money with my 70-200 2.8 II I’d still take the 50 1.4 to keep if I had to choose.

That said, it’s going to be interesting to see what they bring out, improvement wise.

 

[MrFotoFool]

I predict a release street price of 2,899 in USA. I also predict a gigantic preorder list on the big camera sites.

 

[ahsanford]

I predict a release street price of 2,899 in USA. I also predict a gigantic preorder list on the big camera sites.

This is more of a steady seller of a workhorse lens, and has many have said there isn't immense room for improvement with this one. So I don't see it as a pent-up demand product like the 100-400L II, 35L II, initial EOS M, etc. were.

It will sell very well, don't get me wrong, but I don't see there being a mad run on it (more than usual).

- A

 

[edoorn]

I've been shooting the mk II version for about 8 years now; as far as I am concerned it will last many more. Can't imagine the III being that much better I'd feel an instant need to upgrade. We'll see, I might drop the II some day and need a replacement

 

[Maiaibing]

I tried the standard 'scale off of the mount' move in PS, and this is what we've got. There's a small projection delta between the two in how they were shot

Clearly the new lens comes in a much cooler colour - literately speaking. ;D

 

[Maiaibing]

Want to see actual tests before I decide anything.

I guess the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L III will have mode III IS (which is the thing to have) and will be even sharper and maybe a few more rounded blades to brag about. Overall small incremental steps for existing FF Canon owners.

Will it have some mirrorless trick up its sleeve - possibly...

Think the improvement of the new 70-200mm f/4 IS L will be larger as its getting stretched for sharpness after the arrival of the 5DS/R.

Probably more inclined to swap my 70-200mm f/2.8 IS L II to the new 70-200mm f/4 IS L II if it proves an upgrade of the already outstanding 70-200mm f/4 IS L...

 

[[email protected]]

maybe a few more rounded blades to brag about.

Yes, the one flaw I saw on mine was a bit of busy specular highlights that could have been tamped down partially with a more deliberately designed shutter pattern (more leafs, more curvature). I'd add to that the IS mode III. The lens is sharp, but doesn't come close to sharpness of the finer primes.

Take a look at the version II at 135mm versus the new Sigma at f/2.8...
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=1122&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

So, yeah, it's a sharp lens (for a zoom), but is there room for IQ improvement? Sure, lots. If a version III closed half the distance between it and a new prime, it would be quite remarkable. When the Version II first came out, many of the coatings were new. As a result, I suspect there are designs that can rely on materials properties to help with corrections rather than additional elements versus the time during which the version II was designed.

All that hopeful stuff said, I do suspect that the release will be a bit less of a landmark, and more of a small upgrade, coupled with design improvements that save Canon money on the manufacturing and maintenance. -tig

 

[Maximilian]

I tried the standard 'scale off of the mount' move in PS, and this is what we've got.
...

• Hard to tell for sure if we've got a 77 or 82 filter due to some end projection differences. Common sense says we'd get an 82 here to be consistent with the other f/2.8L zooms, but the width of the two end pieces is nearly identical in PS (as shot).

Thanks for the effort, ahsanford!

To me the lens barrel looks exactly the same.
So my guess in what is new would be:

• more cost effective design internally
• new electronics including new IS with mode III
• same optical formula, IQ improvements could only come from different materials or coatings and will be marginal
• maybe better aperture design (blade rounding) for smoother bokeh
• 82 mm filter to match sounds reasonable but I don't see these extra 5 mm in the comparison.
  So I'd expect it to stay at 77 mm.

Still interesting to see, what Canon does here and with the f/4.

 

[MartinF.]

So I quess the EF mount will be around for some more years to come?.....
Actually I thought there would be a new Lens-to-camera protocol, as mentioned in an other post - and maybe also another hint on the future for EF mount on a semi-pro and pro fullframe mirrorless or hybrid camera ahead of a launch of such a camera.

 

[FTb-n]

The Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8e is superior, especially at 135mm. Of course this doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with the EF 70-200f/2.8L IS II, but it is a flagship pro lens and Canon really care about bragging rights.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/11/nikon-70-200mm-f2-8e-fl-ed-af-s-vr-mtf-tests/

It's my understanding that Nikon's lens has a breathing problem that drastically reduces its max focal length for portrait work. I would be curious to see comparisons of focus tracking and IS between the two lenses. Nikon has or had a reputation for IS issues at high shutter speeds. Still, I would suggest that the 1Dx2 helps the Canon lens out perform the Nikon on Nikon bodies.

Why would Canon offer IS for it's 50mm 1.4 when it still sells the 1.2? The only one who would get IS would be an upgrade to the current 1.2.

For same reasons that Canon created the 35 2.0 and the 85 1.4 with IS instead of adding IS to their faster counterparts. I'm guessing that the IS is easier to impliment with smaller elements. Plus, slower lenses may benefit more from IS. My interest is with controlled motion blur where I don't really need f1.2, but f1.4 would be ideal for other needs.