When I wake up before my alarm goes off (practically daily) my mind starts going like a train leaving the station. If I can get back to sleep before it picks up too much steam, I'm good to go. More often however, it slowly starts going, picks up speed, and within a few minutes is racing along the countryside thinking of anything and everything conceivable.
This morning, somehow I started thinking about my lens usage. I have the following prime lenses for my 6D:
EF 35mm f/2 IS USM
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 135mm f/2L USM
Then I started thinking about the fact that realistically, I could easily get along without the 85mm f/1.8 because the 100mmL is such a similar focal length and has IS to boot, and typically I stop the 85 down to at least 2.2 and usually 2.5 or 2.8. All that would really hold me back is the very fast focusing of the 85 which comes in handy when photographing my daughter (and when he becomes mobile) my son at play.
I also then started thinking about the fact that my favorite lens and focal length is truly the 135mmL and that I really only use the 35 and 50 indoors, more out of necessity than love of the focal length.
Finally, I thought about a tip I read one time regarding lens selection that, when deciding what focal length to purchase next, a person should consider halving, or doubling their current prime lens because that is such a significant leap that it provides some real value and versatility.
Then my mind went back to my least used lens, the 35mm f/2 IS USM. Double that focal length would be 70mm. That's close enough to 85mm, in my mind, that if I had a 70mm lens, I could probably do without the 85. Also... taking 70mm and doubling THAT would roughly be back to my favorite lens, the 135mmL. So... MY personal "lens that won't be made" but I'd buy in a heartbeat is...
35-70mm f/2L IS USM (or STM if there was no speed penalty in focusing). That's a 2x zoom range, so it's long enough to be useful but not so long that a very fast aperture (for a zoom lens) is prohibitive. It doesn't really give up much to many of the popular lenses in terms of aperture (the 35 f/2 lenses, 50 f/1.8, and 85 f/1.8 are the same, or 1/3 of a stop difference). And finally, it covers very common angles of view from (barely) wide angle to normal to (barely) short telephoto.
For this lens to be of use to someone like me, it would need to be of a similarly high image quality to Canon's latest L series glass. And of course the price would match - lol.
For me, I think I'd still rarely use the lens, simply due to my focal length preferences. But I'd be willing to pay handsomely to trim my lens collection from 3 lenses that (arguably) cover this (rough) focal range down to one, with little to no loss in wide open ability, and likely result in an improvement. And that's coming from someone who basically never uses zoom lenses. For me, I rarely use the 35 and 50 so being able to have a zoom cover both would be very valuable, especially when using the telephoto end, as I would do most of the time.
With my vast experience designing lenses in my head with absolutely zero real world experience or education, I'd assume that despite this lens having a large aperture, it could be made relatively small (for a zoom and especially for a zoom with a large aperture). Consider that the 35 f/2 IS, 50mm f/1.8, and 85mm f/1.8 are all small-to-medium sized lenses. I would think that a 35-70mm f/2L IS could be the same size or possibly smaller than the 24-70 f/2.8L II.
I don't think this lens will be made because the 24-70 lenses are so popular. Personally, I'd prefer a shorter zoom range with a larger aperture.
A 35-70mm f/2L IS USM plus the 135mm f/2L would be a dream combo for me. That's a 4x "zoom range" (yes, I know 71-134 is missing) at f/2 and would allow me to utilize my favorite lens almost all the time, but not miss out on the normal focal length range when I occasionally need it, and do so without necessitating 4 lenses.
So... what's YOUR "lens that won't be made". I'd love to hear about it, why it won't be made, but why you'd love it!
This morning, somehow I started thinking about my lens usage. I have the following prime lenses for my 6D:
EF 35mm f/2 IS USM
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 135mm f/2L USM
Then I started thinking about the fact that realistically, I could easily get along without the 85mm f/1.8 because the 100mmL is such a similar focal length and has IS to boot, and typically I stop the 85 down to at least 2.2 and usually 2.5 or 2.8. All that would really hold me back is the very fast focusing of the 85 which comes in handy when photographing my daughter (and when he becomes mobile) my son at play.
I also then started thinking about the fact that my favorite lens and focal length is truly the 135mmL and that I really only use the 35 and 50 indoors, more out of necessity than love of the focal length.
Finally, I thought about a tip I read one time regarding lens selection that, when deciding what focal length to purchase next, a person should consider halving, or doubling their current prime lens because that is such a significant leap that it provides some real value and versatility.
Then my mind went back to my least used lens, the 35mm f/2 IS USM. Double that focal length would be 70mm. That's close enough to 85mm, in my mind, that if I had a 70mm lens, I could probably do without the 85. Also... taking 70mm and doubling THAT would roughly be back to my favorite lens, the 135mmL. So... MY personal "lens that won't be made" but I'd buy in a heartbeat is...
35-70mm f/2L IS USM (or STM if there was no speed penalty in focusing). That's a 2x zoom range, so it's long enough to be useful but not so long that a very fast aperture (for a zoom lens) is prohibitive. It doesn't really give up much to many of the popular lenses in terms of aperture (the 35 f/2 lenses, 50 f/1.8, and 85 f/1.8 are the same, or 1/3 of a stop difference). And finally, it covers very common angles of view from (barely) wide angle to normal to (barely) short telephoto.
For this lens to be of use to someone like me, it would need to be of a similarly high image quality to Canon's latest L series glass. And of course the price would match - lol.
For me, I think I'd still rarely use the lens, simply due to my focal length preferences. But I'd be willing to pay handsomely to trim my lens collection from 3 lenses that (arguably) cover this (rough) focal range down to one, with little to no loss in wide open ability, and likely result in an improvement. And that's coming from someone who basically never uses zoom lenses. For me, I rarely use the 35 and 50 so being able to have a zoom cover both would be very valuable, especially when using the telephoto end, as I would do most of the time.
With my vast experience designing lenses in my head with absolutely zero real world experience or education, I'd assume that despite this lens having a large aperture, it could be made relatively small (for a zoom and especially for a zoom with a large aperture). Consider that the 35 f/2 IS, 50mm f/1.8, and 85mm f/1.8 are all small-to-medium sized lenses. I would think that a 35-70mm f/2L IS could be the same size or possibly smaller than the 24-70 f/2.8L II.
I don't think this lens will be made because the 24-70 lenses are so popular. Personally, I'd prefer a shorter zoom range with a larger aperture.
A 35-70mm f/2L IS USM plus the 135mm f/2L would be a dream combo for me. That's a 4x "zoom range" (yes, I know 71-134 is missing) at f/2 and would allow me to utilize my favorite lens almost all the time, but not miss out on the normal focal length range when I occasionally need it, and do so without necessitating 4 lenses.
So... what's YOUR "lens that won't be made". I'd love to hear about it, why it won't be made, but why you'd love it!
