why there are no new L primes

[privatebydesign]

However Canon has left behind their L primes update, since there is no new 35L 50L 85L 135L replacements, and the 24L II isn't quite the sharpest lens wide open.

Since you're willing to go ~5 years back:

In 2006 Canon has updated the 85mm f/1.2, and the 50mm f/1.2 was released the same year.
In 2007 Canon has updated the 14mm f/1.4
In 2008 Canon has released the 200mm f/2 and 800mm f/5.6
In 2009 Canon has updated the TS-E 24mm f/3.5, and released an all new TS-E 17mm f/4 and 100mm f/2.8 macro IS
In 2010 Canon has updated the 300mm & 400mm f/2.8 IS
In 2011 Canon has updated the 500mm & 600mm f/2.8 IS
In 2012 Canon updated it's non-L 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm lenses, and released a new 40mm STM lens.

So, in the time frame you refer to, the 85mm L has been updated, the 50mm L is a new release, and the 24mm f/1.4 has been updated (though you find the not up to your expectations).

I agree the 35mm f/1.4 L is old, but unless you need that extra stop, the 35mm f/2 IS is a great lens.

As for the 135mm f/2, I'm not sure what you would expect from a mkII, beyond the letters "II" in the name. An IS?

The 14mm is an f2.8, not an f1.4.

 

[symmar22]

EF-S 10-18, EF 16-35 f/4 IS, EF-S 24, 400 F/4 DO II, 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS, EF-M 55-200... just not the lenses you want.

You are right it is a few lenses, but it is all relative for me since I do not have a crop camera (or an M one).

I am thinking about buying the 16-35mm f4 (finally a good wide angle zoom). The 10-18 and and 24 are likely good news for the crop sensor users. The 400 DO is obviously not a lens for everyone and the previous one was not very successful. I do not have much to say about the 24-105, but I won't trade my f4 L for this one. Finally the 55-200 is released when they do not make the (relatively unsuccessful) Canon M any more, with no successor announced.

In the same time, I would love to see replacements for :

20mm f2.8, 28mm f1.8, 35mm f1.4, 45mm f2.8 TS-E, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f2.5 Macro, 85mm f1.8, 90mm f2.8 TS-E, 100mm f2.

These are outdated designs, and IMO in need for a refresh. How many of these would sell compared to the 400mm DO ?

Hopefully, the new 100-400mm is coming soon.

 

[Antono Refa]

However Canon has left behind their L primes update, since there is no new 35L 50L 85L 135L replacements, and the 24L II isn't quite the sharpest lens wide open.

Since you're willing to go ~5 years back:

In 2006 Canon has updated the 85mm f/1.2, and the 50mm f/1.2 was released the same year.
In 2007 Canon has updated the 14mm f/1.4

<snip>

The 14mm is an f2.8, not an f1.4.

You're right, my typo.

 

[Busted Knuckles]

I agree that the 24 to 100 L prime space is getting long in the tooth. I do have the Sigma 50 Art and don't have a focusing problem - perhaps I am just lucky.

Haven't gotten the 35... yet

I do have the 16-35 f4 and the 70-200 II with the 50 in the middle. I don't have a big need for low light action shots so really fast glass isn't my issue. The other thing I am confronting is that I don't do massive prints, and 99.9% of my work is posted to the web in some sort or another and shared for computer viewing. This brings in all the questions about resolution - which brings about the observation that resolution may be "good enough" for some vast majority of the images now being taken. If that is the case, Canon has been pretty smart to improve the imaging of their zooms over primes.

I am an "M" and am interested in the meta bones speed booster. One could ponder a smaller mirrorless body such as a 7d-M (otherwise known as an Oly) w/ the speed booster. If Canon could do something "native" like that, yikes what an imaging system they would have in overall space. Combinations galore with fstops to burn.

Sorry for jacking the thread :-\

 

[Antono Refa]

This brings in all the questions about resolution - which brings about the observation that resolution may be "good enough" for some vast majority of the images now being taken. If that is the case, Canon has been pretty smart to improve the imaging of their zooms over primes.

Couldn't possibly be good enough - the local photo shop prints so many photos A0 size, two employees work night shifts to keep up with demand.

 

[PhotoCat]

You forgot the 50mm compact macro on your list, brilliant in the f8 - f11 range , but the crappiest lens ever wide open. It is one of the very few (if not the only) left over from the original 1987 EF releases. The old Nikkor AI-S 55mm was much better compared to the LOMO/Canon 50 Compact Macro f2.5. Come on Canon, your standard Macro is a shame, this one as well needs an urgent upgrade. What happened to the year of the lens ???

What do u mean by "crappiest lens" My copy is sharp wide-open in the centre at f2.5. I often shoot at f2.8 without any problems, despite the fact that my copy has some blurry right edge, which only shows up in shooting test charts. It is vy sharp wide open on the left edge and centre too on a full frame camera. It is a vy sharp lens good for food photography.

The only issue is QA like the defect I have and the loud focus motor noise LOL!

BTW, distortion wise, the compact macro tops 50/f1.8 & 50/1.4.

Changing topic... I don't care about "L" for now. Just give me an 85 f2.0 IS!!
There is currently no IS prime for a portrait lens. 100L is just too long.

 

[Arty]

The Canon 50 F2.5 macro tests out as excellent, but only goes to half life-sized, without their converter. I have the Sigma 50 F2.8 macro lens, but that lens does not seem to be listed on the Sigma website in a Canon mount. The Sigma 70 is also missing in the Canon mount, the last time I looked. Tokina also discontinued their 35f2.8 macro, a crop lens.
There must not be much of a market for shorter macro lenses.

 

[symmar22]

What do u mean by "crappiest lens" My copy is sharp wide-open in the centre at f2.5. I often shoot at f2.8 without any problems, despite the fact that my copy has some blurry right edge, which only shows up in shooting test charts. It is vy sharp wide open on the left edge and centre too on a full frame camera. It is a vy sharp lens good for food photography.

The only issue is QA like the defect I have and the loud focus motor noise LOL!

BTW, distortion wise, the compact macro tops 50/f1.8 & 50/1.4.

To begin with, I had to test 3 copies, before I could find one that was not badly centred (obviously yours is as well). Honestly, the edges are indecent at 2.5, and the complete coverage until the corners is not happening before f8. That's acceptable on the 50mm f1.8, not on a Macro lens. The vignetting is is also extreme until 5.6, and strangely it's the only lens I have that Reikan FoCal refuses to AFMA (seems the AF motor can not repeat focus properly enough). I have a 15mm fisheye that doesn't show the same issue.

The plus is the distortion is absolute 0, the field is perfectly flat (good for art repro), and it's a killer lens at f8, f11 and much better than most at f16. So I use it as kind of fixed aperture lens for architecture. Considering the price, it's not that bad, but again it compares very poorly with the Nikkor AI-S 55mm and AF-D 60mm I had before.

For a macro lens it is the absolute minimum requirement, and clearly shows it's age. I believe it's the only 1980's micro motor left in Canon's range (not sure if they still make the 135mm soft focus). I would buy immediately an improved IQ version with IS and USM.

 

[Larry]

Heavy glass means slow focus - it is difficult to move this amount of glass. Impossible to do IS.

Not 1.2 or 1.4, but -

Can you explain how the 400/2.8 escapes the "heavy glass" impossibility, ...and has I.S.? It seems to focus fast enough for many pro sports shooters.

Thanks

 

[sdsr]

I use the 50mm macro not for real macro (a 100mm or even the 180mm are more practical), but for the specifications of any 50-60 macro lens : ultra sharp , zero distortion, perfectly flat field and the ability to focus close. It has a use in (art) reproduction, studio photography, landscape and architecture. I used Nikon for 20 years before switching to Canon and the 55mm AI-S, then 60mm AF-D were the best lenses I had. They both could easily replace the 50mm of their time for general use, if you did not need 1.x aperture. I just cannot say the same with the 50mm Compact Macro (a 27 year old lens).

That's why I like c. 50mm macro lenses too, and that 55mm AI-S Nikkor is one of my favorite lenses - the best $125 I've ever spent and one of the reasons I'm glad to have a FF mirrorless camera (my lens is second hand, but I understand you can still buy new copies from Adorama or some such).

 

[kaihp]

I would suggest you take another look at the Sigma 50 art. I have it and am enjoying it.

OP just reviewed and blogged about the 50A the day before you wrote, so I doubt he needs to go back and take another look. His blog entry is here (semi-NSWF):
http://www.beyondboudoirphoto.com/blog/2014/10/outdoor-photoshoot-for-a-portland-couple