|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
Now the claims start flowing
Received 3 emails in the last 10 minutes claiming to know which lenses are coming.
Canon will launch the 24-70 f/2.8L IS II and 70-200 f/2.8L IS II near the end of August.
Another Take
According to a reader, a pro sports photographer had told him to hold off on purchasing a 300 f/2.8L IS as well as the 500 f/4L IS.
I have a history dating back a fair ways stating we'd see an update to the big white lenses for the Olympics and World Cup.
I was told by an MLB photographer that Canon would be updating their big white lenses over the next “12-24 months”. That was in the fall of 2008.
Take #3
Could this confirm the new L macro rumor from a while back? An email and commenter think so.
CR's Take
I have no info from credible sources yet, I should see some insight in the morning (EST). I need to really sleep though!
thanks for waking me Dave
cr
My guess would be 24-70 , 70-200 and 100mm IS L macro.
Shame i dont want any of them really.
This is a cool rumor for sure! (runs off to count pennies for the 24-70IS) lol
Both lenses I’d buy (the 24-70 2.8 IS and the 70-200 2.8L IS II).
Time to start saving LOL.
Taking this with a big ol’ heaping of salt though.
As you should, I think we’re more likely to see updates to sport lenses.
24-70 IS, while it would sell fantastic, the timing seems to be off. More likely to see that launched with a new 1Ds.
There should be lots of info coming down the pipe now.
Finally a lens that has both 2.8 and IS in the mid range that’s L. No more will i consider the 17-55 for my crop body. Be gone plastic!
The 24-70 2.8 II/IS would make a fine “kit” lens for the 1DIV bodies that’s for sure.
Keep us post CR guy. This site is my food. LOL
I would love that kit! I’m holding out for the new 1D and a 24-70L with IS, hoping it’s released before I graduate in December!
looking at the technical specs it wouldn’t be locical to see that in new big whites.
Sounds more like a macro-IS (200/4 L IS macro?) or something for a 24-70 (or similar) Kit-Lens.
With a different type of IS and not just an incremental 1 stop improvement anything goes. While it is plausible that the EF 70-200 f2.8 lens might be the first to get the upgrade what made me think it wont be is because this lens was still being made recently. Surely Canon would halt production a year in advance to clear out existing stock for such a lens given it price.
I still think it will be a sport lens but since the 24-70 f2.8L is due for a replacement it could be that, but eventually most existing Canon zoom L lens with IS will be upgraded with the new IS in the next few years.
Going by Canon’s announcement the main improvement of this IS has a lot to do with macro photography were it will see the most benefit. This would rule out telephoto lens or at least not a priority to introduce it for that particular class.
Wheres’s the EF-S 18-105mm that is so badly needed to complete the EF-S line up.
I agree with you david. All I hear are lenses for professionalls. Lenses that costs a lot of money. I cannot affort them. I woulk like to have a lens like 18-105 EF-S 3.5-4.5 or 5.6.
Since they keep talking about this new IS being useful for Macro, that the 100/2.8 Macro is out of stock I’d bet that the first lens with this IS will be a replacement for the 100 Macro or maybe the 180. I was about to try and find myself a copy of the 100Macro, but I think I’ll wait a little longer…
A 200 mm f/4 IS Macro lens can also be used for telephoto purposes. :)
Ok, gotta start saving the pennies for the 70-200 IS,,, gonna have to hold up on so many Starbucks trips,,,,
My bet is on the big whites.
A new IS system will be an excellent justification for raising their prices.
That’s a great news. I was planning to buy a 17-40 and a 24-105. I think i’ll take the 17-40 first, and wait some months because I’m sure that Canon will sort out à24-105 with a new IS. It would be cool if they make it a little bit longer.
I doubt the 24-105 will be updated so soon. Its a kit lens after all. It will probably be updated with a new FF camera like 5DMkIII.
Not shooting EFS but selling them I would love to see kit lenses work on two things…
A. faster apertures. Not fixed necessarily but honestly wouldn’t a 2.8 to 4 18-70 or better yet 16-70 be worth 100 extra in the kits (at first till supply caught up) (I would actually love to see an L 24-105 2.8 – 4 as well. Nikon had that 24-85 2.8/4 Macro that was very nice and sharp)
B. Just be sharper.
The number one problem for lots of people that walk in and buy and Slr is that the kit lenses don’t really give them the POP! that they are looking for thinking they are going to get when they make the move from p/s to slr. Having a faster lens would help that immensely – the “portrait shooting ability” of a 70 at f4 on a crop camera is far..FAR…greater than a 55 at 5.6 and would make people really learn to love their entry level Slr’s
Sure could, but that would give canon 3 200mm lenses. Now if they replace the 200 2.8 II with a 200 2.8 III HIS macro then that would be something. I tend to think we’ll see a new macro lens, in the 150 range. Or added macro onto the 70-200 HIS II.
nods
they make one that is a bit longer
it’s over 2200 dollars, weighs a ton, and is 5.6 at the long end…
the much unloved 28-300
You have to understand the size vs. aperture vs. focal length relation before you ask for “it would be cool if they make it a little longer”
What do you want then? Those lenses would dominate.
Wonder if they would consider an “IS Package” — buy the 24-70 f/2.8L IS II and 70-200 f/2.8L IS II together as a package deal? Wishful thinking I suppose…
With the emphasis on macro performance in the release, we should expect a new 180mm macro and probably a 100mm macro as well. HIS won’t encourage me to upgrade my 100mm macro anytime soon — it’s just not needed when you’re shooting with flash (which I do 99% of the time w/ the MT-24 EX).
If I was someone looking to buy a 70-200 f2.8 IS or a 300 f2.8 IS (two lenses that I already own), I’d buy them NOW — not after any prospective IS upgrades. Since they both have IS already, I wouldn’t want to pay the premium of a new lens for the +2 stops increase. If you’re considering these lenses, I’d pull the trigger now.
24-135 wouldn’t be terriblly large, though it would be larger and cost more.
See now I have a 300/2.8L IS and was thinking of selling it to go to the 500/4.0L IS and then buy back a 300/2.8L IS in 6 months or so. The current 300/2.8 is stellar and now I think I should keep it as I may be spending an extra grand to buy one in the future with minimal upgrades.
That said the 400/2.8 and 500/4.0 both have little things that I would love to see improved and now there is promise that Canon has something new to put in them. And there is always the hope that if they are making other improvements they may polish out some of the little things that I want too.
I was also thinking about upgrading my 70-200/4.0L to the IS version (I also have a pair of 70-200/2.8L IS’s). But now I may just wait and see.
The only issue to new versions is that the value of my gear will drop while the new toys prices will go up :)
Oh well, my accountant will have more items to deal with this year ;)
Or, to your point, you could wait for the new lenses to be released and purchase the current models used at an even higher discount since they will be less so in demand. 70-200 2.8 IS goes for about 1400-1550 now used, you might be able to get another 10% off used. 1250-1400 could become the new standard for used 70-200 2.8 IS especially if we find out that the MKIIs offer other improvements like resolving power, lower CAs, better coatings, etc.
Should be fun for all.
I am hoping that the lenses which are replaced will be discounted because of the new ones coming out. If it is a lens I would like and it becomes cheaper then I might consider buying the older version of the replaced lenses.
Do you think the 24-70 f/2.8 will stay on the market like the 70-200 f/2.8 after (and if) the IS version comes out?
Oh how I am longing for a new 35mm f/1.8 USM (where did that rumor go …)
Canon doesn’t emphasize on macro in their text! They state that shift-based shaking is more pronounced in macro than angle-based shaking. On the contrary, they state that angle-based shaking is a problem in standard shooting.
So there is no need to start saving money for a new macrolens. I think the 100-400 is the first on the list to be replaced by version with the new IS.
cheers!
SarSal
I’m finding the 400 2.8 just too darn big these days, but I doubt a smaller lighter version is possible so I’m not gonna update for new IS on that, but the 70-200 2.8 I’d go for.
If people bought the 28-135 instead of the kit lens they’d get more of that pop from the longer focal length.
It might stay on the market at a lower price, especially for awhile while stocks diminish.
depends on the aperature, an F4.0 would be quite sizable, a 2.8 would be huge
might be a bunch of used L lenses on the market ;)
I’d think they’d keep the non-IS around for a lower price point
WOULD THE FACT THAT THE 100MM 2.8 MACRO IS OUT OF STOCK ALMOST EVERYWHERE HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF A NEW 100MM MACRO 2.8 “IS” (L) RELEASE?
OR MAYBE IT’S JUST A SIMPLE OUT OF STOCK SITUATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR LENS?
The Neutral Observer is wondering if Canon sees the EF-S system as a dead end street, that will give way to a full sensor in the next few years across the dSLR line industry wide. Since Canon makes lenses that stay in the catalog for decades, why release a new lens for a crop factor that might not be produced in 5 to 10 years?
The writer is wondering what planet the natural observer is observing the observer observe?
They’re adding direct print buttons to it…
but APS-C sensors are so small and inexpensive that they will almost certainly stay in existence, though they will increasingly be confined to entry level cameras. therefore we deduce that the introduction of improved low-end kit lenses will be important, as to keep Canon’s entry level cameras and lenses competitive in order to expand market share, hence the proposed 18-105. The Neutral Observer would be correct in that Canon does not see a significant future for high performance APS-C as a complete system, though they certainly recognize the advantage of those dense sensors for wildlife shooters, and thus will maintain a APS-C sensor in a decent body (the XXD line) for the foreseeable future. how ever, as for EF-S lenses that give APS-C cameras a competetive standing with their larger sensor siblings, such as the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, and to a lesser extent the EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM, will most likely not undergo improvements, as the consumers that appreciate the benefits of those products will most certainly appreciate the benefit of a larger sensor, the key for Canon in this regard will be to make a not terribly expensive larger sensor camera, one below the 5D and somewhere between the 5D and XXD cameras in terms of price.
my $.02
I suppose but 28mm is not very wide on a crop body and the 28-135mm has an ancient IS system.
I hope the 24-70 IS rumor is true. I just ordered the non IS and was able to cancel after reading the rumors. August cant come soon enough.
actually, 28mm on APS-C isn’t wide. its a 45mm (roughly equivalent), making it a normal to telephoto zoom.
true, but many P&S’s are in the 37-122mm range and that’s what a lot of first time DSLR buyers are used to. The 18-55mm kit lens gives about a 28-88 range, and they’re often buying that thinking they’re gonna get better shots of their kids sports, plays, beach and typical family outdoors stuff. I just had this conversation yesterday with a friend who is in this exact situation and thinks her P&S gave her more pop because it’s got a 38-140 4X zoom that says “5.8-23.2mm” on it and she’s thinking the DSLR 18-55mm should be much more powerful.
Yep, right on Zac, APS-C isn’t going anywhere at this point. Canon has no problem walking both sides of a fence even if it is confusing for consumers. Many people buy EF-S kit cameras and have no idea they will not work on some of Canon’s DSLR’s. Personally it doesn’t bother me. In fact, if they made better EF-S lenses like Pentax does I might buy a couple to have for my 50D (or 60D perhaps) and keep the EF for my FF’s. Pentax has some very nice APS-C 2.8 weather sealed zooms – I’d take Canon’s APS-C line much more seriously if they had lenses like that for it.
I’d think all the current IS lenses will eventually get updated with this Hybrid IS.
god I hope so. maybe a USB port too in that case.
If the lenses are supposed to be launched in August, don’t you think they would already have announced them? It’s July 23rd. I am no expert, but isn’t that normally how it goes? Announce the product several months before relase, to generate demand.
launch = announced, available = available
sure, and a GPS tagger…
Do you think 100-400 will be upgraded soon?
Hope so!
With the Olympics just around the corner…
and new tech available for their lineup:
*new is
*new lens coating(which opens the door to new designs)
I can see Canon using this event to get some of their
most popular lenses upgraded:(as rumored)
*24-70L 2.8is
*70-200L 2.8is
*300L 2.8is
*500L 4is
*100-400L (200-500? would fit with 24-70 & 70-200)
how many manufacturing lines does Canon have that make lenses?
1D3 was at last summer Olympics,
I expect to see 1D4 at the winter Olympics.
all with new glass.
It seems like I may be replacing 100mm macro this Christmas :) That would be about time Canon equals Nikon.
24-70mm may also get the cull and I am tempted with 70-200mm IS II. Time to rob a bank!
100-400 => 200-500 ?
it can be a 200-500, but there must be a 100-400 too for poor photographers (like me)
i can’t handle 24-70 + 70-200 + 200-500 ! (it will cost something about 4500$)
but 24-105 + 100-400 (that Costs about 2500$) is a nice choice for such a person.
I think canon will do one of these choices:
1- keep 100-400 and produce 200-500
2- upgrade 100-400 and produce 200-500
3- just upgrade 100-400
I think the number one is more reliable. because 200-500 will be for more pro photographers and 100-400 will be a bargain. if they upgrade it, it might cost more, something uncomfortable.
but i don’t think so!
Any idea about Aslan’s speech?
I want your ideas too…one of my friends is selling his 100-400 for 1000$…new is 1500$ here. it’s better too buy or not? any upgrade soon?
Yes but 18mm give an equivelent of 28.8mm and once you have got used to having that bit of width you don’t want to go back. Nikon’s 18-105 VR and 18-135mm lens’ are good and Canon should be aiming for that. That includes ring USM and a non-rotating front, even if they have to discontinue the 17-85mm
Canon’s rebate program was extended to end on 08 August. Maybe they are using that promotion to help clear inventory of some of the lenses to be updated. (By no means saying that all of these would be updated.)
Qualifying Products:
EF 200mm f/2L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 50mm f / 1.2L USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
EF-S 17-85MM f4-5.6 IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM
EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM
EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Hey I’m all for new Canon lenses. I think it would be great if Canon stepped it up on the EF-S front and offered some EF-S glass that is on par with Pentax DA* and Olympus 4/3 which I think offer the best dedicated crop sensor lenses right now.
I use it for backpacking wildlife lens as it compacts nicely and is quite sharp at 400 – it’s a great lens if you can live with the push pull design and lack of weather sealing.
And some of them did run out of stock
Now the question is WICH ONES are going to be updated and wich ones are just going to be back on stock? and WHEN ?
If a 100 2.8 Macro “IS” (L) is released (firstly announced), I suppose the price would be higher than the current non-IS non-L model
So in any case they both could be on sale at the same time, just like many other IS/non-IS lenses are right now
Why should Canon replace lenses that sell like hot cakes?
Why should Canon add a new IS for macro work in telephoto zooms?
Why should Canon “replace” a lens? That would look like a minor upgrade. The big money is with a completely new design.
Why should Canon use the new “macro IS” in professional lenses that are already quite expensive and have a good IS? They canot charge much more for those lenses. Instead of that, they they can just double the price for a consumer lens by adding that IS.
Why should a professional photographer want a macro-IS? For serious macro photography he uses a tripod and mirror lockup in most cases, and he knows that wind and the complete lack of depth of field are the problems that he cannot overcome with a better IS.
I say: it will be a consumer lens, for people that don’t want to use a tripod or mirror lockup. It will be a lens for general use, not only macro, probably a zoom, a ‘normal to medium tele’.
Canon is clearly looking to hype this new Hybrid IS so I really doubt they’re going to introduce it in a low cost consumer general use EF-S lens. I’m sure it will make it into all the IS lenses at some point, but they’ll probably release it with a something high end as that has always been Canon’s marketing strategy – “get the reputation from the pro cameras/lenses and sell boat loads of Rebels/500D’s/1000D’s in EF-S kits.
What I expect is: they will label a consumer lens with this new IS “somewhat professional”, beat the marketing drum like never before and make a fortune. And still, a “macro IS” might make its way into macro lenses or similar. What L macro lenses are there? Not so many. Is that a huge part of the market? No.
>Why should Canon replace lenses that sell like hot cakes?
Maybe to keep them selling that way? Actually, who here has seen mad sales of pancakes?
>Why should Canon add a new IS for macro work in telephoto zooms?
Because MFD’s are laughable on the current lenses? My crusty old G6 is better in this respect than anything I have for my 5D2.
>Why should Canon “replace†a lens? That would look like a minor upgrade.
>The big money is with a completely new design.
Slapping “New & Improved!” on an item is a time-honored way to goose sales, even if the only change is to put less product in the same size box. In the Canon lens arena, if you don’t want them to replace an existing lens, what hole do you see in their lineup that they could fill instead? Something to compete with the Bigmos?
>Why should Canon use the new “macro IS†in professional lenses that are already quite expensive
>and have a good IS?
Aren’t the customers who buy those the ones who’ll be most likely to buy something new like this?
>They canot charge much more for those lenses.
Nikon somehow gets away with it, not to mention Sony.
>Instead of that, they they can just double the price for a consumer lens by adding that IS.
They wouldn’t get many sales that way.
>Why should a professional photographer want a macro-IS? For serious macro
>photography he uses a tripod and mirror lockup in most cases, and he knows that wind and the
>complete lack of depth of field are the problems that he cannot overcome with a better IS.
You know that for a fact before the thing even ships?
Takumi Says:
“Why should Canon replace lenses that sell like hot cakes?
Why should Canon add a new IS for macro work in telephoto zooms?
Why should Canon “replace†a lens? That would look like a minor upgrade. The big money is with a completely new design.
Why should Canon use the new “macro IS†in professional lenses that are already quite expensive and have a good IS? ”
rule #1 if your product is as good or better than the competition you don’t sit back and enjoy the view for long… because your competition is hard at work to beat you to market with their new innovation.
from Canon press release:
“The new Hybrid IS technology incorporates an angular velocity sensor that detects the extent of angular camera shake which is found in all previous optical Image Stabilizer mechanisms, as well as a new acceleration sensor that determines the amount of shift-based camera shake. Hybrid IS also employs a newly developed algorithm that combines the output of the two sensors and moves the lens elements to compensate for both types of movement. Hybrid IS dramatically enhances the effects of Image Stabilizer especially during macro shooting, which is difficult for conventional image stabilisation technologies.”
does not say ‘Hybrid IS’ is only useful for macro, just has a greater impact on macro shooting due to the new sensor.(it now has 2 sensors)
with a new design, they have larger R&D costs. I’d rather get minor upgrades than no upgrades at all. also you are assuming they are only changing the ‘IS’ what about the new lens coating?
also if your view was Canons/and other manufactures view, we wouldn’t have metering, motor drive for film advance, auto focus, I.S., nor digital cameras.
Maybe built in wifi or bluetooth for the lens?
An mp3 player would be nice too but that dream lacks possibility.
In the meanwhile I am quite sure females have their gossip about celebrities and males have their gossip about toys…
There is no proof, no indication about replacements for “L” lenses. The only hint was a stupid sales rep of one mailorder house who turned a backorder of the f2.8 70-200 IS into a discontinuation, followed by an excuse for this error.
The only thing I can see are people who WANT this or that lens to be better. If I have it my way, I want a better 100-400 lens. But I see no hint that this is going to be available within the next 12 months.
… Or even 24 month.
Maybe not, the Dynamic IS also has dynamic EQ
if they up the IQ noticeably that would be some lens
but it has been wished and rumoured for some many years now and always a false promise
but maybe it is time
maybe for august:
24-70 IS with better optics, especially at wide end
180 IS L macro
35 1.4 Mk II L (although this one was already pretty good at Mk I and maybe not the most urgent need, then again they redid the 24 and TS-E and they seem to refuse to update the non0L primes, which is a shame, as a landscape 24mm f/2.8 with equal or better IQ than the 1.4 L MkII could be done for a LOT less, so maybe this makes sense to next on line, but only if they did the 24-70 IS so maybe yes the 24-70 IS!)
maybe one new EF-S, but four lenses sounds like a lot
and a few new super-tele with much modern IS for olympics time, at least on trial basis
well so many of those are 100% not due for update not sure you can tell anything from that
IMO the 24-70, 17-40 and some slow, high quality wide to 50mm primes are badly in need of an update; my guess is canon is not touching the latter, at least not for a long while, which is a shame
i mean they do have great wide primes now and great stuff for landscapes but starting at $1700 is rough when you might get a 24mm f/2.8 MkII or L for $850 that is at least as sharp at f/6.3-f/11 as the new 1.4.
anyway at least they do have superb options now, even if at great cost, so that is a positive
lens rumours do have a terrible record, much worse than for body specs, virtually none have ever been correct aside maybe for the 18-200 about a month early