|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
What could be coming
Finding out what lenses are coming down the pipe has proven to be a difficult task. I have yet to find a really good source. I've asked around lately to figure out what's coming. Here's what I've been told.
Expect a big white lens or two to get updates in the next 12 months.
A pro baseball photographer ranked which lenses are likely to get replaced first. He wouldn't go as far as to say whether or not he had been testing any. He didn't deny it either.
1) EF 300 f/2.8 IS (Current model launched 1999)
– Very likely to get updated
2) EF 400 f/2.8 IS (Current model launched 1999)
– Probable that it'll be updated at the same time as the 300
3) EF 500 f/4 IS (Current model launched 1999)
– This and the 600 will be updated at the same time
4) EF 600 f/4 IS (Current model launched 1999)
– This and the 500 will be updated at the same time
All four could be updated in the same year. I predict 2010, but it could be sooner.
Primes:
1) EF 35 f/1.4 (Current model launched 1998)
– This will be updated at the end of 2009
2) EF 200 f/2.8 (Current model launched 1991)
– It's been suggested this will get IS. Don't hold your breath.
3) EF 400 f/5.6
– Everyone wants IS put into this lens. I don't think it'll ever happen. Thankfully I'm wrong a lot, because I think such a lens would sell quite well…
Zooms:
1) EF 24-70 f/2.8 (Current model launched 2002)
– This has been a hotly desired lens to get an update. Adding IS and the new coating would make it very popular. I have no solid information that it's going to happen.
2) EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 IS (Current model launched 1998)
– The most popular rumor for a lens is an update to this one. It's rumored Nikon is redoing theirs shortly, and I think it's time this one is redone by Canon.
New Lenses:
1) EF 500 f/2.8 IS
– One person has written me saying this lens is in the works. I don't buy it, its cost would be astronomical. With current high ISO performance, do we really need a 500 at 2.8? Canon really has no reason to get into it with Sigma. Let them have their big green lens.
What else could be coming?
Canon has no real competition from Nikon for fast high quality primes, so I don't see them updating the entire line in the next 18 months. We could see one a year though, starting with the 35.
I think they'll be updating a lot of L glass. They're done with consumer zooms for now. The 18-55, 55-250 & 18-200 should be enough choice for the crop users on a budget out there.
EF-S?
I don't think we'll see a new EF-S lens any time soon. The lineup is well equipped at the moment.
Wackiest idea I've been sent:
EF 24-70 f/2L IS – Yes, Olympus has f/2 zooms, but they're for a 2x crop. How big and heavy would this lens be? Nevermind the price tag!
cr
Wasn’t there a rumor that the 50 1.4 was being updated? Nikon just update theirs, maybe someone was confused…
hope the 24-70/IS L come true…. I’d love to see a lighter/cheaper prime above 400mm to… say a 500/5.6 IS or 600/5.6 IS… though if there is an MKII for the 500/4 IS then maybe the prices on the MKI will come down some ( a man can dream ;P )
There are definately a lot of lenses that need updated for the digital world, and the new higher photosite count cameras. With the poor economy, it might generate some sales to update the big sellers like the 24-70 and 100-400.
But if the 100-400 were updated, and changed to a non-push pull design with excellent optics, that might be the end of the 400 F:/5.6 prime.
I have to wonder how much more expensive the big primes will be when updated? Look at what the 800 costs…
Do you think the EF 200mm f/2.0 L IS USM lens drop in price (current value $4999.00)?
If they do upgrade the EF 200mm f/2.8 L II USM with an IS and improve the coating, will it be a white lense? I think it makes sense to upgrade and hopefully the price within reason instead of the current EF 200mm f/2.0 IS L @ $4,999.00.
One more thing, an EF 28mm f/1.8 L lens would be nice to have in their inventory! More importantly update the EF 50mm f/1.2 L lens.
Who cares about these big expensive lenses
I want a nice cheap and wide prime..something like a (ef-s/ef)24 f1.8 USM…
24-70L IS would kill 24-105L sales
unless 24-70L IS is priced at the high $1600USD
I want to objetcs EF-S (Zoom or Fixed) with opening F/2.8 or less for APS-C sensor.
example:
EF-S 10-22 mm F/2.8 USM (16-35 mm)
EF-S 15-45 mm f/2.8 IS USM (24-70 mm)
EF-S 10mm f/2.8 Fisheye (16 mm 180 °)
EF-S 15mm f/1.8 USM (24 mm)
EF-S 30mm f/1.8 USM (50 mm)
@ ludivine –
“EF-S 15-45 mm f/2.8 IS USM”
Make it f/4 and ~600$ and i got it!
(no reason for 2.8…there is the (expensiv) 17-55…)
Those primes sound good to…
EF-S really not much needed, I hope 24-70 IS
f2 or even f2.5 will be too great news
What about 135mm F2 L??
Nikon has a VR version already
it’s such a nice lens.
Time to update too.
The 300 2.8 II would have to be absolutely stellar to warrant replacing this awesome Canon lens.
Some would say it’s the sharpest, and best Canon lens ever. Having had one for a few months, I would not be surprised if this is the case (having not used all of Canon’s lenses, I can’t really make that call).
All I know is that the 300 2.8 is the most incredible piece of glass I have ever used.
While I doubt I could afford the likely $5000 price tag a 24-70 2.0L IS USM would command, I would certainly lust over one. 2.0 is nice even on a 24 prime. While the 80 1.8 isn’t that much of an engineering achievement, the 1.2L is a giant hunk of heavy glass.
If they can make a 24-70 2.0L and make it weigh less than 5Lbs, I’ll save all my pennies and steal a few from the Salvation Army jar to make sure I get one. I just hope it doesn’t end up sacrificing too much optical quality wide open to get there.
yeah a 27-70 2.0L would be too huge really carry around and use like a 2.8. I would still want one though!
So I guess the 70-200 2.8 is sticking around for a few more years?
I will wait for EF-S IS 55-150 F2.8 or F2.4 for less than 1000 EUR
A short prime 50mm F/1.4 IS would be nice for indoor.
The 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is not as sharp as the f/4.0, therefore an improved 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II would be very attractive.
A short prime 50mm F/1.4 IS would be nice for outdoor (dark landscape with city and a bridge) For indoor people may move to fast to use IS.
In my opinion Canon will IS camera bodies before IS’ing fast primes. It just makes sense.
So many new lenses, so much optimism.
In 2008, Canon launched 3 new lenses: 2/200, 18-200 and 1.4/24 II. They offer 60+ lenses. Divide 3 into 60, and you have to wait 20 years for a renewal. It’s a nightmare.
So many lenses are more or less unusable for digital sensors, mainly the all non-L wide-angle lenses.
Is there any indication that Canon could increase output of its lens’ development team?
2008 was a body heavy year… all indicators point to fewer bodies being introduced in 09 so we may see more lenses as a result
Crap. I just bought a 24-70L brand spankin’ new.
If they release a 24-70L IS, it will be interesting to see what the price point is. Also if they can improve the optics (i.e. 70-200 f4 versus 70-200 f4 IS) I might consider an upgrade.
ROFL @ 500/2.8
THAT is the wackiest thing on that list, sorry but I have a hard time holding my sides together just by imagining such lens :^D
BTW, I find the Sigma monster just a curiosity/freak of nature, without any use in the real world.
TBH, the only lens updates Canon needs to do is a new 50/1.4 and a 85/1.4L with mechanical focus.
hey sorry, off topic question. did anyome receive their order for the 5D2 at Adorama yet?
I would love to see a 90mm f/2 macro–even if it was EF-S. If Olympus can do a 50mm f/2 I don’t see why Canon can’t offer a 90mm….Then we could replace our 85mm f/1.8’s and 100mm macros with one lens. Heck, I’d even pay $600-$800 for it.
I have read the commantaires on sites “Canon Rumors”
on a problem the 49 EF against 5 EF-S.
I want to remove EF-S, continues EF lenses.
And the problem for EOS 50D, 450D, 1000D.
I suppressed casings (Capeur APS-C x1,6).
You make a new case (Capeur APS-H x1,3) as EOS 1D Mark III.
Eexemple:
– EOS 60D (APS-H x1,3) 12 to 16 million pixels + video mode.
– EOS 500D (APS-H x1, 3) 8 to 12 million pixels + video mode.
– EOS 2000D (APS-H x1, 3) 8 to 12 million pixels + mode without video.
with or without KIT “EF” 24-85 mm f/3.5-4.5 USM.
Voila
I would like Canon to update there 28-200mm and put an Image Stabilizer on it. maybe upgrade it to L status??
somehow I don’t see canon ditching APS-C and EF-S considering they just put out the 18-200IS…. looks like APS-H might be the format that bites the dust if the next 1D goes FF… lets face it…if they can make a 21mp camera that shoots a high frame rate (8fps+) then who cares about the crop factor…you can crop to 1.3x and still have a larger image than the 1dIII is delivering, and no more problems with going really wide when you need too… cropped formats are really just a side effect of current engineering limitations… as soon as the cost of sensors goes down and the processing power is there to manage high MP FF sensors (@high frame rates) then what is the point of a cropped camera?
“TBH, the only lens updates Canon needs to do is a new 50/1.4 and a 85/1.4L with mechanical focus.”
Eh??!! When we already have the 85/1.2L and the 85/1.8, both very well thought of? There are PLENTY of lenses that would justify an update/replacement, but the 85mm isn’t one of them. I am with you on the 50mm though….
I’d love to see an IS version of the 100mm 2.8 Macro. Any liklihood of seeing this any time soon?
Anthony, the 85/1.8 is a good lens, but it is not stellar. It is meant to be cheap. It is a 16 year old design, relatively slow (both aperture and AF), no weather sealing.
The 85/1.2L is awesome optically, but it is meant for 1D bodies. It is also too big and slow AF. Does not work well on 40D/50D (ever tried using it on those bodies? it sucks).
When I said I want a 85/1.4L, this is what I had in mind:
Sharp wide open with UD/fluorite/asph elements. No battery-sucking focus by wire, just good USM/FTM focusing. Weather sealing. Less weight.
I’d pay $700-$800 for that baby.
@ Steve R – I’m with you on your request
@ DeeWee – I use my 85/1.2L a lot on my 30D and 5D… why it should sucks ? After using 70-200/2.8L and 100-400m/4.5-5.6L for 3-4 hours on these 2 bodies without tripod or monopod, I could tell that the 85/1.2L is a real charm.
Rox, 30D is not 40D.
85/1.2L has a problem with 40D which not only that Canon didn’t bother to fix, but put in the new 50D camera as well. Basically the battery goes flat after 20-30 shots when using 85/1.2L on a 40D/50D.
I learned this the hard way – thought my 40D was defective, then read other people’s threads on the net and was “pleasantly” surprised to see the new 50D having the same problem. Clearly Canon didn’t even bother to put this lens on these bodies.
And why would you want IS on a macro lens? Not only that IS isn’t helping with macro, but it can potentially affect sharpness at high magnifications.
I want a 50mm 1.2 IS, 85mm 1.2 IS!!!!
Lets have some normal fast primes with an image stabilizer already.
I would even settle for f/1.4
Regarding the 85L on the 40/50D: the battery does not go flat, in the “charge” sense. I believe it is a software or integration error of some kind. Turn the camera off, or remove the battery, it will reset. I’ve shot some indoor sports with this lens and it can be glorious if you get your focus spot on. Even after a “dead” battery, I’ve gone on to shoot 300 shots.
I find if you press the AF-ON button and the shutter at the same time, it is likely to cause the camera body to report a dead battery. So, sequence them a millisecond apart, or whatever you’re physically capable. I certainly don’t get the errors when I do it that way.
I don’t see why they would redo the 300 mm f/2.8 L IS. It is hard to see how it can be improved, unless somehow Canon can make it lighter or smaller.
The 35mm, the 50mm, the 85mm all are excellent but have some obvious flaws that can be fixed in a new version.
@ms “2008 was a body heavy year”. I disagree.
We’ve seen four new bodies 2008: 1000D, 450D, 50D and 5D2. Same number as in 2007: 400D, 40D, 1D3 and 1Ds3. We expect for 2009: 1000D-sucessor, 500D, 60D and 1D4. Four new bodies a year, that’s usual business.
Canon’s lens output in 2007: 14/2.8, 16-35/2.8 II, 18-55 IS, 55-250 IS – four lenses. Output in 2008: 200/2 IS, 18-200 IS, 24/1.4 II – three lenses. Nikon’s output in 2008: DX 16-85, 18-105, 60 macro, T&S 24, 45, 85 and 1.4/50 – seven lenses. Three lenses a year, even this tiny company Leica can do more.
So, before we can dream of new lenses, Canon’s lazybones have to speed-up.
Personally, I’d like to see a non-DO 4/400mm at a reasonable price. An alternative would be something a 4/200-400mm zoom lens like Nikon offers (allthough at an uncomfortably high price).
DeeWee, I beg to differ. I would rate my copy of the 85/1.8 as very good indeed, and I have read many similar views. I don’t find the AF slow at all, quite the opposite in fact. And of course it has no weather sealing – its not an ‘L’! For those who want a faster aperture and weather sealing, there is the 85/1.2L. Your problem with using it on a 40D sounds like a fault with the camera, not the lens.
In short, Canon have this focal length well and truly covered. Of course there is always scope for improvements, however small, but there are many more lenses that are infinitely more deserving of an update – like a new 28mm, 50mm, 24-70IS, 100-400IS, 400IS… the list goes on.
wouldn’t mind if they gave some more options on the super-tele end of things… an affordable 500 or 600 L IS lens would be nice …perhaps in the 5.6 aperture range…. canon used to make a 500/5.6 in the FD days and Nikon had a 600/5.6 with the improvements in really hi ISO performance I think these kinds of lenses would have real traction… especially as more people get into FF (400 just doesn’t cut it for wildlife and the 400/5.6 was saving grace for APS-C shooters on a budgets…these lenses could over the same thing as the market slowly shift to bigger chips)… IS on these lenses would make them even more useful… just as long as the IQ is there
Canon have to realise a new 24-70 2,8 now. The lens they sell today is totally rubbish. It’s blury as hell in the edges on 24 mm. I do a lot of red carped work and in my job, the faces often comes in that area. The other problem is that the lens is extremly badly bild. The one I own now, is mye third one. They useally last for like a year. Then I have to send it to Canon for a tune up and then, maybe I can push it for another year before I have to buy a new one. I useually expect pro lenses to last for at least 3-5 years. This one don’t.
I don’t care if this lens cost like 6000 dollars if it’s good.
I really wondering about swiching to Leica and Canon 24-70L 2,8 is more or less the hole reason.
Please god Please, something sharp like Canon’s 14-24. A 16-35 III that is actually sharp? I don’t care nor do I car about cost, just a really good wide fast zoom. At the least, a 17mm prime