*UPDATE*
I addressed Tilt-Shift, Macro and Teleconverters, I didn’t copy/paste that stuff over. Sorry about that.
Be sure to scroll down for part 1
I think there are far more people eager to see what lenses Canon has coming down the pipeline. I know I am.
I think this is going to be the year of the lens from Canon. I truly expect a lot of upgrades and a couple of new lenses.
Without further ado…….
I could see these three announced February 9, 2010.
14-24 f/2.8L
– An ultra wide for full frame that finally makes Canon users happy.
24-70 f/2.8L IS
– Upgraded coating, build and the much desired image stabilization. I personally think Nikon royally dropped the ball not VRing their 24-70.
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
– The current model is very good, but I wouldn’t call it great (don’t flame me too hard for saying that, I do own one) . The lens will get an upgraded IS and better optical performance, especially at 200mm. Lighter weight would be a welcomed bonus.
World Cup & Big White Lenses
I think we could definitely see updated big white lenses f0r the World Cup. I think 3 lenses will get upgraded.
– 300 f/2.8L IS II
– 400 f/2.8L IS II
– 500 f/4L IS II
No 600 f/4L IS upgrade for the time being. We’ve seen the patent for the 600 f/4 DO, I think that would be an amazing seller for Canon and will be an addition to the lineup. A new 600 f/4L IS in 2011.
New pair of fisheyes
– If Canon is serious about keeping APS-C around, they need an EF-S fisheye. I think the Nikon 10.5mm fisheye is too expensive for a crop lens. I could see the following 2 fisheyes.
– EF-S 10mm f/4 Fisheye
– EF 15mm f/2.8L II Fisheye
What about regular primes?
The following 2 lenses are due for an upgrade, I’ll predict one will get it.
EF 50 f/1.4 II
– The current 50 f/1.4 is one very old lens and among Canon’s most unreliable as far as build goes. The USM is dated and the AF motor isn’t the most reliable. The Sigma 50 f/1.4 is a much better lens (if you get a good copy). This should be upgraded and this might be the year.
EF 35 f/1.4L II
– The 14, 24, 50 , 85 & 200 are on a version 2. It’s time for the 35 to join them. I think we’ll see such a lens launched with the 1Ds Mark IV.
New Lenses?
Some kind of f/2 zoom will enter the lineup I think. I can’t even contemplate what the focal length would be, but something unique must be coming.
Teleconverters
I wouldn’t be shocked to see the 1.4 & 2.0 TC’s getting an update. Howabout adding a 1.7 like the Nikonians have?
Tilt-Shifts
I don’t think we’ll see a new TS-E 45 or TS-E 90 this year. There are bigger fish to fry at the moment, even as far as niche lenses go.
Macro Lenses
There is a patent for the EF-S 60 f/2.8 IS Macro. Could we see that in 2010? I’d wager it being a 2011 lens.
What won’t get upgraded?
I think the following lenses will stick around through 2010.
EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS
– Why bother? It’s head and shoulders better than the Nikkor 80-400 (slowest lens ever) and sells very well. Optically it’s great. The IS is very dated, but I don’t think the lens requires an upgrade over some other stuff.
EF 17-40 f/4L
– I want this lens upgraded, I want to see better corners. I love the size and weight of the current lens… and the price! Canon sells so many of these things as it sits, it must be low on the list to upgrade.
EF 135 f/2L
– This lens is marvelous as it is and really isn’t a “status” lens. The big white lenses don’t really need upgrades, but they’re definitely hype builders.
I have predicted 11 new lenses. My brain tells me that’s probably 3 too many. The big white lenses and fisheye lenses won’t be massive volume sellers, so I can see those produced alongside the volume lenses.
So the bold prediction? This will be the year of the lenses!
Part 3
I will focus on PowerShot and accessories!
cr
|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
EF 50 f/1.4 II – i really hope so this lens has really bad build quality compared to all my outher lenses and i hear the af is very unreliable in some copys
I’m look forward to a 14-24 2.8….but it had better be as sharp as the Nikon version…..none of this Canon 16-35 II blurry stuff.
Was in the market for the 100-400 replacement, looks like that is on hold.
Already got the Sigma 50 1.4….just couldn’t keep waiting on Canon.
New lenses are great..to bad they will have new prices as well.
I still think the list should include one or two TS-E (tilt-shift) lenses. Not only because I want, but because it makes a lot of sense in havin the whole set upgraded.
you’ve got bad copies at every lens, I think the current 50 1.4 is pretty good.. if you have a good copy ofcourse.. like any other lens :-)
Optically it’s fine, it’s just isn’t built well. It has the most repaired AF motor of any Canon lens.
I hope Canon’s 14-24L lens can use front mounted filters…or there’s little point to it over the current (and very sweet) 16-35IIL.
I’m wondering if there is some general manufacturing process upgrade, like a new type of coating that is cheaper to apply, but will sell for more dollars.
Canon needs to get their lens manufacturing standardized. This will save them money. They have multiple lens coatings, multiple types of IS, multiple types of AF, and I’m sure thats only the beginning.
To cut costs of manufacturing they need to maximize the use of common parts, materials, and processes accross the product line.
I agree with Leo Martins. The TS-E lenses, that haven’t been yet, all need to be updated… and long ago.
With the two latest L releases, there’s no reason to leave the 45mm and 90mm TS-E lenses at… whatever denomination they’re given. Like the 100mm f/2.8 an L upgrade with a few modifications in build would be more likely than a whole new candidate.
I know people keep looking for an upgrade on the 24-70 f/2.8 but as an owner I just don’t see it. I mean this glass is heavy enough as it is, maybe it’d help sharpness, but at the cost of hand-holdability? maybe they’d lose the metal construct and put in the plastic like the 100mm upgrade.
My Canon 50mm f/1.4 is wonderful, I’d never change it, but I understand how some folks out there could have issues.
Canon’s also been pumping out a lot of EF-S glass of varying overlapping zoom lengths; while I’m not interested in these myself, I wonder if they won’t plan a few more EF-S primes.
I think im in love with the 35mm 1.4. and i dont even own it. i hear so many good things about it. of course theres always room for improvement… but what would it be? IS?! (yes i know it’s a prime. but still.)
good job CR i’ll be there on saturday at CES.
Excellent, wish I was going. I’m going to try and get there next year. Saving my pennies to be in Germany for Photokina this year.
I think you forgot the Tilt Shift
TS-E 45mm f2.8
TS-E 90mm f2.8
Did you forget about them of you really dont think they’re due for an update?
They’re pretty old no?
50mm f/1.4 and 24-70mm IS f/2.8 would interest me, provided the pricing stays similar.
For “similar pricing” you mean that the IS version of the L lens will command a $500 premium over the non-is version then you will be correct. Expect a 24-70mm IS f2.8L to cost between $1,500 and $1,700.
What about a new 300/f4 IS?. Improve the optics, IS and speed when used with an 1.4x.
I don’t think Canon will introduce non-L EF primes (except for special ones like 400DO and MP-E65) because the non-L customers today use APS-C cameras and EF-S primes are lighter and cheaper to produce. And if you shoot FF you probably want L primes.
The last non-L (non-special) EF prime introduced was the 28/1.8 back in 1995.
Wow! That’s a lot of Glass!
It would be nice. I expect the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200. It would be nice to see them upgrade all the long glass too but that is a lot for one year, especially with the others. I hope they do it.
Just so the wishful thinkers know, here are the actual number of lenses Canon announced each year:
2004: 4
2005: 3
2006: 4
2007: 6
2008: 2
2009: 5
Also, putting together lenses with DSLRs, the number of items Canon announced each year was never less than 6 and never more than 9.
TS-E 90mm f2.8 still delivers very sharp image even on 21MP 5D mark II. But super-rotator design will be great.
Agreed. I was going to get that lens, but when I started running into reports about the flaky AF, I held off. I was thinking about the 85mm, which has better FTM.
If they upgrade this lens to the 85/100mm spec, then I’ll buy it.
With Canon having a new lens manufacturing plant
coming on line last year, who knows how many they can introduce in a year.
I’m looking forward to the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200
being released.
I think you are right about this, but to really seal the deal I’d need to see Canon commit to making EF-S primes. Then your logic is golden. Till then silver style.
Bring on the L zoom trinity.
Bring on the white super tele trinity.
Maybe a 35mm successor (but I dove into the deep end on this one and just got one, so fingers crossed no unless they give me IS, better flare control, and sharper at 1.4-1.8; eff it, make it f/1.2 and we have a deal).
Everything else can wait.
P.S. How many APS-C users are clamoring for a fisheye? If an APS-C user is desperate, don’t the Russians already make super affordable, and decent alternatives?
Comon 14-24 L. I’m holding off purchasing my ultrawide.
How about some premium EF-S lenses? With the 7D, we need them.
An EF-S 30/1.4 would sell very well, if the quality is better than the corresponding Sigma (which is great only in the centre, and pretty bad in the borders). I would definitely get one.
I would also love an EF-S 50-150/2.8 IS. The market is there: people like me who have the 17-55/2.8 would go and buy it. Here too, Sigma (and Tokina) has a head start, but can be easily beaten by adding IS.
I also think there’s a market for an EF 50/1.8 III. It makes an excellent portrait lens on APS-C, and the current one is optically pretty good, even if the mechanical quality is atrocious. I would happily pay 200-250$ (that’s over TWICE the price of the II) for one with the same optics but with a USM motor and a good build (meaning something like the 85/1.8 or the 28/1.8).
A prime fish eye lens? I think the Tokina 10-17 Fisheye is a better buy.
I do think we’ll see an update to the 35 f/2 sooner than expected. According to BCNRanking, the number one selling lens has been the Nikkor 35 f/1.8 DX lens for the longest time. Since these Japanese camera makers pay a lot of attention to their local market, I suspect Canon will offer something similar soon. I’ll be happier if it’s a pancake lens.
There were rumors earlier on this site about a replacement for the 35/f2 which I think is about 80 years old now? I’d love to see that, preferably EF but EFS would do, for now.
Same here, there were so many times I wanted to buy the 50mm f1.4, but the unreliable AF motor that dies always scares me.
Update the motor and optics and I will buy it day one.
+1!
+1 Canon – if you pull that one off right you’ll have sold me a lens.
Does anyone know what it would take to upgrade the old style IS system to the new one? If it is as simple as replacing a chip then they could issue new lenses with old designs.
I recently got tired of waiting for Canon’s answer to Nikon’s new APS-C 35mm 1.8 prime (IIRC its called “DX” in Nikon land, right?) and got myself the Sigma 30 1.4. And since fate hates me, we will definitely see a Canon lens in that price and focal length range very soon. ;-)
Like the 7D dropping a 100€ since I got mine hardly a month ago… *rollseyes*
Otherwise I am waiting for an update of the 100-400. I refuse to buy the current one. Would be my longest lens and at the same time the one with the worst IS (of those lenses that have an IS, yes…). And according to a lot of sources the current one could indeed use an update no only in the IS but also in the IQ department, but that impression could also be due to sample variation.
14-24 likely an L lens and will cost an arm, a leg and your left nut. Since it’s a wide I’ll be satisfied with my 17-40L f4. I would welcome a new 50mm with open arms.
I read in reviews that the f/1.4 is supposedly better built than “el plastico” f/1.8 II. Then I see the eBay listings for the 1.4 with broken AF and think otherwise.
There is more to build quality than metal mounts and “feel”.
Thanks for the reality check.
Don’t know how much a new factory can change their production schedule, but hopefully it can speed things up. Canon will be lacking in the EVIL front this year so they may be thinking to use glass to make their sales targets.
50/1.4 II – yes please! Preferably before I give in and get the Sigma.
100-400L – My most used lens. The AF is a bit slow on the current one so I wouldn’t complain if they made that faster. Updated IS would be nice too. I love the push-pull zoom but suspect Canon will please the masses and make it twist like every other lens.
14-24/2.8 – I’d prefer a 12mm start like Sigma even if it means smaller aperture.
The EF-S 17-55 is the crop version of the f/2.8 midrange zoom. It is good and contains IS. This IS is for the most part considered a worthwhile addition. Most who want the 24-70 IS just want the capability matched on full frame.
Maybe the IS version will be heavier, but probably no more than 100g or so–the 70-200 f/2.8 has a 160g difference between IS and non-IS, the f/4 versions only 55g. This is a not a huge difference and is certainly acceptable to people that want the IS in the first place. And if Canon is willing to use more high-end plastic for exterior construction like the 100mm macro, all bets regarding weight are off.
Sorry 14-24 that will allow front filters will not happen. A 16-35mm f/4 that is light and sharp would be ideal and still allow filters!
A 14-24 would cost you to sell/throw away your front filters too not to mention it probably weighing 2x of the 17-40!
My arm, leg, and left nut would also welcome a 50mm 1.4 II too!
Hey I was just thinking – can they do the opposite of a teleconverter? Ya know, some EF-S mount contraption that corrects for APS-C sensors to give the true focal length?
Since you could use the same aperture (right?) it’d be handy for lenses like the f1.2L and the other primes where the cropped sensor is a bit too long…..
Just a thought…
i don’t need the high end plastic… Ls are Ls because they are physically and optically the best what you cant get (when they were released) these lens are heavily used ones, by professionals, day by day. And i think, the new 100mm macro isn’t a good start for the future… So i hope they will make the new 24-70 as “brick” as it is now.
Any thoughts on the EF-S 10-22mm f3.5/4.5 USM? Update/refresh to an f2.8?
So let’s say the announcements are on 2/9 (although it would seem they would be sooner, CES starting this week and all), how long until these are available to the consumer? We talking mid-year at the earliest?
A 600mm f/4.0IS DO lens would SERIOUSLY blow a lot of minds out there. I would expect it to cost more than the current lens, and be in short supply due to demand for years after introduction. I would expect Canon to drop the glass version 600 on introduction of the DO, pushing some folks to the 800mm…
I’ve owned 3 of the current 600 f/4 IS lens in the last 5 years, and had a 400 f/4.0IS DO for a year…
So let me say that the 400 DO copy I bought new in 2008 was stellar, and the DO technology does work.
I want an EF 600mm f/4 DO IS USM lens. Great for wildlife photography but the EF 600mm f/4L IS USM is rather heavy at 11lb.
Talking about lenses intro’ed per year, was not the 70’s the decade of new fd glass? Like 10ish a year?do a large crop is possible?
On an EOS-1D Mark IV it would be an EF 780mm f/4 DO IS USM. With an Extender 1.4x II, we’d have an EF 1092mm f/5.6 DO IS USM, and with the Extender 2x II, we’d have the equivalent of an EF 1560mm f/8 DO IS USM lens.
For wildlife shooting, that would be incredible!
Problem with this lens is that the cost would probably be just as high as the 800mm f/5.6L IS lens – which is way more than most people could afford.
I just bought a 500/4L IS, and am loving every bit of it! Would like the 600/4L IS, but I know that I would not be able to handle it’s weight.
I Have saved enough for the 50mm f1.4 II..now i just cant wait till it comes out!!
w/ USM Please!
I think the most useful f/2 zoom lens would be in the portrait range. 50-85 for crop. 85-135 for full frame would be harder to pull off without a lot of weight. Wide angle zoom at f/2 requires the least additional glass.
Would like to see the 100-400mm updated with faster autofocus, better IS, and get rid of the push/pull design.
“Some kind of f/2 zoom will enter the lineup I think. I can’t even contemplate what the focal length would be, but something unique must be coming.”
Why must it be coming – because of a flurry of unsubstantiated fanboi rumours? It would be certainly a “cool” lens, one that would give Canon bragging rights (we have the fastest zoom lens, woo hoo) but I don’t see how practical would it be and if it even is really needed. To be so fast it would have to have fairly short local length so it appeal would be fairly limited.
Do you hand hold it Bryan?
That would be a waste of resources considering that some of Canon’s finest primes already exist with precisely those focal lengths. In controlled, portrait studio environment zoom lenses for portraits have very little appeal and they would never be as sharp as already existing primes. 50-85 or 85-135 f/2 zooms would cost a LOT more than already existing combos of actually faster (and sharper) 50/85 and 85/135 primes.
My prediction – more EF-S primes.
There is only one so far but I think that there is a big market for relatively cheap, good primes. I think that Canon would have a really good seller on their hands with an entry level body equipped with 2 or 3 cheap-ish primes instead of come crappy kit zoom.
180mm macro I S it will be nice.
“Fastest zoom lens” for full-frame or APS-C cameras. :-p
Olympus already has two F/2 zooms for the Four Thirds system: 14-35mm and 35-100mm, which in 35mm terms are equivalent to classic 28-70mm and 70-200mm zooms.
I sometimes hand-hold the 500L (or brace it up with a tree branch). But, usually it’s mounted on my Gitzo 3-series CF Systematic Tripod with a Jobu LW2 gimbal mount.
Not a chance.
Meh.
I’ll take the 14-24 f/2.8 thanks.
Isn’t optically I heard it was quite soft when compared to other lens wide open at 1.4 too?
Agreed. Would be quite a waste to do a 85-135mm f/2L – since we already have very excellent 85/1.2L and 135/2L lenses, with the 100/2 in the middle if you really need something in between.
I am thinking something like a 100-200mm f/2L that you can slap a 2xTC (maybe dedicated TC designed together with the lens?) to become a 200-400/4.
“100-200mm f/2L”
It has been discussed before – do you realise how big and heavy and expensive such lens would be?
F2 is a whole stop faster than f/2.8 so the front element of 100-200mm f/2L would be TWICE the area of the 70-200 f/2.8. I’d estimate very conservatively that 100-200mm f/2L would need more that 3 times the amount of glass that’s used in 70-200 f/2.8. Have a look at the pictures of 85 f/1.2 and f/1.8 side by side (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-85mm-f-1.2-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) – there is a little more than one stop between those two, now imagine similarly upsized 70-200 f/2.8.
Good quality glass required for such lens is not cheap either and as the elements double and triple in size the price goes up quite dramatically.
I really don’t think that such lens would be practical and economically viable to manufacture.
Yeah, but it says Tokina on it. The good news is that it’s cheaper :-).
That would have been cool years ago when we didn’t have any APS-C wideangles… Now I think it’s lighter & cheaper just to buy the right lens for the job.
Yeah I was told that and I’m aware of it but even when they updated the 85 1.2 to the MII the previous version was very sharp. The idea itself of buying a $1200 lens and see it updated a few months later bugs me a lot since I don’t swim in money lol…
What do you mean by super rotator? Area they gonna update it to that? Do you know?
Thanks
Pompo
http://www.nolaPIC.com
Absolutely. Canon’s 50, 85, 100, and 135L USM primes could all benefit greatly from image stabilization. Since it’s a burden to add IS to all of them, I think they’ll go for either a 50-135 f/2 EF-S IS USM or perhaps a 70-135 f/2L IS USM for full-frame. I’m guessing that the EF-S lens is more likely as it’ll be smaller & lighter & there’s little market overlap with the various 70-200 lenses as it’s not FF.
That’s called the 17-40f4
I want it bad too, I hope it’s as sharp as the 17 tse.
He means that the old design doesn’ allow
the tilt & shift to be rotated independantly,
you have to take apart the lens, rotate, then put it back together to get the same movements.
Just think, as the global recession ends,
Canon could have most of there lens lineup
updated, it will look very atractive to those that have held off buying camera gear.
Oh I see, but what do you mean by taking apart?
So the newer 17 TS-E the new design and new 24 have the new design?
Do you also know if the lens settings you used with TS-E are embedded in th exif of images
Thanks!
“Bring on the white super tele trinity”
Which 3 are you talking about?
400, 600, 800?
600, 800, 1200?
or other?
I don’t think they will do a minor update like that,
there is already some hesitation by lots about going
from no IS to having it.
Doh!
my left nut is already spoken for, come on 3D.
I don’t want to give up my right for the 14-24 too
:-p
I agree, once the 10-22 came out, it’s pointless to bring out a converter.
It could be a y time after it’s anounced
*any
if you don’t mind the ring highlights in the oof areas.
I’m more interested in a 200-400 or 200-500
to continue from the 14-24 24-70 70-200.
I hope you’re right about the 50 f/1.4 and 35 f/1.4L getting updated. I’ve had my eye on both. A 14-24 f/2.8 would be interesting.
Once upon a time I was Jonesing for a 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L, but I’ve read it’s a little too soft, and it has an old gen. of IS. I hope you’re wrong about that one and it does get updated.
I own the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, and I think it’s a great lens–focuses fast and (my copy at least) is very sharp. I really don’t see the need to update that one. I also don’t see the need to update the excellent 1.4X II teleconverter, but I would welcome a better 2X or even a 1.7X.
The problem that a new 50mm f1.4 lens has…is that the current 50mm f1.2L isnt massively better, just a bit better in evey way. So how can Canon update the non L prime without eclipsing the L model?
The 35L and 135L have the little to gain in an upgrade other than styling and nominal weather sealing. Optically, they are already fine performers.
The 50 f1.4 isnt built very robustly and it suffers from a lack of contrast wide open.
The 100-400L just needs an AF and IS update, optically its quite strong.
The 70-200 2.8 ISL needs an IS update, as well as an optical make over, its a bit soft compared to the f4 version, especially at 200mm
id like to see the 100-400 updated as well – has it is getting very old. It would be great if it was twist zoom, updated IS and around the same price; probably more wishful thinking.
My 50/1.4 died a couple of weeks ago: worked fine one day, picked up the camera the next day only to find the lens was dead as a doornail. Canon just did the return. I’ll be ready and waiting if a replacement appears with better build and better optics, especially wide open.
EF-S 50mm 1.4 II – 72mm diameter and micro USM (although ring USM would be nice!) and IS is what I expect. Tamron will own Canon with their 50mm VC if this is not sharp wide open.
The critical issue is sharpness and transmission. Therefore in prime lenses and very sharp zooms the IS is not very welcomed. The new solutions offer more effective stabilization (up to 4 EV) and more versatile behavior — for example you don’t need to switch off the IS when on tripod. Upgrading old version of IS is not expensive but normally is made together with an obsolete optic upgrade and then it is.
Sigma not Tamron…
I would love an alternate design to the push-pull of 100-400mm. But try Sigma 120-400 for once and you will notice that the standard twist zoom may not be so effective in moving that largish front element. Anyway, the 100-400 is incredible (for a zoom). The color & contrast are superb ! I rented it for a day, and am convinced it is one of the most indispensable Canon zooms if you like to do wildlife.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/98416954@N00/tags/canonef100400mmf4556lisusm/
Yes Justin, “I wonder if they won’t plan a few more EF-S primes” too a cheap 30mm f1.8?
The 135/2L could benefit a whole lot from IS. It would be a far more useful lens for low-light event and performance coverage. I leave mine in the bag most of the time in favor of the 70-200/2.8IS. It’s one stop slower, but with the IS it’s usable in places where the 135 requires a monopod.
There’d be double bang for the buck with a 135/2 IS. On a 1.6 cropper, it’d be the poor photographer’s 200/2 (216mm field of view). On the 1D series it’d be the equivalent of 175mm FOV, a full stop faster than the old 180/2.8 lenses we used in the film days, with the ability to handhold at much slower shutter speeds. I’d buy one.
Excellent question !!!
Some news ?
What about the small white telelenses (300 f/4 and 400 f/5.6)??
Grtz Jan
it’s an odd lens optically, it has some off axial chromatic aberration, which leads to color tinges on both sides of the blur that can look either terrible or terrific depending on your point of view.
As for sharpness, it depends very much on your copy of the lens, some of them are pretty fairly sharp in the center as of about f2 with the corners catching up at around f4 others just never get that sharp. I’ve ownd 2 copies, one that’s been decent and another that felt like it has a poltergeist living in it sometimes.
I think it’s definitely due for an upgrade, but either it’s price will have to go up, or the L will have to be upgraded also.
*Both sides of the out of focus blur
Not a lot goes back to the camera in exif data on the TS-E’s it’s one of the reasons they don’t double too well as a general use prime. so no info on how much tilt or shift you put in.
He means that the new 24mm and 17mm allow you to rotate both the tilt and shift axis separately, which means you can tilt and shift in the same direction or at any angle from each other. The old TS-E design locks them 90 degree’s apart which means you can rotate the hole thing but you can’t tilt or shift on the same axis at the same time, unless you have the lens taken apart and have them rotated and put back together. Which usually meant sending it to canon.
Well I’d gladly see an update to the 24-70 2.8L, I don’t care if they put IS in it or not, I just want it to be sharp, as it stands most copies of the 24-105 f/4L seem to be a lot sharper then the 24-70’s and I really do prefer my lenses to be 2.8 or faster.
I really think there’s room for an updated 50mm, whether it’s the 1.4 or 1.2 I don’t know, but either of them could definitely be improved.
I don’t really think the 70-200 f2.8 IS is in as much need of an update as the 24-70, but I suspect any updates we see will be at least partially to bost canon’s new “hybrid” is, which is fair enough.
Hoping for EOS 3D & 70-200 f2.8 IS II USM … :)
Why not 100-300f/4ISL for all using 24-105f/4ISL ???
70-200 f/2.8L IS II: “The lens will get an upgraded IS and better optical performance, especially at 200mm.”
I thought the lens is soft at 70mm and nice at 200mm ???
It should be possible, but maybe not practical to implement.
Strictly it doesn’t “correct” the focal length, as that is a lens characteristic. It could only give you the equivalent field of view as a full frame sensor.
I’ve wanted one for a while. I wouldn’t look at it from a focal length adjustment perspective only. Don’t forget while reducing the focal length, you get an effective decrease in f value too. Imagine the potential light gathering capability!
How about a 50mm f/1,4 IS? Could this be possible?
one prediction is sure:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/canon/70200ii-slant.jpg
Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS II USM
another image link: http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/canon/70-200ii_side.jpg
Slightly longer and fatter, but also strangely lighter?!
http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20100105_ef70-20028lis.html
Um, optically the 45mm and 90mm are perhaps the two sharpest lenses Canon makes, the supertele primes included. The only thing that could use updating is the mechanical workings allowing the tilt and shift movements in the same direction without modding like the 17mm and 24mm. The 24mm TS-E Mk I was in need of the upgrade optically.
The lenses that need to be updates long ago are the non-L wide angle to normal primes like the 15mm FE, 20mm f/2.8, 24mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.4 (though it is the youngin of the bunch being only 16.5 years old). The 15mm, 28mm and 24mm are all over the legal drinking age in the U.S., 21 years old and the 35mm isn’t too far behind.
Yep! Herer also http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/10010508canon70200isii.asp
Way to go, admin, you’ve already got one of the lenses right, though thins one was perhaps the easiest to predict.
Weel, the new EF 70-200 F/2.8 IS USM II is here: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=19092#ModelDetailAct
Not necessarily. The L primes are big in size and weight compared to the non-L’s, something not desired by FF shooters like landscape photographers. We want them light and compact for hiking. We also don’t need f/1.4 speed. The non-L wide angles are among the oldest designs Canon still sells, predating the digital era. Here are all the Canon non-L primes introduced before the Apple QuickTake 100 (the first consumer digital camera):
15mm f/2.8 FE – 22 years, 9 months
28mm f/2.8 – 22 years, 9 months
50mm f/2.5 Macro – 22 years, 1 months
24mm f/2.8 – 21 years, 2 months
35mm f/2 – 19 years, 3 months
50mm f/1.8 II – 19 years, 1 months
45mm f/2.8 TS-E – 18 years, 9 months
90mm f/2.8 TS-E – 18 years, 9 months
100mm f/2 – 18 years, 3 months
20mm f/2.8 – 17 years, 7 months
85mm f/1.8 – 17 years, 6 months
50mm f/1.4 – 16 years, 7 months
The 85mm f/1.8 and 100mm f/2 are still fine lenses where an update is unnecessary. The 45mm and 90mm TS-E’s are superb optically needing perhaps only a refresh to include the ability to tilt and shift in the same direction without modding. I have no experience with the 50mm macro to testify to it and the 50mm f/1.8, is still good- a great bang for the buck lens. The rest of the field though…meh. Updates please.
that’s 6 too many lenses. only a few of the ones you mention have patents and are seen as in need of update by anybody other than gearheads.
realistically you can probably expect all the patented stuff to show up and maybe one of two more at BEST.
canon must update non L primes as well like 24/2.8 or 28/2.8, with usm and of course better optical quality.
in 2009 canon intruduced some new lenses above 1000$ 24TSE 17TSE 24IIL in this year will be some new non L( maybe EFS) prime lens. Personally i’d like to see a 30mm prime with usm below 500$.
don’t see the 400/5.6L on the site anymore… perhaps a 500/5.6L is on the way? Maybe even with IS… id pay 2k+ for that :)
Not to be redundant, but I too would love to see the 50 1.4 updated. I need a new 50 that is usable wide open. The Sigma looks great, but I keep reading about the lousy AF, which is keeping me from buying it. IS in a prime would be sweet, but I won’t hold my breath for that one.
EF-S primes would be nice, but think I would avoid them unless they’re optically amazing for the cost.
So much for my comments that this lens doesn’t need an update. It just got updated today.
Well, there are primes with IS, so why not a 50mm f/1,4 IS? Wuld be great, in my opinion =)
These rumours of a Canon f2 zoom have reminded me of a lens I used a few times years ago, but never owned. In pre-AF days Tokina briefly had an unique ATX 60-120/2.8 zoom – excellent for portraits, and perhaps surprisingly, an excellent landscape trekking lens used with a couple of prime wideangles.
Something like this would be possible as a full frame f2 lens, or as an EFS equivalent, but neither 60-120/2 or 40-80/2 sound like Canon lenses – they rarely go for anything away from the accepted norm.
An f2 wideangle zoom seems impossible, a standard zoom would be nice, but probably quite limited in range, which leaves telephoto, 70-200/2 would be huge and ultra expensive and cut across other models.
But as the 7D is primarily an action camera, how about an EFS telephoto zoom? Say 45-130/2 or similar, which wouldn’t have to be massive and could use 72 or 77mm filters. I know Canon have seemed ruluctant to develop EFS lenses, but the 7D is supposed to be a new category – perhaps it heralds more emphasis on quality EFS optics…maybe…
I am surprised that so few people are talking about the 50mm 1.2L. The problems with this expensive piece of glass have to be an embarassment to Canon. I tend to think that if Canon updates the 50 1.4, they will have to do the 50 1.2L at the same time. And yes, I know the 50 1.2L is a recent introduction.
At the risk of being repetitive, I want a super wide wide zoom to complement the 70 – 200 2.8 L lens for APS-C sensors. It does not exist from Canon. This would mean a 14mm – 70mm 2.8 L. Can we encourage great Red Father to do something that captures a full frame 21 – 105 mmm 2.8 L WOW. Now THAT would be a Killer lens!
Considering that the 28mm are normals for the APS-C cameras, I’m surprised to hear about a possible Canon EF-S fisheye before an upgrade to either EF 28mm lenses or a new EF-S 28mm lens.