If Canon could make one lens that they don't offer now, what would it be?

200-400 f4 IS...

I second the F4 200mm-400 L-IS.....

 

But I'd really like an f2.8 35mm-150mm L-IS

135mm f/1.4L IS. But a tad lighter and cheaper than the 200mm f/2L IS, please. (and much faster AF than the 85mm f/1.2L)

Since Canon has so many crop bodies (many more than full frame) should focuses its attention on EF-S lenses or

at least at lenses that could be useful on both bodies. Full frame has many standard zoom, many more than APS-C,

so I think canon should fill the gap. Here’s a comparison:

 

EF-S........................................EF

 

17-55 2.8 IS.............................. 24-70 2.8 L

 

18-55 3.5/5.6 IS.........................24-85 3.5/4.5

 

17-85 4/5.6 IS............................28-135 3.5/5.6 IS

 

18-200 3.5/5.6 IS.......................28-300 3.5/5.6 IS

 

................................................28-105 4/5.6

 

................................................28-200 3.5/5.6

 

.................................................24-105 4L IS

 

There’s the evident lack of EF-S zooms starting from an equivalent range of 24mm, there’s only 1 high quality

lens, the 17-55 2.8 IS, since the 28-135 should perform better than 17-85 which is poor at the wide range. I

think next lens should be the equivalent of 24-105 4L IS. I think the following should agree with me, if not so

I’m sorry!

 

JDM von Weinberg -> A Mark II of the EF-S 17-85mm IS

 

Ben Quinn -> 16-70mm f/2.8 IS

 

Tommy DiGiovanni -> EF 17-55 2.8 L

 

Ronald Smith -> EF-S 15-75mm f/4 IS L

 

Matthijs ClaessenE -> F-S 14-70mm f/4 IS

 

Andreas Braunlich -> F-S 17-70mm f/2.8

 

Tony Law -> EFS 15-70 f/2.8 IS USM

600 f/5.6L IS

Paolo De Faveri , Nov 10, 2008; 02:12 p.m.

 

13mm f2,8 EF-S with at least the same optical performance of the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f2,8. They should make it MF and not more than 800-1000$. That's really the only lens I'm missing for my system.

 

Ebay selling a new zeiss distagon 21mm at $2500 and even an used at $1500, I don't know how you come up with the price $800 for a lens to match zeiss quality, interesting wish.

1) EF-S 16-55 f3.5-4.5 USM IS for under $400. If they can sell the EF 28-105 f3.5-4.5 USM for about $230 then

surely adding their new low cost IS and producing and EF-S version (whioch has less glass) should be doable for

$400.

 

2) The EF-S 55-250 f4-5.6 IS updated with ring USM and a metal mount. I'd gladly pay $100 more for such a lens.

 

3) A 70-200 f4 L IS that wasn't a ripoff. I could buy a Pentax K200D with in built IS for the price difference between

the non-IS and the IS version of 70-200 f4 lens. What is Canon trying to tell us? Switch to another system?

 

4) EF 35 f2 USM.

 

5) EF 28 f1.8 USM (or f2) that is sharp in the corners.

 

6) EF-S 30 f1.8 built like the 50 f1.8 and for the same price.

400 f/5.6 with IS priced under $US1600.00

 

and, I'll add my votes to updated (improved) 50 f/1.4 (ring USM + IS) and 28 f/1.8 (USM + IS + improved optics)

 

Cheers! Jay

Anson, ebay listing is simply too much expensive. The Contax version of that lens is so rare and people is so crazy about that lens that the price became a totally nonsense. That's as simple as that. Zeiss is going to release a new version of the 21 mm Distagon with EF mount at a street price of 1399 $ (check their website). We will see then how the ebay listings will drop down once the new version will be available at that price.

So it's not a nonsense wishing to have an EF-S equivalent costing around 1000$.

a PANCAKE EF-S 30mm F2 or 1.8 (and then a slimmer 55D to match!).

Wow -- the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f2.8 mentioned 3 times (~3% of posts). Good thing it will be available in EOS

mount in a couple of months. Why does Canon make best-in-class freakishly great optics in the long end (200mm

f/2L IS!) and leave the short end wide open (pun intended) for competition?

Zeiss is going to release a new version of the 21 mm Distagon with EF mount at a street price of 1399 $

 

if canon is going to release the same quality 21mm as zeiss, it going to cost more than a MF lens with the add on USM, IS technology. It will still over $1399, I dont' work for canon, but you get what you paid for : - ) $1000 is unlikey they will make enough profit. To end user like me, I wish the have a 21mm f2.8 IS USM for $200...it's not going to happen.

Anson,

in fact I also stated that I want it MF. Honestly, USM AF and IS on a 13mm lens is totally a nonsense.

I do believe 1000 $ for a MF 13mm EF-S lens would be a fair price.

<i>"Why does Canon make best-in-class freakishly great optics in the long end (200mm f/2L IS!) and leave the short end wide open (pun intended) for competition?"</i>

<p>

Exactly. It is one of life's great mysteries!

I would like to see 2 lenses

 

400mm F5.6 L IS

 

20mm F2.8 L IS

It is not a lens that I would really want now if it came out because I am using 1D series cameras. But what would be great for the aps-c sensor users a 1.6x but reversed. So basically a 1.6 divider in a sense. So in theory it would make a 300mm f4 a 300mm f2.8 at full aps-c frame. 300 divided by 1.6 times 1.6 crop. In theory it would work to make a 300mm f4 into a f2.8 for aps-c but I am not sure how well they could make the optics for the IQ or if it would even really work to sctually make a lens faster. Any one have thoughts on this?

EF not EF-S of the following:

 

1. EF 10-25mm F4 IS,

 

2. EF 20-110mm F2.8 IS,

 

3. EF 100-300mm F2.8 IS.

EF 200-500 f/4L IS or 200-400mm f/4L IS USM

I wish 400mm f6.7 (or even 7.1) lens or 500mm f8 lens - normal lens, not a mirror lens.

The lens should be half the weight and price of 400mm f5.6 L lens.

The lens should be as good as 400mm 5.6L wide open.

I think the lens manufacturers have still not realised that now we can bump ISO on DSLRs and such long focal lenghts does not have big impact on maximum possible apertures that can be used. i.e. 500mm f8 can give quite good isolation of telephoto subjects.

I don't know--maybe their first SHARP one!? That would be a change...

15mm 1.4.

 

...for us 20/30/40/50D users that want something similar to the 24mm 1.4.

 

and, maybe a 30mm 1.4 to compete with Sigma's version of the same, which can only be a good thing for us.

 

Basically, more fast lenses for cropped sensors.

Maybe stretch out that 15mm to an 15-70 mm F/2.8 with all the trimmings IS, "L" etc.

effective 24-112 mm on the crop cameras, and have a hood come with the lens.

Wow! What a novel idea! And as long as we are in fantasy land, have the price be around

the 17-40mm range.

Marc Radema, 19-11-2008

A mild wide-angle with tilt and shift possibilities - not necessarily autofocus.

For architecture, but also macro where you want both the flower and the stalk sharp, for instance.

Something affordable!