Why a EF-s Macro?

[min_wong1]

I don't see there are any point people will switch from their 100mm

F2.8 to a EF-s macro. Also, even new DSLR buyers won't be interest

in Ef-s much I guess. We all know how fast that Canon announce their

new Digital SLRs. It's no wonder that a 25D or 30D will be announced

sometime this year. No wonder that EF-s won't work in their 40D 45D

or 50D in just a few years. The only situation that people will be

interested in this lens is that it comes like a kit lens which costs

within $100-200 like 18-55.

Let's enjoy our 100mm F2.8 Macro and expecting Canon to announce

more high end EF lens. A 15-55mm F2.8 L, new USM 50mm F1.4, 85mm

F1.4 sounds way more attractive to me.

[kiestphoto]

From my other post:

<p>As for why it is EF-S, those who argue why not make it EF, seem to not understand

how this lens works, and why it exists. This lens is a DSLR version of the 100/2.8. Film

users would use that. What it is, is 9 oz lighter, narrower, and shorter. It could not be so if

it were EF. Also, macro is hard to keep field flatness at wide sizes, that is why the Life-Size

converter for the 50mm is also a TC. This lens, if not EF-S, would be heavier, larger, and

not go to 1:1. Knowing Canon, it would also cost less, as I do think the rip us off by

charging more for less.</p>

<p>However, I don't think many will <b>switch</b>, I think those who were looking at

the 100/2.8 M, (like I am), might consider this instead.</p>

[mark u]

I think it's a portrait lens in disguise. Reason for EF-S? To protect the market for the 50mm f/1.4 and Compact Macro which don't have ring USM and E-TTL II distance encoding.

[knight_b41]

I just received my 100mm F2.8 for my 20D two days ago!

When I saw the announcement, I just went "Doh!" ... then "Who cares".

I totally agree with you, unless it is dirt cheap, I don't see much interest here.

[tommyinca]

My 2 cents, Why a 60mm EFs Macro?

 

Because there may

 

12.5 EFs?

15 EFs?

17 EFs?

22 EFs?

32 EFs?

53 EFs IS?

85 EFs IS?

125 EFs IS?

 

Comming?

 

I am sure a few of us will part with our pocket book for some of these. A 60mm EFs if it is as good as the 50/2.5 may be a choice for a new Canon Customers.

[knight_b41]

Do you think that in the not so distant future we could see a low-cost digital SLR that would accept only EF-s lenses? Marketing rules!

 

In that case, Canon is going for a complete range of EF-s lens and we may see soon a long-focal EF-s: 200mm or more.

[christopher_bibbs]

Funny, my 100mm macro came from KEH just last week. I shoot film and digital so EF-S wasn't a real option, but I like the fact that Canon is committing to the platform.

 

Plus, I'm a weakling and any time they can make the camera and lens smaller and lighter I'm all for it. I love my Rebel GII in all its lightweight plastic glory.

[digitmstr]

Actually, it makes sense. We can speculate that it will be lighter and cheaper than the fill-frame "counterparts", giving the equiv. of a 96mm lens. It will also be a lens with resolution, contrast & color rendition above the current EFs lineup.

 

20D, 300D & 350D users who were "stuck" between the 50, 85, 100 (both MACRO and non) will now have a very affordable and very good choice with the latest USM and FTM. I bet they'll sell quite a few...

[eoghan]

I'm not buying any EFs lenses because they will never be able to be used on anything other than 1.6 crop cameras. And I don't think the change is that far away.

 

It's a clever way to have people buy lenses that won't be compatible with future cameras. So not only do they get money out of people because their cameras are 'obsolete,' their glass is too.

 

It's the FD change all over again. Except this time there is nothing wrong with EF. The solution was EFs.

 

-e

[eoghan]

Unless the EFs macro is dirt cheap of course:)

 

But the 10-22 and 17-85 weren't. The 17-85 is significantly overpriced in my opinion for what it is. But of course it's selling well to people who want the most range in one lens. So wait for the price i guess. Here's the link:

 

<a href="http://www.pma-show.com/canon/006_ef-s_60mm_USM.html">EFS Macro</a>

[knight_b41]

Actually 1.6 crop cameras could be the cameras of the future. You can basically replace a very expensive and heavy 500mm lens with a 300mm lens.

 

With hi-pixel-density, low-noise sensors, Canon is creating a new format that could obsolete the EF lenses 10 years from now. Just a speculation...

[yakim_peled1]

<p> It is obvious that Canon believes that 1.6 DSLRs will be here for a long time. That is why it's expanding it's EF-S range. Anyway, as I said <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BBAy">in a recent post</a>, while it is a natural evolution, I believe it should be an EF one.</p>

<p> It is not impossible that Canon thinks it has enough EF lenses (24-70/4.... 70-200/4 IS....) and now invests in the EF-S line.</p>

<p> I really miss the "old days" when all lenses fitted all bodies...... :-(</p>

 

<p>Happy shooting, <br>

Yakim.</p>

[min_wong1]

There are many X-factors affect the life time of EF-s. 1st, How many of you will buy a EF-s lens if 1D Mark 2 drops to $1,600 in a year? It's really possible as 1D's life-cycle.

2nd, if Nikon, Olympus, Minolta, Pentax, Fujifilm... come out their first 1.3x factor DSLR in $1600 level next year or next next year. Do you think Canon's 1.6X factor DSLR can still sell like a hot cake?

[stefanovandelli]

"I really miss the "old days" when all lenses fitted all bodies"

 

They still do. Just ignore EF-s.

[jim_larson1]

Guys . . .please stop comparing the 60/2.8 EF-S Macro to the 100/2.8 Macro. A 60 is a 60. A 100 is a 100.

 

This lens should rightfully be compared to the 50/2.5 Macro. Cost $225.

 

I personally think the EF-S mount will be around for 5 - 10 years, but I do think considering Canon's EF offerings, the new 60 EF-S is the least useful product in the EF-S line.

 

Where is my $600 24-70/4L?

[digitmstr]

<i>>>please stop comparing the 60/2.8 EF-S Macro to the 100/2.8 Macro<<</i>

<p>

We are not, Canon<i> is</i>:

<p>

"Featuring a true 1:1 macro magnification ratio, the Canon Macro USM lens has a focal length equivalent of 96mm in the 35mm format. This very closely matches the EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, Canon's most popular single focal length lens"

[derek_linney]

I repeat my answer to a previous thread a few weeks ago:

<p>

Not wishing to fuel the "is the 1.6 factor / EF-S here to stay" debate but lets not forget that Canon shipped 1.3M DSLR's in 2004 and plans to ship 1.8M DSLR's in 2005.

<p>

Now, the vast majority of those are going to be DRebel/300D models in 2004 and all but a very small number DRebel/300D/350D (or 20D) in 2005. In other words there are going to be at least 2.5M EF-S compatible bodies out there by the end of this year.

<p>

So whatever Canon does in say 2007/2008 then there are going to be zillions of EF-S bodies out there and therefore a good market for EF-S lenses.

<p>

So to today's announcement: On a 1.6 factor body the 100mm Macro is just too long a focal length for a lot of macro work and the new 60mm macro will be a much more versatile tool (macro / portraiture) for the majority of 1.6 factor body DSLR owners - most of whom do not own a macro lens today [and many will own no primes]. I find myself using my 50mm f2.5 macro a lot more than my 100mm since I moved to digital from film. But it is an old design (and needs the 1:1 convertor for lifesize macro) so I welcome the new lens.

<p>

I also said that EF-s would have come of age when we got some prime lenses for it ... well here we are.

[thomas_sullivan]

jeez.........Canon leaks everything else, I wonder why they haven't leaked the price on the 60mm efs macro. It looks like an interesting lens to add to my present line up...and would be my first efs lens.

 

anybody have any "ballpark" guesses what Canon would charge for this?

[wildpicture]

Here in Europe it is priced at 429 euro. So I guess the price would be around $400 in the US.

[ryanjoseph]

Knight,

 

No matter how good 1.6x sensors get, 1x sensors will always have better resolotion, albeit at a higher price. I do not see full frame teachnology going anywhere for a long long time.

[grant g]

"...I like the fact that Canon is committing to the platform."

 

This is what matters. They have already sold so many 300D and 20D

cameras that there should be no worry that there will be a market for used EF-

S equipment in the future.

[jimstrutz]

I'm not in the market for a new macro lens, so I don't really care about this one, but I do believe that this lens is a clear indication of Canon's vision of the future. The intro of the 60mm f/2.8 Macro, is Canon way of beating another nail in the coffin of future low cost full frame digital cameras. I ain't gonna happen, and Canon knows it. In the next few years this will become clearer to all of us.

 

Full frame cameras will start to fill the niche that medium format gear has for the last few decades. APS-C sensor cameras will cater to the masses, and will continue to improve. Like it or not, we're all going to have to get used to the increased DOF, and other problems, just like our grandparents did when switching to 35mm. BTW, 35mm will not die, but it won't be a factor in the market place.

 

Full frame digital cameras will get less expensive, but they will not drop in price as fast as APS-C sensor DSLRs. The masses will continue to buy the smaller format, and that's where Canon has to invest their development money. Full frame cameras, having a smaller market share, will continue to cater to professionals and well heeled enthusiasts, and there won't be enough of them to drive the price down.

 

That's why this lens exists today.

[min_wong1]

One more question: If EF-s must times 1.6, why doesn't Canon directly name it EF-s 96mm F2.8 Macro?

[paul -]

<i>why doesn't Canon directly name it EF-s 96mm F2.8 Macro?</i><P>Because a 60mm lens is physically a 60mm lens, regardless of whether it is mounted on a Digital, 35mm, Medium Format, or Large Format camera. The "96mm" is just a convenience term so 35mm users know what field of view to expect.

[d._chan]

I think the reason for the EF-s Macro is mainly marketing. Photographers are not Canon's customers, the stores are. They want things that will sell easily. You can use the current EF macros now on the DSLR's but think about what a sales person can say now: "This is the new macro lens, just came out, made for digital, especially for your camera, etc". Look at all the commotion over this lens already. Could Canon have gotten all this buzz over the current macro lenses. This is not for people to convert but to sell to all the new owners of DSLR's that may not be as knowlegeable or care about compatibility. Besides, now Canon can add another lens to the pile in their print ads that show all their lenses to make their "system" appear larger.