Anyone care to guess on which lens might be announced after 35d?

[jayhai]

Bob I know you said maybe a 18-200 prosumer lens. as well as maybe a 28-300, but what

about an improvement on the 17-85. I wish canon could make me a more solid lens that did

not have the barrel distortion.

[PuppyDigs]

The EOS 35D was actually announced? I heard it was going to be called the EOS 7D,

(Elan Digital in North America).

[mkhan]

whatever is, but no EF-S

 

because,

1. EF-S is only for crop factored (pls correct me, if I am wrong)

2. crop factored was introduced to reduce the cost of camera

3. those days are going to end as technology is getting better day by day

4. If there have no future of crop factored camera why we will need an EF-S.

5. Canon knows that, thats why EF-S line up is one grade lower than EF line up.

6. So.. wait for the day .. No EF-S ..no crop factored camera !

 

 

Mohammad

[steve_dunn2]

<p>Quite likely an 18-200, though I wouldn't consider that to be a prosumer lens; the tradeoffs inherent in a hyperzoom mean that the only way to get optics which would satisfy a prosumer user would put it out of most people's price range. Canon's 28-200 is regarded as not the best of the 28-200s, and it wouldn't surprise me for them to introduce an 18-200 that is also not the best.</p>

 

<p>I don't expect any changes to the 17-85. Barrel distortion at the wide end is par for the course for a wide-to-tele zoom, particularly for a consumer model.</p>

 

<p>I won't be surprised to see an EF-S lens or two. APS-C sensors are going to stay, at least for the next several years, at the Rebel level, and the 20D successor and quite possibly the model after that will also be APS-C. The cost of sensors is dropping but not quickly enough for APS-C sensors to disappear any time soon. There's always a market for something less expensive, so even when a full-frame sensor can go into a 20D-class body for a 20D-class price, there will still be a big market for a Rebel-class body, which has to hit a substantially lower price point. And if the rumours are true that Canon is about to introduce a DSLR below the Rebel XT/350D, well, that's an even lower price point which will have to retain a 1.6-crop sensor even longer.</p>

[shambrick007]

How bout a EF 21/2.8 that's better than the Zeiss version to kill off all the Contax/Zeiss blowhards? <p>

Don't get upset, I'm kidding about the blowhard part. But it would be nice to see all the Canon wide bashers quieted for a whileﾅ

[mark u]

85mm f/1.2 L II. No wait, maybe Canon plan to announce that first - but it's coming.

[taner]

Some new telephotos would be nice:

 

Low-end: EF 100-300/4.5-5.6 USM II - The kind of optical upgrade the 70-300IS lens got (with a minor increase in price as well).

 

Prosumer: A brand new design, 100-300/4L lens priced somewhere between the 70-200/4L (to be discontinued) and the 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS (to be discontinued)

 

Pro: New design again, a 200-400/4L IS zoom (Nikon has got the right idea about the need for such a zoom I think)

 

I would buy the 100-300/4L lens on its first day of release...

[vincent_j_m]

It's not the 35D, it's the 33'VD' based on the EOS-33V body and 20D/5D type electronics. My sources tell me there's a 15-50/2.8 EF-S L USM, a 45-140/2.8 L USM IS, a 12.5mm rectilinear EF-S USM, a 8mm EF-S fisheye, an 18-70/3.5-4.5 USM EF-S, a 24-70/2.8L mark-II and a 40mm f/1.2 L.

[terry_smith2]

I'll be happy to see the 85/1.2L II (long overdue), 50/1.4 USM II (long overdue), and 58/1.2 L (also long overdue). The last one on the list would replace the late and mostly unlamented 50/1.0. It could easily be made to take 58mm filters as the original 58/1.2 did back in Canonflex and FL days.

[bobatkins]

A 50/1.2L and an 85/1.2L MkII are rumored, but of little interest to most people since few will buy a $1500 prime lens.

 

Some people suggest a 70-200/4L IS, but that's mostly wishful thinking. Actually be careful what you wish for since IS adds about $650 to the 70-200/2.8L, so an IS version of the 70-200/4L would probably launch at around $1200. Canon could easily then drop the non-IS version (like they did with the 300/4L) so you'd be stuck if you were on a limited budget unless you wanted the EF 70-300/4-5.6IS.

 

A wide range EF-S zoom would likely be a winner in terms of sales. People buying into the low end of the DSLR market tend to like "do it all" zooms.

 

The EF-S 17-85 does have significant distortion at 17mm, but a couple of mouse clicks in most image editors will get rid of it, so for me, it's no big deal. I wouldn't expect Canon to bother trying to correct it.

 

Otherwise there are no gaping holes in Canon's lens lineup. It's a matter of maybe tweaking some older lenses. I know a few people would like to see a better performing wideangle prime, but I don't know how many people would appreciate a $400 20/2.8 turning into a $1600 20/2.8L.

 

IS in the 400/5.6L would be appreciated by many users of that lens, though I don't think that lens is a huge seller and so it's probably not a high priority.

[glen peterson]

A 17-500 1.8L IS, for $50. It will be the greatest lens ever, an no one will ever need anything else.

[thomas_sullivan]

I still want a 22mm f/2 or f/1.8 (and it doesn't have to be an "L" either)...I'm not giving up on that.

[colindoust]

Why

 

What is the point of guessing anything like this. It seems totally ridiculous to me.

[bobatkins]

Sigma have both a 20/1.8 and a 24/1.8. I doubt anyone is going to make a 22/1.8 just for you!

 

The Sigma lenses aren't even very expensive ($400 or less). You may have a long wait if you really want a Canon made lens.

[thomas_sullivan]

"...I doubt anyone is going to make a 22/1.8 just for you!..."...i know....just drumming up support right now ;o)

 

actually, I already own the sigma 20mm f/1.8 and it works well. It's just that when I put the 17-40 f/4 on during the lighter hours, you would not believe how often when zooming i end up at the 22mm setting...kinda telling me that's what I really want.

[jim_larson1]

<i>Some people suggest a 70-200/4L IS, but that's mostly wishful thinking. Actually be careful what you wish for since IS adds about $650 to the 70-200/2.8L, so an IS version of the 70-200/4L would probably launch at around $1200. Canon could easily then drop the non-IS version (like they did with the 300/4L) so you'd be stuck if you were on a limited budget unless you wanted the EF 70-300/4-5.6IS.</i>

<p>

I concur with this assessment. It actually makes very good sense. Note that the logical companion would be the 24-105/4L-IS, which sells for $1250. <p>You may see even see something like a 105-300/4L-IS; although in this case I would expect the cost to be closer to the $1500 mark.

[pto189]

Bob's assumption is most rational. I bet an EF-S 18-200 f/3.5-5.6 IS at $500 price mark will be on every single XT. I also think soon or later the 70-200 f/4L will be replaced by a 100-300 f/4L IS at $1500 or even more. Will I buy that lens? I'm thinking. My 2006 budget will be 5D, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, and 16-35 f/2.8L. If the rummor is true, I will pick up the 55 f/1.2L and 85 f/1.2L as well.

[pbizarro]

This is not me guessing, just me and my wishful thinking:

 

1. Update the 35 f/2 to FTM and USM, with the build quality of the 28 1.8.

 

2. Ditto for the 50 f/2.5 macro, update it like the 100 macro.

 

3. 70-200 f/4 IS L: yes, I would buy this lens even at USD 1200, but please make it black.

[larry h.]

I don't think it will happen, but I agree with Thomas Sullivan. I would like a non-L 20-24mm/2.0 lens, even if it is in EF-S mount, but only if it is small, with a 58mm filter and has USM. I won't buy the sigmas because they are way too big, don't have HSM and are, after, all Sigmas, with the questions about future compatibility.

 

As long as the FD lens did not have rotating filter threads, all Canon needs to do is copy the FD 24/2 lens that used a 52mm filter. But since that would mean Canon would sell four different 24mm primes not to mention four L zooms that reach 24mm. Not likely. I'd even welcome an optical redesign of the 28/1.8, but I would like something wider, to match the field of view of a 35mm/2 lens as Thomas said.

 

BTW, a fast, small 15mm EF-S non-L prime would be welcome, too, but won't happen.

[robin_sibson1]

A 100~300/4L IS would be a very interesting lens. However, if you put an Extender 1.4x on a 70~200/2.8L IS, then that's pretty much what you get, and that should tell you enough about likely size, weight, and cost to see that there is no sense in which such a lens would be a replacement for the 70~200/4. Similarly, the occasionally suggested 200~400/4 would be in a different league in those respects from the existing 100~400. Maybe Canon will feel the need to counter the Nikon 18~200. Prosumer? Bling, more like.

[gary_ferguson1]

"I know a few people would like to see a better performing wideangle prime, but I don't know how many people would appreciate a $400 20/2.8 turning into a $1600 20/2.8L"

 

A pretty high percentage of 1Ds mkII owners would appreciate it! Indeed I'd guess there's plenty of us out there who won't be trading up to Canon's forthcoming 22mp uber kamera without it.

 

Surely the point is that Canon's top end digital cameras are now firmly located in the territory that used to be the exclusive preserve of Hasselblad and Contax 645's. So lens prices should be judged against Zeiss medium format glass just as much as against consumer 35mm.

[bobatkins]

I'd imagine that 1Ds sales are less than 5% of total DSLR sales (maybe as low as 1%) and that 20mm prime sales are way less than 1% of all lens sales.

 

Doesn't help you much if you shoot a 1Ds with a 20mm prime of course, but reality sometimes bites.

 

That's not to say Canon won't come out with a $1600+ 20/2.8L lens, just that it can't be a very high priority for them given that their primary business goal is to make money.

 

Even without a 20/2.8L in the lineup, plenty of users will upgrade to a 1Ds MkIII with a 24MP sensor, if and when Canon release one - and most of those who say they won't will probably break down and do it when they see their competitors buying them!

[gary_ferguson1]

Bob, you're missing the point.

 

Firstly, there's a growing view that the great DSLR pixel race is approaching

the end, one key reason being that Canon's current wide-angle lenses will

negate any further quality benefits. So if they want to keep that bandwagon

rolling then it's an issue they'll have to address.

 

Secondly, neither you nor I are privvy to the commercial realities of Canon's

business. However, they presumably feel it makes business sense to contest

the top end of the DSLR market, and I can understand why. Besides the

kudos to their brand I'd guess that margins are a lot fatter across the L range

than with the basic kit lenses. it's certainly been true in every business I've

ever been involved with that you make the real money by trading the

customer up through the range.

[bobatkins]

You have to be careful not to fold your own wants and wishes into predictions.

 

The great DSLR pixel race isn't yet near the finish line, though Canon are a lap ahead of the rest of the field. It will certainly go to 24MP in a year or two. After that, I don't know. It will be a case of rapidly diminishing returns.

 

The vast majority of pro level DSLR shooters are using zooms like the 16-35/2.8L and the 24-70/2.8L. I'm sure there are some wideangle prime users, but they are not the core market. Canon is smart enough to address it's core market first, then if resources are left over, they'll go for the "prestige" items (like the old 50/1.0L, which, of course, they eventually dropped).

 

I don't think many people shoot 20mm primes on their 1Ds. That doesn't prevent Canon from devoting resources to make a world class 20mm prime, but somehow I doubt it's on the top of their list. A world class 24mm prime might well be a better seller for example.

 

Canon also have to be careful. If they bring out a 20/2.8L USM for, say, $1500 and it still isn't as good as, say, the Leica 19mm f/2.8 Elmarit R (which sells for $3800), people are still going to complain. And f Canon bring out a 20/2.8L USM which is as good, but which costs $4000, people will still complain!

 

How much would you pay for the world's best EF 20/2.8L and at that price, how many do you think Canon would sell?

 

At some point I'm sure Canon will release new versions of their wideangle primes, but just what market they will aim at, I'm not sure.

I doubt they'll be able to have both world class performance and reasonable price in the same lens though.

[jcs56]

ﾓThe great DSLR pixel race isn't yet near the finish line, though Canon are a lap ahead of the rest of the field. It will certainly go to 24MP in a year or two. After that, I don't know. It will be a case of rapidly diminishing returns.ﾔ

 

I agree with Bob but there is a physical limit to accommodate more pixels in a 36.0 x 24.0mm, probably we will see these limitations close in few years... my neophyte guess, Any one have a idea?

 

PS. Sorry for my English.