New lens wish list for Canon (2011)

[dan_south]

<p>What new lenses would you like Canon to release this year? Which one(s) would you be most likely to purchase?</p>

<p>My list:</p>

<ul>

<li>An updated 35 mm f/1.4 (maybe with IS)</li>

<li>An updated 24-105 f/4L IS</li>

<li>An updated TS-E 45 with all of the features of the TS-E 17 and the TS-E 24 II</li>

<li>A new, fast, AF prime lens in the 45-55 mm range</li>

</ul>

<p>What's on your wish list?</p>

[bueh]

<blockquote>

<p>An updated 35 mm f/1.4 (maybe with IS)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'd love a selection of IS non-telephoto primes of any focal length! Doesn't need to be super-fast -- because super-expensive would be a dealbreaker...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A new, fast, AF prime lens in the 45-55 mm range</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I sometimes think that a fast 40mm AF prime would be very handy -- wider than the standard normal length, but not yet wide angle.</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p> I will be getting the MkII 35 L when it comes out, not fussed about IS but would like weather sealing and future proofing.</p>

<p> I will also get the MkII 45 TS-E, I have the 17 and it has had a dramatic effect on some of my image taking.</p>

<p> I am also very interested in the 200-400 f4 L with built in 1.4 TC, even if it is $6,000+.</p>

<p>So that is my lens budget done for the year (or two)!</p>

<p>What else would I like? A 24-70 f2.8 IS, before anybody says you don't need IS on that lens, I would like to point out that they might not, but I do. And the 24-105 f4L has it.</p>

<p>A 50L that has a different focusing system would be tempting, even an f1.4, though many love it as it is, it does have a reputation. An 85 f1.2 that focuses as fast as the f1.8 would be a winner too.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>My wish list is that prices would stop going up faster than you can keep track of.</p>

<p>Otherwise I'm pretty happy with the current offerings.\</p>

<p>I suspect that any new lens upgrades will result in at least a 50% price hike, which just pushes them even further out of my budget :-(<br>

<br />The only lens which is seriously in need of an update is the 400/5.6L, which really does need IS added to it</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>I'd vote for the updated 24-105, and I'd like to see a 100-400 f/4 IS.</p>

[matt_white4]

<p>EF-S pancake primes in the sub-$300 range: 18/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/2.8, and 70/2.8.</p>

[jonsjons]

<p>How about a 14-24 f/2.8? I wouldn't really need a constant f/2.8, but something wider than 16mm for full-frame would be nice...not that I could afford one right now....</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>I just bought a used Canon EF 17mm f4 L TS-E and was hoping to part with my Nikon 14/2.8 (for financial reasons). Although I really haven't even used it yet, I don't think it can replace my 14/2.8 100%, so I will add a Canon EF 14mm f4 L TS-E to the wish list.</p>

<p>P.S. I really hope Canon releases some full frame DSLRs this year, so that I can afford another used one in a few years time.</p>

[matthias_meixner2]

<p>400/5.6L with IS<br>

Update of 100-400 with latest version of IS<br>

Update of 300/4L with latest version of IS</p>

<p> </p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>EF-S 50-135/2.8 IS with ring-USM for $600-700.<br /> EF-S 30/1.8 for under $150<br>

EF-S 10-22 mk 2</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Well, I want a TS-E 17mm lens for under $1000 US.<br>

or a EF 100-400mm IS for $800.<br>

Although, like Bob, I'd be happy if they just stopped raising the prices.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>A 50mm, faster than f/2 that has the real deal ring USM and as good as the 85mm 1.8 is.<br>

I would buy that instantly.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>It would be nice if canon offered more EF-S(cropped camera) lenses that matched the L series lenses insofar as speed and build. Also scrap the 15-85mm f3.5/5.6 and replace it with a 15-85 f2.8, or a f3.5.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>I've got all the lenses I need but wouldn't mind the return of ECF on new DSLRs. I'd actually upgrade just to escape the slavery of the joy stick thingie...</p>

[alan_bryant1]

<p>I'm surprised you can't get a 500mm f/5.6 IS. Seems like it would be a hit among the wildlife photographers.</p>

<p>I'd like a reasonably priced, reasonably light, decent quality 28-300mm zoom. Nikon now has one, so there's hope.</p>

<p>All in all though, I'm happy with the lenses I have. And I'm glad I assembled a kit before the prices started going up.</p>

[nathangardner]

+1 to the 400mm f/5.6L IS. Maybe a 12-24mm or similar for a true superwide offering on the 1D series.

[zml]

<p><em>> 28-300mm zoom. Nikon now has one</em></p>

<p>You mean thee is a company out there called "Canon" that doesn't produce a 28-300 mm zoom lens..? Or you consider the Canon EF 28-300/3.5-5.6 L IS USM unreasonably priced, not reasonably light, not decent quality?</p>

[pto189]

<p>1) 35mm f/1.4L II. 2) 400mm f/5.6L IS. 3) 24-70 f/2.8L II with or without IS but no more than 1.6 lbs. 4) 50mm f/1.4 II with ring USM.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>28/2L (although if they were to do it no doubt it would be f1.4). 14-24mm f4L with Nikon 14-24mm performance but much smaller. But frankly I don't need anything really. 400mm f5.6 L would be a good idea at less than $2000.</p>

[zml]

<p>35/1.4 L..? Really? Can any current owner tell me what exactly is wrong with that lens? It is one of the finest lenses in the Canon's lineup in my experience, something that I've been using all the time for years with awesome rsults in terms of IQ. And even though everything can be improved why improve somethng that is already extaordinarily good before updating/redesigning optics that really needs an update... 50/1.4, 28-300, 100-400, 180 macro, etc. come to mind... The 24/1.4 was a notch or two below the 35/1.4 in terms of IQ and it got updated, and quite justly so. The long teles badly needed weight reduction and a better IS system and Canon did exactly that (and more...) But the 35/1.4..? </p>

[tdigi]

<p>Michael, I think weather sealing is what most want, I shot briefly with the 35L and its pretty spectacular.</p>

<p>My vote is for a small pancake prime around 35 or 40mm. I keep eyeing the Voigtlander Ultron 40mm f/2.0 SL II, I would love something similar with autofocus. </p>

[maderik]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm surprised you can't get a 500mm f/5.6 IS. Seems like it would be a hit among the wildlife photographers.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I doubt it would be much cheaper than the current 500 f/4 given that any new lenses are priced with new tooling and new dollar-yen assumptions (e.g. old vs. new 300mm f/2.8 IS). Easier to ask for a Canon 1.7x converter that combined with the old 300mm f/2.8 IS would give a 510mm f/4.8 (or 300mm f/4 to give a 510mm f/6.7).</p>

 

[ed_k__north_carolina_]

<p>I would like a 50 -150 mm f2.8L IS, NOT EF-S.</p>

<p>An updated 50mm f1.4.</p>

<p>Ed</p>

[maderik]

<blockquote>

<p>My vote is for a small pancake prime around 35 or 40mm.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You mean like a compact 35mm f/2 lens? It's Canon's second smallest lens - by the time you add an in-lens AF motor to the Ultron the size difference would be minimal.</p>

 

[jack_nordine]

<p>I like the idea of a 500mm 5.6, but would even he happy with a sharp 500mm 6.3. The 400mm 5.6 is very popular and I think if Canon or Sigma or Tamron or Tokina came up with an IS version of a 500mm 6.3, it would sell big.</p>