New Canon lenses to be released(rumors)

[jediforce4ever]

Found rumors that Canon would be releasing these lenses in 2007....believe it or not..up to you guys...I cannot testify for the reliability of the sources supplying these rumors...so keep them as rumors for the momenthttp://forums.clubsnap.org/images/cs/smilies/smile9.gif

1) EF 200mm f2.8L USM IS

2) EF 400mm f4L USM IS

3) EF 10-24 f2.8L USM

4) EF 24-70 f2.8L USM IS

5) EF 100-400 f4L USM IS

slurphttp://forums.clubsnap.org/images/cs/smilies/biggrinlove.gif

[evandavies]

Nice list and all out of my budget I'm sure.

We'll just have to wait and see....

[PAFC2004]

Found rumors that Canon would be releasing these lenses in 2007....believe it or not..up to you guys...I cannot testify for the reliability of the sources supplying these rumors...so keep them as rumors for the momenthttp://forums.clubsnap.org/images/cs/smilies/smile9.gif

1) EF 200mm f2.8L USM IS

2) EF 400mm f4L USM IS

3) EF 10-24 f2.8L USM

4) EF 24-70 f2.8L USM IS

5) EF 100-400 f4L USM IS

slurphttp://forums.clubsnap.org/images/cs/smilies/biggrinlove.gif

Shouldnt this be in the lens rumours board?

EF 100-400 f/4L? Ok mate..

[Andy_T]

10-24/2.8 ... quite a hunk'o'glass, to be sure :wink:

For the low-light landscape photographer who doesn't like to use a tripod...
IS is essential in that focal length :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[PuR HART]

I'll take an order of number 3 and 4

[jediforce4ever]

10-24/2.8 ... quite a hunk'o'glass, to be sure :wink:

For the low-light landscape photographer who doesn't like to use a tripod... :wink:

Best regards,
Andy
not just that...but finally a 10mm FF lens for Canon users!!
gonna benefit the whole line of users...from the FF to 1.3x to 1.6x!!



Mods; please move the thread if inappropriate

[-MasterChief-]

10-24 f2.8 --- highly unlikely, and very expensive too!! just look at the 14mm f2.8L!!! OMG!

[shaunknee]

#4 looks good to me

[ed rader]

I'll take an order of number 3 and 4

i'll take number 4 only if it gets a serious weight and hood reduction and IQ is improved. otherwise i'm sticking with my non-IS 24-70L which is a very sharp lens.

on the 5d IS isn't that critical at this range and i would not buy the "new" lens just for IS.

oh, if canon expands the range to 24-85 and IQ is the same or better i could not care less about the weight and would be a buyer :D !

ed rader

[jediforce4ever]

#5 would definitely be a pretty big hit too!

[ed rader]

#5 would definitely be a pretty big hit too!

it would be priced much higher than today's 100-400L tho, and i don't think that's a good thing.

ed rader

[aLFaDaRK]

Found rumors that Canon would be releasing these lenses in 2007....believe it or not..up to you guys...I cannot testify for the reliability of the sources supplying these rumors...so keep them as rumors for the momenthttp://forums.clubsnap.org/images/cs/smilies/smile9.gif

1) EF 200mm f2.8L USM IS

2) EF 400mm f4L USM IS

3) EF 10-24 f2.8L USM

4) EF 24-70 f2.8L USM IS

5) EF 100-400 f4L USM IS

slurphttp://forums.clubsnap.org/images/cs/smilies/biggrinlove.gif

10-24 will never happen on FF, and if it's an EF-S, then it will never be "L" even if the quality is there. Not sure about the others, they all sound too expensive for me anyway though.

[jediforce4ever]

it would be priced much higher than today's 100-400L tho, and i don't think that's a good thing.

ed rader
but if its handholdable....lets say below 1.8kg...I'm sure people are willing to pay for it...f4 gives quite reasonable bokeh too...only issue here is the image quality.
If this lens gives me good IQ at f4...to me, its worth it.:)

[captiankirk28]

I will have a order in for #3 and #4 for sure that should be the ultimate dream team to go along with my 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM cant wait if it's true !!

[jediforce4ever]

10-24 will never happen on FF, and if it's an EF-S, then it will never be "L" even if the quality is there. Not sure about the others, they all sound too expensive for me anyway though.
pretty much to me too...but lets not forget that Sigma did manage to create a 12-24 FF lens...so I wont rule out its possibility...

Besides, even if true L quality aint there...I'm sure there is still a demand for it.The 5d is proving more popular with amateurs...which I guess this lens, if real, would be targetted at.

[ed rader]

but if its handholdable....lets say below 1.8kg...I'm sure people are willing to pay for it...f4 gives quite reasonable bokeh too...only issue here is the image quality.
If this lens gives me good IQ at f4...to me, its worth it.:)

i'm sure there would be buyers but one thing about the current model is it's very affordable. well sorta affordable :D .

ed rader

[Andy_T]

pretty much to me too...but lets not forget that Sigma did manage to create a 12-24 FF lens...so I wont rule out its possibility...


Well, from all I've read about that lens, the image quality is not in a range where Canon would put the 'L' level on it, and getting a constant aperture of f/2.8 on top of that... I'd relegate it to the land of fantasy or lens-designer's wet dreams.

Also, think of the price point ... canon already asks you to spend the same amount of money on the reduced-image-circle-non-constant-aperture 10-22 as they ask you to spend on the 17-40/4.0 L ... that would be a $ 2,000 lens, then.

Best regards,
Andy

[Tom W]

I'll take an order of number 3 and 4

And I'll take a 3 and a 5. I don't expect #2 will materialize, given that the DO covers that focal length already, not to mention that the 300/2.8 and a 1.4X gives you 420 mm at f/4 with good quality.

[aLFaDaRK]

pretty much to me too...but lets not forget that Sigma did manage to create a 12-24 FF lens...so I wont rule out its possibility...

Besides, even if true L quality aint there...I'm sure there is still a demand for it.The 5d is proving more popular with amateurs...which I guess this lens, if real, would be targetted at.

Well the 12-24 comment is true, but keep in mind its aperture is 4.5-5.6, not a constant 2.8 at a shorter focal length. So even if it were possible, I bet it would be huge and cost a LOT unfortunately. I bet the FOV would be insane on a FF camera though! :eek: Probably similar to a fisheye by that point.

[ed rader]

Well the 12-24 comment is true, but keep in mind its aperture is 4.5-5.6, not a constant 2.8 at a shorter focal length. So even if it were possible, I bet it would be huge and cost a LOT unfortunately. I bet the FOV would be insane on a FF camera though! :eek: Probably similar to a fisheye by that point.

good points. i heard this rumor before but mentally filed it away under wild-ass fantasy :D .

ed rader

[Woolburr]

At least #5 might be a viable option...I don't know that the others stand much chance of seeing the light of day. That 200mm diameter front element is a killer...........

[Citizensmith]

I think the EF 10-24 L is proof as to the real nature of the source of this list. Dreaming.

Wonder how long before this all gets relocated to the rumours/lenses thread.

[Non-Pro]

What's better for a crop camera, 24-70 f2.8L IS or 17-55 f2.8 IS?

[poah]

nikons 200-400 weights in at 3.2k and costs almost £4000 so you can expect a 100-400 f4 to a bit more and wight a bit more. out the range of most people

but if its handholdable....lets say below 1.8kg...I'm sure people are willing to pay for it...f4 gives quite reasonable bokeh too...only issue here is the image quality.
If this lens gives me good IQ at f4...to me, its worth it.:)

[Lord_Malone]

If this were real I'd be all over #2 and #3.

[Phideaux]

Am I missing something? Is not #2 already available because according to Canon:

"The EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM is the worlds first super telephoto lens incorporating "Multi-Layer Diffractive Optical (DO) Element", for camera lenses, and is considered a major breakthrough"

[jediforce4ever]

Am I missing something? Is not #2 already available because according to Canon:

"The EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM is the worlds first super telephoto lens incorporating "Multi-Layer Diffractive Optical (DO) Element", for camera lenses, and is considered a major breakthrough"
well...that aint an L-lens...

still...these rumors are still rumors...:)

[aLFaDaRK]

well...that aint an L-lens...

still...these rumors are still rumors...:)

I think DO lenses are considered a form of L lens, but I could be wrong

[ScottE]

I think DO lenses are considered a form of L lens, but I could be wrong

No, DO lenses have a green ring. I have been told that only lenses with red rings work well enough to earn the L designation.

[aLFaDaRK]

No, DO lenses have a green ring. I have been told that only lenses with red rings work well enough to earn the L designation.

I know DO lenses have a green ring, but I read somewhere on a lens review website that DO lenses are a type of L lens, in the sense that they are built with similar quality, use similar elements, but because they use diffractive optics, they are badged differently because it wouldn't be fitting to group them in with all the other L lenses.

The 400 f/4 DO has a fluorite element, superior build quality, and dust/weather sealing (plus it's painted white with a stripe, it just happens to be green), so it seems to support the theory that it's a type of L lens.

In fact, Canon Canada lists the 400 f/4 DO as the 400 f/4L DO!

http://canon.ca/english/index-products.asp?lng=en&prodid=980&sgid=7&gid=2&ovr=1

[ScottE]

In fact, Canon Canada lists the 400 f/4 DO as the 400 f/4L DO!

It is not listed as an L in the their Spring 2006 EOS System brochure. Maybe they have changed it since then.

Also interesting is that the EF-S 10-22 and EF 17-40 L both have 4 aspherical and one Super UD lens elements. Teh EF-S 17-55 has two aspherical and two UD lens elements while the EF 24-70 L has two aspherical and one UD lens element.

The type of glass used does not determine whether a lens is given an L designation.

[aLFaDaRK]

It is *Still* listed as an L lens if you visit the link, the title says 400 f/4L DO.

On a side note, another rumoured lens, the 800 f/5.6 DO IS, *apparently* a screenshot taken from Canon UK's website which has since been removed.

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/1DS_replacement/lenses/EF800_f56_DO_IS.gif

[freebird]

#5 would definitely be a pretty big hit too!

yeppers.........would love to have #5

[ScottE]

It is *Still* listed as an L lens if you visit the link, the title says 400 f/4L DO.


Yes, it is listed as an L in Canada and not an L in the USA.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=154&modelid=7468

Do we get the good ones and our friends to the south the substandard copies?

[aLFaDaRK]

But it shows that even if it's not marketed as an L lens, it's the same standard as an L lens if they were able to mix it up, or even if they debated whether to market it as an L lens or not. For the price, DO lenses better be a type of L lens. ;)

[SunTsu]

Do you guys all think these new lenses will come about if Canon announces a new lens mount this year?

[aLFaDaRK]

Do you guys all think these new lenses will come about if Canon announces a new lens mount this year?
Do you mean a new lens mount as in..the same type of change from FD to EF? Or a new lens mount as in the type of change from EF to EF-S. I highly doubt that Canon would switch mounts entirely, and I don't see why they would need another version of EF other than to accomodate for 1.6 crop bodies, which they have done. And even so, I still don't think these lenses will appear.

[Broncobear]

3) EF 10-24 f2.8L USM



I find this one very hard to believe....maybe a 14-24 but not up to a 10 ...no way.

[SunTsu]

Do you mean a new lens mount as in..the same type of change from FD to EF? Or a new lens mount as in the type of change from EF to EF-S. I highly doubt that Canon would switch mounts entirely, and I don't see why they would need another version of EF other than to accomodate for 1.6 crop bodies, which they have done. And even so, I still don't think these lenses will appear.

Well there is the other rumour on another thread that claims a new mount will be made to allow for better quality on new bodies coming out later this year. I just wonder if Canon would keep releasing new lenses knowing that a new type of mount would come out. i.e. an EFx or some other mount.

[aLFaDaRK]

I'm not sure how a new lens mount would really increase quality...either the lens gives good IQ or it doesn't, I don't think it's a question of being able to add more glass or whatever, but I wouldn't really know.

[Keith R]

I just wonder if Canon would keep releasing new lenses knowing that a new type of mount would come out. i.e. an EFx or some other mount.

Intoducing a new mount doesn't automatically mean they'll get rid of an existing mount - it is more likely (if it comes) to be an addition to the Canon range, rather than a replacement for something they already do.

[TTLImaging]

200 1.8 IS coming soon to a sideline near you

[TTLImaging]

Do you guys all think these new lenses will come about if Canon announces a new lens mount this year?

new lens mount will NOT replace EF except for entirely new camera line w/ much larger sensor (read: physical size / compete w/MF digital). Will not be to replace existing line of EOS/EF cameras only to supplement them. Besides new mount = bad rumor for most all consumers. If/when it arrives it will be targeted towards a very specific very high end camera model. So if you do not want to either sell your car or get a 2nd mortgage on your house as a consumer it shouldn't be a worry.

[Glenn NK]

Intoducing a new mount doesn't automatically mean they'll get rid of an existing mount - it is more likely (if it comes) to be an addition to the Canon range, rather than a replacement for something they already do.


This makes the most sense if a new mount is introduced.

[SunTsu]

new lens mount will NOT replace EF except for entirely new camera line w/ much larger sensor (read: physical size / compete w/MF digital). Will not be to replace existing line of EOS/EF cameras only to supplement them. Besides new mount = bad rumor for most all consumers. If/when it arrives it will be targeted towards a very specific very high end camera model. So if you do not want to either sell your car or get a 2nd mortgage on your house as a consumer it shouldn't be a worry.

I sure hope so. Somehow, I'm mentally prepared to buy a new camera body, but the lenses would really hurt. This is especially true, of course, once my lenses quickly exceed the body in replacement cost.

[BradT0517]

I want 2 and 3 but I would need the money first.

[Ken Cravillion]

200 1.8 IS coming soon to a sideline near you

If announced I would immediately order one...

[BradT0517]

If announced I would immediately order one...
If only they reintroduced the 200 1.8L

[Opa114]

how sure is it that this lens came out: EF 10-24 f2.8L USM ??
Does anybody know when this lens should be released?

[Barry H]

Not sure where you here about these rumours, but I am looking for a longer lens and it would be nice if they came out before the fall!!

[BradT0517]

Opa and Barry,

Just so that you know none of the lenses have been announced in any way or form they are basicly the lenses that the original poster wishes that they would announce.

[Andy_T]

Not sure where you here about these rumours, but I am looking for a longer lens and it would be nice if they came out before the fall!!

Longer than what?

As Canon won't build the 100-400/4.0 anytime soon, maybe just go with the Sigma 200-500/2.8 then :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[BradT0517]

Longer than what?

As Canon won't build the 100-400/4.0 anytime soon, maybe just go with the Sigma 200-500/2.8 then :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

Yea surprisingly it is only $7,000 and 37 pounds. Now if only it were white.;)

[AdamJL]

At least bring the 100-400 down from f/4.5 to f/4.
Doesn't even have to be constant.
Every little bit helps if you want higher shutter speeds.

[rklepper]

I would love to have this one: 3) EF 10-24 f2.8L USM. And with what it will cost it would not hurt Canon to throw in the new 4 stop IS. Heck I would even buy this lens in an f/4 version.

[johnms88]

Ok. Im starting to believe this.

Search for these lenses on b&h, the 10-22 and 100-400 are out of stock (i didnt look for the rest).

[sportpics]

Number 4 would be nice to have in the kit.:lol:

[col4bin]

ef 10-24 2.8L?? slap something like that on a FF and that is one crazy UWA.

[gregster]

Ok. Im starting to believe this.

Search for these lenses on b&h, the 10-22 and 100-400 are out of stock (i didnt look for the rest).

The 10-22 is back in stock, but I think it's because the 100-400 has sold quite a bit with the instant rebate on.

[ak_powder_monkey]

maybe 100-400 f5.6 prices will go down! (hahaha)

[noct]

10-24/2.8 ... quite a hunk'o'glass, to be sure :wink:

For the low-light landscape photographer who doesn't like to use a tripod...
IS is essential in that focal length :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

is there such a thing as a low light landscape photographer who doesnt use a tripod?

[achristian]

I will gladly take 1,3, and 4 please. I would love the IS on the 200mm.

[Thunderheart]

3,4 & 5 for me thanks. Would compliment what I have rather nicely. :D

[JohnnyG]

But let's not overlook the "kit" lens which hasn't been updated in forever! Or maybe since the 20D was announced? Anybody know?