PDA

View Full Version : How about a 18-55/2.8L

cactusclay
14th of June 2005 (Tue), 17:31
How many people would buy this lens if Canon would make it. I was just curious, because I've been waiting for a couple of years, to no avail. I would like to see this lens, built just like the 17-40 and 16-35, with USM internal focusing/zooming and weather proofing, as well as it being for full frame Cameras, so everyone could use it. Nikon makes one, although I think it's just for digital. Afterall, we are the customers and if enough of us are interested in this type lens, then maybe we could get the attention of Canon's lens design department. I don't know, maybe there is some marketing scheme at work, that would make this lens cause Canon to loose money or something, but I vote for it. Anyone else? :D
cactusclay
14th of June 2005 (Tue), 18:01
Wow, I thought a lot of people would be intested in this type of lens. I guess not.
RbrtPtikLeoSeny
14th of June 2005 (Tue), 18:11
Haha, chill man, you just posted this 37 minutes ago. :-) I think it'd be pretty cool! I sertainly wish my 17-40L went to 55mm, but 17mm is pushing it on the wide end. I don't think people would like making matters worse with 18mm.
tim
14th of June 2005 (Tue), 18:18
I wouldn't buy it, given the existing 16 and 17mm zoom lenses at the wide angle i'd just buy one of those.
cactusclay
14th of June 2005 (Tue), 18:23
Ok, how about 17-55/ 2.8 L with the same specs as above. I don't know how many times I wish my 17-40 went out to 55 or 60 or even 70, but I would settle for the 55 on the long end. I would just like to have a good one lens set up for weddings, or for most of it and the 24-70 isn't quite wide enough, on a 1.6 crop, among other things.
ed2day
14th of June 2005 (Tue), 18:27
From a marketing viewpoint, I think Canon looks at the coverage of a "suite" of lenses such as: 16-35L, 28-70L (now 24-70L), 70-200L in their f/2.8 pro lineup. 18-55L would be an akward fit though I think it's a nice range.
GyRob
15th of June 2005 (Wed), 04:10
i like to use the 17-40L as a portrait lens and 55 would be a lot better as 40 is just a bit short on a 1dmk2.
Rob
nitsch
15th of June 2005 (Wed), 04:29
Why not make an L version of the 17-85mm lens? I think this is an excellent range on a 1.6 crop camera, but the current 17-85mm is a bit mediocre quality wise. That is a lens I would definately buy. :-)
Andy_T
15th of June 2005 (Wed), 04:34
What about an 18-50/2.8 EX lens?

You could ask Sigma to sell you one of these (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=232):wink:

Best regards,
Andy
Salleke
15th of June 2005 (Wed), 04:43
Why not make an L version of the 17-85mm lens? I think this is an excellent range on a 1.6 crop camera, but the current 17-85mm is a bit mediocre quality wise. That is a lens I would definately buy. :-)

An L version of the 17-85mm lens? I buy it in a heartbeat!!!
cactusclay
15th of June 2005 (Wed), 05:41
What about an 18-50/2.8 EX lens?

You could ask Sigma to sell you one of these (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=232):wink:

Best regards,
Andy I looked at that pretty close Andy, but it doesn't have FTM focusing, the MF ring rotates in AF and it does not work with the focus assist light on the 580ex. I'm talking about something that does not extented when zooming and is just like the build of the 17-40 or 16-35 L lenses, only longer.
:D
Andy_T
15th of June 2005 (Wed), 05:59
Well, then I can't help you ... y'know, life is full of compromises :wink:

Best regards,
Andy