Your Canon lens wishlist?

[Pekka]

I would like to see

40/1.2L (on 1.3X it would be a nice 52mm FoV lens)

200 f/2.8L IS (so that I could leave 70-200IS home on tours).

16 f/2.8L prime with perfectly sharp corners.

200-500 f/4.5L IS (to replace 100-400).

[schmoelzel]

Ok......I'll play Pekka:

85 f1.0 - for really LOW light shooting!!

200 f1.8 IS - so I can finally afford the original when people drop them for the IS version

135 f1.4 - I love this focal length on my 1D and with a wider aperture it would be awesome for portrait work!

35 f1.2 - I am loving this focal length as well on my 1D and I can just imagine how great it would be with an extra stop of light!!

Pekka......can you make this happen with your 'pull' with Canon!!??:D

ps......just saw the Finnish Shouting Mens Choir in TO last week and they were AWESOME!!! Have you heard of these guys?

[Longwatcher]

The lenses I would like to see include:

a 100-500/2.8L IS as replacement for 100-400, but would settle for 200-500/4.5L IS as long as under $1500
This would be most likely lens I would get after 85/1.2, 135/2, and FE which are still on my list (in that order - sort of)

other lenses, less likely to see (or purchase)
16-35/2.8L II upgrade to 16-35 with better optics for eventual 22MP FF camera.
followed by 35-140/2.8L IS that will take extenders.
and then 140-560/2.8L IS just to one up everyone (it also need to take extenders).
Or something like the above set to improve the range and get it from four lenses into 3 at same time.

And now for my really cool lens I would like to see....
12-24/2.8L distortion adjustable (DA) lens allowing 180 fisheye circle to corner corrected lens. I am having trouble seeing how it could be done optically unless it is a function of the zoom (at 12 is 180 circle fisheye, at 15 is 180 corner fisheye, at 24 is distortion corrected), but would be cool if they could figure out how to get it to work at all focal ranges. Something for image scientists and engineers to work on. Get it to be at least 16-35L lens quality and keep it under $1500 and its mine (if I still have job at time).

Just my opinion,

[felix21685]

hah you guys are askin to much ;)

i would love to have
Canon 70-200 f/4L
Canon 17-40 f/4L
Tamron DI XR ZQ 99A9 whatever its called 28-80 f/2.8

some extension tubes and 50-60 dollar filter for each :)
alright whose buyin ?:)

[roanjohn]

Canon................bring back the 50 f1.0 L!!!! Or even a 50 f1.2 L (fast focus) would be nice.

That is on the top of my list.

And I am jealous of the Nikon 17-55 f2.8..........

So Canon, give 'em a run for thier money with the 16-60 f2.8 L!!!

If Canon introduce these two lenses.........I will snap 'em up like white on rice!!

:-)

Ro1

[ed2day]

I always wonder why they havent come out with an affordable 24-70L or 28-70L f/4 standard zoom to complement the 17-40 and 70-200 f/4.

[Tom W]

OK, we'll start at the wide end and work up!
Replace the 14/2.8L with a 12/2.8L of higher optical quality.
18 mm f/2L wide angle
Revised 24/1.4
Revised mid-priced primes from the 20/2.8 up.
22-85 f/4L zoom
New revised 50/1.4 with true ring-type USM.
200/1.8 IS or 200/2 IS
200-400 f/4L IS
560/5.6L IS prime
22-85 f/4L

For EF-S
18-70 f/3.5-4.5 USM (kind of like the 28-105 in build and price)
15-50 f/2.8
Perhaps a range of fast primes - 14/2, 20/1.8, 30/1.4, 55 mm (though the standard 50 is fine here)

[Camo 757]

400 DO

sooooo cooool

[CyberDyneSystems]

Are we ignoring physics and optical properties in this wish list here?
Like are these "M" lenses for "Magic" :lol:

Most of these fantasy long zooms would be waaaaaay too heavy if they were actually made with modern techniques! :lol:

There are allready 500mm f/4.5 primes.. and they weight 7 pounds or more... and cost about $3K
Not likely to replace the lightweight and affordable 100-400mm with a 500mm zoom @ f/4.5. (all the current fairly carriable and affordable 500mm zooms are at f/6.3 at the long end)

A zoom @ f/4.5would be even heavier than the prime,.. and 500mm @ f/2.8 ??? Or 560mm @ f/2.8 ??

Absolutley collosal! We're approaching 1200mm f/5.6 size here!!!! This is a $90,000.00 lens we are talking about and one that no current standard tripod is rated to hold.

200-400mm f/4 is doable.. in fact I just handeled Nikons version of this lens a few weeks back.. again.. no way is this a 100-400mm replacement.. it is larger than the 300mm f/2.8.. nearly as large as the 500mm f/4 prime.. and about the same weight. (very nice lens though!) With a 1.4X it is a 280-560 f/5.6 zoom... not bad at all.


What I would like to see?

400mm f/5.6L IS with focus speed of the current 400mm and modern IS
AND/OR
Update the 100-400mm (you can knock 100mm off of the wide end and make it 200-400)
Keep it f/5.6 at the long end so it's just as light as the current one,. BUT update the AF so it is closer to the 400mm primes speed,. and replace the IS with the 3rd gen standard.

Make a decent 100-300mm for gods sake,.
Emulate Sigmas 100-300mm f/4 EX but add IS ;)

Canon needs to make a competitor for Sigma's 120-300mm f/2.8 as well. This will of course have IS,. it will cost over $3K and weigh a little more than the prime,. but it will rock for sports.

[ddelallata]

I'l like to see a 10 or 12mm prime for around 350-450 dlls.

[Sicily1918]

A 2x-13xmm f/2.8L IS would be nice -- an uber-walkaround lens. The current 24-70 does not have enough zoom in it, the 28-135's a little soft, and there's nothing else. Actually, even f/2.8-3.5 would be OK if it had IS.
A non-push/pull 100-400 with third gen IS and maybe f/4 (if weight allows).
A 2x that doesn't kill AF?

[xtrpureguts]

Canon needs to make a competitor for Sigma's 120-300mm f/2.8 as well. This will of course have IS,. it will cost over $3K and weigh a little more than the prime,. but it will rock for sports.

CDS,
I would love to have a Canon version of that lens, but my 300 f/2.8 IS would have to go on ebay. If you could only have one - which would it be?
Don

[I Simonius]

I would like to see

40/1.2L (on 1.3X it would be a nice 52mm FoV lens)

200 f/2.8L IS (so that I could leave 70-200IS home on tours).

16 f/2.8L prime with perfectly sharp corners.

200-500 f/4.5L IS (to replace 100-400).

40/1.4L would do me, if pushing it to 1.2 would make the price silly, but otherwise YES, yes yes!
and the 16mm Prime also yes please :D :D :D

Not bothered bpout the others :cry:

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yep..// I'd love to see a 16mm prime too...
And or make the 14mm more affordable

[Salleke]

It must be possible to make a lens from 24 (15?) - 135 (200?) mm 2.8 L IS (new generation). To replace the very old 28 - 135.
Also to lower the 70 mm from the 70 - 200 series in the low end.
And must not extend when we are zooming and not turn when it's focussing. To choose in white or black and the weight of the 28 - 135. And, and...
And to have for 750 USD. Ok, i'm now going to sleep and dream on this night...:D

[RichardtheSane]

A non-push/pull 100-400 with third gen IS and maybe f/4 (if weight allows).

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say I seriously see the benefits of the push pull. I certainly don't fancy the idea of a non push pulll 100-400

A 2x that doesn't kill AF?

I believe that is down to the camera body and the lens it is mounted on. the 2x just tells the camera it is there...

[Tom W]

Are we ignoring physics and optical properties in this wish list here?
Like are these "M" lenses for "Magic" :lol:

Most of these fantasy long zooms would be waaaaaay too heavy if they were actually made with modern techniques! :lol:

There are allready 500mm f/4.5 primes.. and they weight 7 pounds or more... and cost about $3K
Not likely to replace the lightweight and affordable 100-400mm with a 500mm zoom @ f/4.5. (all the current fairly carriable and affordable 500mm zooms are at f/6.3 at the long end)

F/4.5 & 6.3 don't bode well with Canon teleconverters. I know that the 200-400 f/4 would be big and heavy (just like Nikon's) but it would also be compatible with both the 1.4X and 2X (on 1-series bodies) and retain autofocus. Something intriguing about a clean 800 mm lens.

I'd like to break the 400 mm f/5.6 barrier (and I know that some day, I'm going to have to bite the bullet and snag a 500/4).

A zoom @ f/4.5would be even heavier than the prime,.. and 500mm @ f/2.8 ??? Or 560mm @ f/2.8 ??

:) Yeah, 500/2.8 would be huge. 560/5.6 would share the diameter of the 400/4. In fact, the 400/4 DO with the 1.4X TC is 560/5/6, so I guess that lens is already available.

Absolutley collosal! We're approaching 1200mm f/5.6 size here!!!! This is a $90,000.00 lens we are talking about and one that no current standard tripod is rated to hold.

That's a lot of telescope! :)

200-400mm f/4 is doable.. in fact I just handeled Nikons version of this lens a few weeks back.. again.. no way is this a 100-400mm replacement.. it is larger than the 300mm f/2.8.. nearly as large as the 500mm f/4 prime.. and about the same weight. (very nice lens though!) With a 1.4X it is a 280-560 f/5.6 zoom... not bad at all.

Yes, that focal length is high on my list. I know it isn't as portable as the 100-400 (which really is pretty compact for its focal length), but it is a logical progression from the 70-200 lens.

What I would like to see?

400mm f/5.6L IS with focus speed of the current 400mm and modern IS
AND/OR
Update the 100-400mm (you can knock 100mm off of the wide end and make it 200-400)
Keep it f/5.6 at the long end so it's just as light as the current one,. BUT update the AF so it is closer to the 400mm primes speed,. and replace the IS with the 3rd gen standard.

Make a decent 100-300mm for gods sake,.
Emulate Sigmas 100-300mm f/4 EX but add IS ;)

How about a 70-300 f/4 IS. :)
Naw, Canon won't make that, since it would compete with the DO lens.

Canon needs to make a competitor for Sigma's 120-300mm f/2.8 as well. This will of course have IS,. it will cost over $3K and weigh a little more than the prime,. but it will rock for sports.

Yes, that would be a very useful focal length at that aperture. I would expect it to be more expensive than the 300/2.8 prime though.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Salleke,..

I think your 24-135mm f/2.8 should be aa bit smaller than the 70-200mm f/2.8.. so yes,. certainly "doable"

[Tom W]

Salleke,..

I think your 24-135mm f/2.8 should be aa bit smaller than the 70-200mm f/2.8.. so yes,. certainly "doable"

Probably doable, but I can almost see the barrel distortion and CA from here! :)

[Salleke]

Probably doable, but I can almost see the barrel distortion and CA from here! :)

Tom, I was so happy that CyberDyne finds "my lens" doable and ready to go to bed and hava plesant dreams about it and now you spoiled my dreams whit your CA.
Can you please take away your "CA, BARRELDISTORTION? FRINGING"? And so on?
So at least for one night I will have nice dreams!!! ... :D

LOL...

[Longwatcher]

Heck, I will take almost anything that gets me more focal range (both ends) and same or better quality, same or less weight, same or more aperture.

Or a lens that gets me more aperture for same range, size, weight.

And does not significantly cost more then the lens it is replacing.

And none of those EF-s 'that don't fit any of my cameras' lenses. :)

Seriously though, my #1 lens needed upgrading remains the 100-400 and I like the push-pull (especially for airshows). The twist zoom takes too long for me to change in those conditions.

As to physics of light. I have faith that Canon can design the lens, I just might not be able to afford it. :)

[Hellashot]

Why is everyone requesting very expensive L lenses? I'd rather see a 100-500 so they can put something out to compete with Simga in the big consumer zooms.

[Tom W]

Tom, I was so happy that CyberDyne finds "my lens" doable and ready to go to bed and hava plesant dreams about it and now you spoiled my dreams whit your CA.
Can you please take away your "CA, BARRELDISTORTION? FRINGING"? And so on?
So at least for one night I will have nice dreams!!! ... :D

LOL...

OK, would you settle for 24-105 instead? :)

[danielr]

i would love to see an EF-S 10mm f2.8 fisheye that is my one and only wish. Please canon, please!?!?

ok so i would like about 10 other lenses too but that would content me.

Daniel

[TammieO]

In my fantasy world, Canon offers the 500mm f4 IS and the 600mm f4 IS at a price so I could afford both...LOL

[SkipD]

I'm waiting for the 16-1600mm f1.8L IS lens that weighs in at two pounds even, is sharp as a tack corner to corner for the entire range, and priced under a thousand bucks US.

[Tom W]

I'm waiting for the 16-1600mm f1.8L IS lens that weighs in at two pounds even, is sharp as a tack corner to corner for the entire range, and priced under a thousand bucks US.

1.8?? Why such a slow one. I want f/1.2 or better.

[roanjohn]

..............if Canon is reading this now...............

Ro1

[RockOne]

100-500/2.8L IS
Absolutely. Big and heavy for sure...that I can live with (I mean yor going to have to carry a substantial weight of coin to the shop to buy it).
nother possibility is a version of the BIGMA with IS. That'd be a winner.

[csnudelman]

Just a 16 or 17 or 18mm f/2.5 or f/2.8 prime (a good one).

[cactusclay]

Canon................bring back the 50 f1.0 L!!!! Or even a 50 f1.2 L (fast focus) would be nice.

That is on the top of my list.

And I am jealous of the Nikon 17-55 f2.8..........

So Canon, give 'em a run for thier money with the 16-60 f2.8 L!!!

If Canon introduce these two lenses.........I will snap 'em up like white on rice!!

:-)

Ro1 Dito on the 17-55 or a 16-60, but it has to be internal zooming, so it doesn't get as long a a 70-200 when zoomed out. I agree on the 50 too, it seems like with the 1.6 crop, there should be an L 50 or 55 for portraits.
:lol:

[KevC]

A 10-10,000mm f/1.0L with absolutely zero distortion, or CA, weighing under 2lbs. Oh, and priced under $1000! Sounds good to me :)

Hahaha, realistically, I really like that schmoelzel's suggestions. I really am a prime guy. All that, plus a 50/1.2L or 1.4L with faster USM and better optics. That'd be real nice :)

[ghocking]

1. like a lot of others 200-500 f4 L IS

2. 20-100 f2.8 L IS

Max price £1100

[Wazza]

A top quality 100-400L replacement, for under US$2000.

The existing one, already costs $2000 locally. A lot of shooting I do is around 100mm or so, so 100 is fine. But 200-500 is a good idea, making an add on for the 70-200, 24-70, 10-22. Now that would make a nice lens set. Plus of course a couple of primes in between.

[Matatazela]

I would have to ask for a 300 - 500mm zoom with USM and f2.8 that is affordable. Okay, add IS to that if you must!

Otherwise, if the wizards at Canon could shrink a 1500mm F11.8 Maksutov Cassegrain astronomical telesope, fit autofocus, aperture control, all the bells and whistles 100mm lens size at an affordable price....

[I Simonius]

Yep..// I'd love to see a 16mm prime too...
And or make the 14mm more affordable

or just better - it hasnt got good reviews - and I wouldn't fork out that amount on a lens that is bested by the 15mm ( which is OK ish for £500+) :cry:

[I Simonius]

OK, we'll start at the wide end and work up!
Replace the 14/2.8L with a 12/2.8L of higher optical quality.
200-400 f/4L IS



I'd like the 12 please Santa, and the 200-400f4 IS if you can get it in my stocking.. (or even -500/5.6) ..this would make more sense for those that already have the 70-200s :D

[I Simonius]

snip>
Seriously though, my #1 lens needed upgrading remains the 100-400 and I like the push-pull (especially for airshows). The twist zoom takes too long for me to change in those conditions.
<snip>

Do you mean that lens needs upgrading or you need to upgrade to owning one
Sorry I can't see your lens list anywhere :(

[I Simonius]

Having actually THOUGHT about this:

- I'd buy a prime 'L' series lens just for the 1.6 sensor, well corrected, SHARP, doesn't have to be fast, wide-wide angle, i.e. in the 10 - 15 range, or a zoom in that range that wasn't made by Blue Peter (a kids TV program) i.e. I'm not impressed by the 10-22.

- I'd buy an affordable (i.e. not a fast version -f4-5.6 will do) 100-400 IS, OR 200-400IS, OR 200-500 IS, PROVIDED they had 3rd Gen IS. i.e. not buying the current 100-400IS or versions thereof, until it's updated. The arguement for startingat 200mm is a strong one because masses of us must also have 70-200's or something in that range - I mean how many people go out and buy a 100-400 IS zoom as their first telephoto??

- and that's it from me on lens wish lists, the rest of the range is already there, they could do with some updating or speed tweaks, or price drops but it'sthat's all in the pipeline anyway and there's still PLENTY on my shopping list

[roanjohn]

A 10-10,000mm f/1.0L with absolutely zero distortion, or CA, weighing under 2lbs. Oh, and priced under $1000! Sounds good to me :)



UNDER 2lbs???!!! Then you're talking about a 10-10,000 f1.0 DO!!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[LouDawg]

I'd love to see a 16mm prime...

I think the perfect sports lens would be a 200-400mm f/2.8...but since that's dreaming, I'd settle for an f/4. Please, Canon, no more push-pull zooms.

[Belmondo]

I just wish they'd bring out the 400 f/5.6L with IS.

[Longwatcher]

Do you mean that lens needs upgrading or you need to upgrade to owning one
Sorry I can't see your lens list anywhere :(

My equipment list:
http://www.longwatcher.com/photoequipment.htm
(it is a bit long to put in a sig block) - the list is missing a few things, but otherwise up to date.

The reason I want an upgrade to my 100-400 is I know the optics can be improved slightly and the IS is first gen (meaning it is the same one on my 75-300 IS) and I would really like it to have same or better IS then 70-200/2.8L IS. It is also I think the oldest "L" class zoom in Canon's inventory.

It is still an excellent lens, but I think Canon could improve it.

[Alexandre Gabriel]

14-28 f/2.8L - will cover almost every wide possibilities
100mm f/2L Macro - do we have L macro lenses?

[CyberDyneSystems]

I just wish they'd bring out the 400 f/5.6L with IS.

I'd buy that lens tomorrow,..

Or the updated 100-400mm with faster AF and gen 3 IS.. either one..
But I really want that prime :)

[roanjohn]

.........100mm f/2L Macro - do we have L macro lenses?

YES............180 f3.5 L?? I think............

Ro1

[Sprout Crumble]

Another vote for a 200-500mm IS L. Would fit in nicely with the rest of the range and be a decent size and price. Very realistic lens.

I'd also like to see Canon drop the premium for IS a little as well.

Another lens, probably not many will agree here, would be a good quality, compact 600 or 700mm mirror lens that us mere mortals could afford. I think Canon have the wide and mid range sorted, maybe a tweak here and there, but would like to see some affordable quality telephotos.

And a few quid off the TS-E's would be nice. I'm sure many more would love to experiment at a realistic price rather than caning an elite few.

[deedas]

Lenses in my actual wishlist I will be purchasing this year:

17-40mm f/4L
85mm f/1.8
50mm f/1.4
1.4x TC

Lenses in my "I wish I didn't have to spend money on my other hobbies so I could get these" wishlist:

16-35mm f/2.8L
100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS
Fisheye 15mm f/2.8
180mm f/3.5L (might actually buy the sigma version of this, if reviews are good)

Now besides lenses, I also have a 580ex on my later wishlist. Maybe a second 420ex too.

[csnudelman]

I'm not sure but I don't think the 1.4X TC works with the 3 lenses you want.

[Sprout Crumble]

180mm f/3.5L (might actually buy the sigma version of this, if reviews are good)


Sigma's 150mm f2.8 is a great lens. Very highly recommended.

[TooManyHobbies]

Here's my lens wishlists.......

For my Canon 20D
Canon EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ( I already own)
Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I already own)
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

For my future Canon FF Camera
Canon EFS 16-35mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (I currently have the Sigma)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

[kheops]

mine would be a 200-400@f4 L IS
tell me when it comes out :)

[Tareq]

Here's my lens wishlists.......

For my Canon 20D
Canon EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ( I already own)
Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I already own)
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

For my future Canon FF Camera
Canon EFS 16-35mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (I currently have the Sigma)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM


i will have 3 lenses of these lists in this month i hope, and next month i will think of another lens, but i am looking for FF camera at the end of this year at least (1DsMK2).

[Lightstream]

200-500 f/5.6 IS L here. I'd relinquish my Bigma for that lens. It is possible, although it will be bigger and heavier than the Bigma due to the larger aperture.

The Bigma requires a theoretical minimum front element size of ~79mm (500mm / 6.3, which it really is), and winds up at a practical minimum of 86mm (filter size). A 500 / 5.6 = ~89mm, probably going to be 95-100 mm filter size when it actually comes out. But worth it. Canon please give me an integrated lens hood, I love that kind.

Also within the realm of possibility (it's already been done, just not in EF) - bring back our Canon 50 f/1.2! I want one with REAL ring ultrasonic motors and seriously solid build quality. The 50 f/1.4 is halfbaked in my opinion, build quality does not impress me (see EF-S 60 macro for REAL build quality). I shoot with the plastic fantastic 50 1.8 only because its price tag was commensurate with the compromises I was making.

40 f/1.2L would also be nice. I'd shoot it on full frame, but the slightly expanded FOV is cool with me.

I heard a rumor about a EF 14-35mm f/4L, and this would probably knock my 17-40 off its perch if the image quality is up to par, because I love rectilinear wide angle, the wider the better.

[Coco-Puffs]

Zooms
EF-S 10-22mm
EF 16-35L

Primes
EF28mm f1.8

[grego]

16-35 f/2.8L
24-70 f/2.8L(although its not as needed since the 16-35) pairs better with the 70-200.

[weka2000]

200-500 f/5.6 IS L here. I'd relinquish my Bigma for that lens.

Nah 300-600mm F4 2 versions IS and non IS :lol:

[TooManyHobbies]

I had to update my lens wishlist to add a new lens released by Canon! Now finally I can get the lens that I have for my Nikon film camera, a 50mm f/1.2!

For my Canon 20D
Canon EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ( I already own)
Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I already own)
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

For my future Canon FF Camera
Canon EFS 16-35mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (I currently have the Sigma)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I already own)
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

[Dante King]

300-600 2.8 IS and built in sherpa or tank like track propulsion system.

200 1.8 IS or not.

that's it.

[malla1962]

16f2.8L would just do me nice.:D

[mnsurikov]

I'd love to see a 300mm 2.0. and 400mm 2.0. That way I can finally, take an adequate High School football game pics without resorting to ISO 50000.

[TooManyHobbies]

I forgot to add the 85mm f/1.2..

I had to update my lens wishlist to add a new lens released by Canon! Now finally I can get the lens that I have for my Nikon film camera, a 50mm f/1.2!

For my Canon 20D
Canon EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ( I already own)
Canon EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon EF 85mm F/1.2 II USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I already own)
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM

For my future Canon FF Camera
Canon EFS 16-35mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon EF 85mm F/1.2 II USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (I currently have the Sigma)
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (I already own)
Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM