If canon is going to keep pushing EFS, they need higher-end EFS lenses

[mikekelley]

10-22 is sharp as a tack but slow as a dog.

10-2x with constant 2.8 would be just fantastic.

Some nice EF-S primes would be great too. I'm sure that they could be made significantly cheaper (less glass) and super-sharp.

How about some EFS super-teles? Again, they could be made cheaper, lighter and just as sharp as their EF equivelents, if they kept within the EFS build standard.

Less variable aperture crapola. More serious lenses for EFS mounts, please.

I know that they are capable, I just don't get why they continue to pump out consumer grade minutiae.

[RDKirk]

Remember that Canon considers EFS to be a consumer grade product line.

[mikekelley]

Originally Posted by RDKirk

Remember that Canon considers EFS to be a consumer grade product line.

Then by this logic, only people with 1d bodies (pro bodies) need non-consumer grade glass.

As far as I am aware, the only thing considered "pro" is the 1d line.

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by mikekelley

Then by this logic, only people with 1d bodies (pro bodies) need non-consumer grade glass.

As far as I am aware, the only thing considered "pro" is the 1d line.

5d and 5d II are considered pro too.

ed rader

[KenjiS]

Originally Posted by ed rader

5d and 5d II are considered pro too.

ed rader

7D is as well isnt it?

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by KenjiS

7D is as well isnt it?

i'm not sure but i don't think so.

ed rader

[RPCrowe]

I love my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens but, the major gripe about this lens is that people don't want to pay that high of a price for a non-L lens.

I love to use my 17-55mm along with my 70-200mm f/4L IS lens on a pair of 1.4x cameras.

However, an even better combination would be a 50-150mm f/2.8 IS EFS lens which has image quality equal to the 70-200mm f/4L IS. This lens could be made considerably lighter in weight than the present 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens and the 50-150mm would be even nicer in combination with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens.

By the way, there is a pretty darn nice 11-16mm f/2.8 Tokina for 1.6x wide angle needs. Additionally, the 12-24mm f/4 Tokina isn't quite shabby either.

[secabeen]

Originally Posted by RPCrowe

etter combination would be a 50-150mm f/2.8 IS EFS lens which has image quality equal to the 70-200mm f/4L IS. This lens could be made considerably lighter in weight than the present 70-200mm f/2.8L IS lens and the 50-150mm would be even nicer in combination with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens.

I agree with this. Sigma has a decent 50-150 f/2.8 HSM, but it doesn't have IS. I'd happily pay L-level prices for a 50-150 f/2.8 IS USM.

Once the 7d comes out, it will be interesting to see what Canon does. They clearly are committed to the crop body, so I could certainly see a hole in their lineup in the mid-zoom range for crop sensors. (Yes, you can use a 70-200, but that's not ideal for crop just like the 17-55 range isn't ideal for a FF)

[Joaaso]

Originally Posted by secabeen

I agree with this. Sigma has a decent 50-150 f/2.8 HSM, but it doesn't have IS. I'd happily pay L-level prices for a 50-150 f/2.8 IS USM.

Once the 7d comes out, it will be interesting to see what Canon does. They clearly are committed to the crop body, so I could certainly see a hole in their lineup in the mid-zoom range for crop sensors. (Yes, you can use a 70-200, but that's not ideal for crop just like the 17-55 range isn't ideal for a FF)

+1
I'm dreaming of a EF-S 50-200 f2.8 IS USM, but in the lack of such a lens, I've been debating with myself wether I should get a 200 f2.8L or 135 f2L instead (or both), but a 50-150 with IS could be a decent compromise...

[AngryCorgi]

Originally Posted by ed rader

5d and 5d II are considered pro too.

ed rader

They are marketing the 7D as such too.

[jobe1492]

Just want some weather sealing.
Canon needs a 35mm 1.8 EFS. A 20mm EFS would be nice too.
EFS super teles - LOL no way. They lens would snap in half.

[mikekelley]

Originally Posted by jobe1492

Just want some weather sealing.
Canon needs a 35mm 1.8 EFS. A 20mm EFS would be nice too.
EFS super teles - LOL no way. They lens would snap in half.

Remember that, when tailored for the 1.6 sensor size, the image circle is smaller, and thus, less glass is used, and thus, it weighs a bit less. So I don't think that is so plausible.

[Mike Deep]

Not agreeing or disagreeing with the OP, I just want to get this in:

Originally Posted by jobe1492

EFS super teles - LOL no way. They lens would snap in half.

What kind of nonsense is this? An EF-S lens could be produced to the same build quality as an L. Just because Canon won't, it doesn't mean they can't. A smaller image circle doesn't somehow force the manufacturer to adhere to plastic and suck.

[DaveSt]

Personally, I feel just the opposite. I think Canon needs to release more lower cost EF-S lenses. As was mentioned earlier, there are plenty of high grade Canon EF mount lenses that work just fine on 1.6 crop bodies. If the EF-S line is meant to be a consumer grade line then Canon should actually make some lenses that the typical consumer is comfortable paying for. Look at some of the lenses in the lineup. The 10-22 costs $700+ and the 17-55 costs over $1000. If those are consumer level prices I'll eat my shorts. I really hope the new Tamron 17-50VC turns out to be a great lens. I probably won't buy it but I would love to see sales of the 17-55 drop in a big way to send Canon a message. Chances are neither will happen, but it would be nice. If Canon decides to release any prime EF-S lenses, I would hope they would shoot for something more like the Sigma 30 f/1.4 rather than a 35L.

**Edit: I should note that I feel the EF-S 55-250 is more the way I think the EF-S line should go. There is a very useful lens priced at a level many consumers and amateurs can stomach.

[KenjiS]

Originally Posted by Mike Deep

What kind of nonsense is this? An EF-S lens could be produced to the same build quality as an L. Just because Canon won't, it doesn't mean they can't. A smaller image circle doesn't somehow force the manufacturer to adhere to plastic and suck.

See Olympus and their 300mm f/2.8

Which is the equivalent of a 600mm f/2.8

Also their 150mm f/2...Thats a spanking great lens right there...

Oh! What about the 90-250...

Look, Criticize 4/3rds, but they do have some amazingly cool lenses [And optically, Those lenses are all the equal of Canon/Nikon..they're impressive]

I really hope the new Tamron 17-50VC turns out to be a great lens.

MSRP for the Tamron 17-50 VC with its crappy AF and build is $750...And it will likely sell for $750 [Tamron sticks to their MSRP, i see little price deviation on their part at different stores]

Note you can get a used 17-55 in great shape for that..Not worth it IMHO to get the Tamron..

ok...Now im going to get flogged for this, but whats the big deal with variable aperture...Seriously? Just because its variable aperture doesnt make it a poor lens [See, my 100-400 for instance]