Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 12 May 2014 (Monday) 12:59
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

16-35mm f/4L IS is here!

 
CollegeKid
Senior Member
475 posts
Joined Mar 2014
May 12, 2014 16:48 |  #46
banned

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #16899825external link
^ Agreed. I want a 35L II f1.2

I think a 135L f1.2 IS would be too much to hope for? ;)

I think a 135 f/1.2 IS would be a tad larger and heavier than a 70-200 2.8 II. And certainly more expensive.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Jerobean
Senior Member
785 posts
Joined Mar 2008
May 12, 2014 16:55 |  #47

whiteflyer wrote in post #16899831external link
Don't you think Canons marketing men have looked at the 70-200 range and thought we can do that with all our zooms, 4 models in every focal length, that's what the punters want, choice.

My main point isn't that this lens will be bad, it's just super boring as the beginning of the 'year of the lens'

next up 60-210 f3.5L IS


_______________
6d, 24-105L, Tak SMC 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 135L

LOG IN TO REPLY
zamorac
Member
zamorac's Avatar
Joined Mar 2013
May 12, 2014 16:55 |  #48

Not sure what to think about the new 16-35... We'll just have to wait to see first reviews and price. And then, there are rumors of Sigma 16-20 F/2... I'll wait to see if this one becomes reality.


6D | 40mm/2.8 | 50mm/1.8 STM | 17-40/4 L | 24-105/4 L IS | 70-200/4 L IS
My Blog (external link) | 500px (external link) | Youtube (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
gnome ­ chompski
Goldmember
1,252 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Jun 2013
oakland, ca
May 12, 2014 16:56 |  #49

Somedude18 wrote in post #16899712external link
I'm new to this kind of photography, so correct me if I'm wrong...Can't you solve this problem by taking a 2-shot panorama and crop the 'bad parts' out of it so you keep one clean image without the borders?

theoretically, yes. But the whole idea is to not have to do major surgery in post to get a workable image. Thats why so many Canon users are going nuts for the Sony A7R. It allows them to use their Canon lenses (with adapter, of course) and get a 36mp sensor that has a (2??) stop dynamic range advantage over the Canon sensors so they dont have to HDR the landscape. Same applies here. Might as well get it right in camera, and if the lens has corner performance to match the asking price then its a win-win.


Tumblr (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
MNUplander
Goldmember
Joined Oct 2009
Duluth, MN
May 12, 2014 16:59 |  #50

Jerobean wrote in post #16899814external link
1: this new lens will be already absurdly priced. If you use ultra wide stopped down, then you already have 2 options. Which leads me to my 2nd point...

2: there are already 2 great lenses that compete directly with this lens. you have a 17-40 f4, which is inexpensive and a great lens, and a 16-35 2.8 which is a great lens. So we needed another lens in the mix here? You really argue that we need another version of something we already have 2 of instead of something new?

3: I don't care if it's 14-24 2.8 or 4, but something not the same would be somewhat refreshing here.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and just assume you aren't a landscape photographer. Although the current options are quite sharp in the center and midframe, they muddy up pretty badly in the corners - even stopped down.

Sure, there are primes available that solve this problem but I do much of my landscape shooting while backbacking and a zoom that covers more focal ranges with similar IQ is appealing so I can leave a bag of primes at home while still getting the IQ I want.

Give me a zoom that allows me to forgo the expense of several primes but maintain the same IQ in the same focal range and I'll still come out ahead even if it is $2k.


Lake Superior and North Shore Landscape Photography (external link)
Buy & Sell Feedback
6D, 16-35 f4 IS, 50 1.2

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott_online
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
May 12, 2014 17:01 |  #51

I think both of these new lenses are good news. My guess is that in time the 16-35/4 IS will replace the 17-40. Maybe there are plans for a 16-35/2.8 III to complement it?

The 10-18 STM is clearly meant to accompany the 18-55 and 55-250 STM consumer lenses so will likely slot in below the 10-22. I would guess at maybe 2/3 the price? There are many, many Rebel/XXXD owners who would like a wide-angle option but aren't willing to pay more than they spent on the body. If they get the price right, they'll sell a boatload of these.


flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
InfiniteDivide's Avatar
Joined Dec 2013
Kawasaki, Japan
May 12, 2014 17:15 |  #52

CollegeKid wrote in post #16899833external link
I think a 135 f/1.2 IS would be a tad larger and heavier than a 70-200 2.8 II. And certainly more expensive.

Ok, a compromise 135L f1.4 IS with a 72mm filter size.


James Patrus
6D | 16-35L F4 | 24L II | 50L | 100L | |  -> Website (external link) & Gallery (external link)
For Sale:Canon 16-35mm f4 IS l Do you enjoy Super Famicom games? (external link) PM me directly.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Jerobean
Senior Member
785 posts
Joined Mar 2008
May 12, 2014 17:21 |  #53

Scott_online wrote in post #16899858external link
I think both of these new lenses are good news. My guess is that in time the 16-35/4 IS will replace the 17-40. Maybe there are plans for a 16-35/2.8 III to complement it?

The 10-18 STM is clearly meant to accompany the 18-55 and 55-250 STM consumer lenses so will likely slot in below the 10-22. I would guess at maybe 2/3 the price? There are many, many Rebel/XXXD owners who would like a wide-angle option but aren't willing to pay more than they spent on the body. If they get the price right, they'll sell a boatload of these.

I guess I'm really out of touch or something, because that 10-18 also strikes me as a who asked for this lens. 2/3 stop and less reach in exchange for IS compared to the already great 10-22?

I can't see this lens being cheaper than the 10-22 with how canon prices IS.


_______________
6d, 24-105L, Tak SMC 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 135L

LOG IN TO REPLY
CollegeKid
Senior Member
475 posts
Joined Mar 2014
May 12, 2014 17:24 |  #54
banned

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #16899892external link
Ok, a compromise 135L f1.4 IS with a 72mm filter size.

Wishful thinking. What is the filter size difference between the 35L and the 35 IS? 5mm, or about 12%. A 135 f/1.4 would be at least 77mm, more likely 82mm. Possibly larger.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott_online
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
May 12, 2014 17:24 |  #55

Jerobean wrote in post #16899901external link
I can't see this lens being cheaper than the 10-22 with how canon prices IS.

The 18-55 and 55-250 both have IS and are amongst Canon's least expensive lenses.


flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
13,480 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Sep 2007
May 12, 2014 17:28 |  #56

Scott_online wrote in post #16899858external link
I think both of these new lenses are good news. My guess is that in time the 16-35/4 IS will replace the 17-40. Maybe there are plans for a 16-35/2.8 III to complement it?

The 10-18 STM is clearly meant to accompany the 18-55 and 55-250 STM consumer lenses so will likely slot in below the 10-22. I would guess at maybe 2/3 the price? There are many, many Rebel/XXXD owners who would like a wide-angle option but aren't willing to pay more than they spent on the body. If they get the price right, they'll sell a boatload of these.

well the 10-22 isnt exactly fast to start with, so if the 10-18 has modern canon optics and costs 2/3 less, expect it to sell really well. I wouldnt mind a 16-35 F5.6 as long as optics really good and costs a lot less.


Sony A7r - A7ii - A7rii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 35/2.8 - CV 35/1.7 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CY 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4

LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,305 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
May 12, 2014 17:33 |  #57

Somedude18 wrote in post #16899712external link
I'm new to this kind of photography, so correct me if I'm wrong...Can't you solve this problem by taking a 2-shot panorama and crop the 'bad parts' out of it so you keep one clean image without the borders?

Or just take one image with a good lens and be done with it. Many scenes don't lend themselves to multiple image stitching.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,305 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
May 12, 2014 17:38 |  #58

Jerobean wrote in post #16899814external link
1: this new lens will be already absurdly priced. If you use ultra wide stopped down, then you already have 2 options. Which leads me to my 2nd point...

2: there are already 2 great lenses that compete directly with this lens. you have a 17-40 f4, which is inexpensive and a great lens, and a 16-35 2.8 which is a great lens. So we needed another lens in the mix here? You really argue that we need another version of something we already have 2 of instead of something new?

3: I don't care if it's 14-24 2.8 or 4, but something not the same would be somewhat refreshing here.

I have the 17-40 and it sucks in the corners, even stopped down. I've used the Nikon 14-24 and it is a dream lens, until you want to use filters. If the 16-35 f4 has the iq of the 14-24 and can take filters then in my books it is a winner. I have never shot with the 16-35II, but the reviews I've see put it at just an ok lens with not the greatest corners. For me, the corners are just as important as the center. The 16-35 is an event lens where typically corners don't matter.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Jerobean
Senior Member
785 posts
Joined Mar 2008
May 12, 2014 17:43 |  #59

Scott_online wrote in post #16899905external link
The 18-55 and 55-250 both have IS and are amongst Canon's least expensive lenses.

I mean, you aren't wrong...I guess I should have said non kit new release lenses.

All newer IS lenses have been pretty expensive. The IS primes, the 24-70 f4 IS, 15-85, 17-55, etc.


_______________
6d, 24-105L, Tak SMC 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 135L

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott_online
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
May 12, 2014 17:57 |  #60

Jerobean wrote in post #16899946external link
I mean, you aren't wrong...I guess I should have said non kit new release lenses.

All newer IS lenses have been pretty expensive. The IS primes, the 24-70 f4 IS, 15-85, 17-55, etc.

The 24-70 f/4 IS is a case in point. My guess is that in time, this will replace the 24-105 but it will be a gradual transition. If they launched the 24-70 at the same price as the 24-105 then they would never sell whatever inventory is in the channel and they would devalue the 24-105. So instead, they let both lenses co-exist for a few years, gradually reducing the price of the newer one. The 24-70 started out at £1500 in the UK. It's down to £935.

I suspect the same will happen with the 16-35 f/4 IS. It will be expensive to start with but reduce towards the 17-40 over time.


flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

214,041 views & 2 likes for this thread
16-35mm f/4L IS is here!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00234 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is ashleyrose315
791 guests, 329 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6106, that happened on Jun 09, 2016