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

 
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions 
Thread started 28 May 2010 (Friday) 10:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

if canon made a 16mm prime...

 
kaitanium
Goldmember
Avatar
3,966 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco USA
     
May 28, 2010 10:42 |  #1

i would love to see canon make a 16mm prime. ive noticed that ive been using my 16-35 but only 95% of the time on the 16mm side. i guess for me i just want smaller lenses and more portability. a 16mm prime would fit the bill perfectly allowing me to get rid of my 16-35.

i would get the 14mm out right now but i dont like its bubble front element. if the 16-35 doesnt have a bubble front, can i safely assume that if a 16mm prime is created, it wont either?

anyone else in this boat? =). someone make my day and tell me that canon is making one haha




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
CanonGarcon
Senior Member
419 posts
Joined Apr 2010
     
May 28, 2010 10:58 |  #2
bannedPermanent ban

Never will happen. Too specialize of a lens and Canon has the 17mm TS-E.

Perhaps Canon should create a 15mm prime, 18mm, 19mm prime, 21mm, 22mm, and so on to suit every taste and whim of it's users.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
banpreso
Goldmember
2,176 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Socal
     
May 28, 2010 12:03 |  #3

canon does have a 14mm f2.8L ii, which from reviews seem really nice. so really no need for a 16mm.

also i don't think there's anything wrong with a "bubble" front element. my Zeiss 35mm ZE has a bubble front element and it's my best lens.


Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kaitanium
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,966 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco USA
     
May 28, 2010 13:58 |  #4

i guess i just feel like that front element will take some beating if not careful. oh well.

CanonGarcon wrote in post #10261594 (external link)
Perhaps Canon should create a 15mm prime, 18mm, 19mm prime, 21mm, 22mm, and so on to suit every taste and whim of it's users.

sounds like youre fed up with the rumors board. =P




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dmcavoy
Member
74 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
     
May 28, 2010 15:24 |  #5

Maybe not a 16mm but a 15mm (non-fisheye) lens would be great. Mainly because it would work out to be a 24mm prime on crop sensor. Something which I would love.


Canon 7D || EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 || EF 50mm f/1.8 || 430EX II
danielmcavoyphoto.co.u​k (external link)
Daniel McAvoy Photography on Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonGarcon
Senior Member
419 posts
Joined Apr 2010
     
May 28, 2010 16:05 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

kaitanium wrote in post #10262592 (external link)
i guess i just feel like that front element will take some beating if not careful. oh well.

sounds like youre fed up with the rumors board. =P

No, just people who think Canon or whatever company must produce a lens that fits a specific focal length when Canon produces lens that are close to that focal length to begin with. Canon can't please every Tom, Jane, and Bruce.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kaitanium
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,966 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco USA
     
May 28, 2010 16:28 |  #7

CanonGarcon wrote in post #10263257 (external link)
No, just people who think Canon or whatever company must produce a lens that fits a specific focal length when Canon produces lens that are close to that focal length to begin with. Canon can't please every Tom, Jane, and Bruce.

eh who cares :rolleyes: canon has the final say anyways. if there were no dreamers in this world...the world would be a different place.

dmcavoy wrote in post #10263004 (external link)
Maybe not a 16mm but a 15mm (non-fisheye) lens would be great. Mainly because it would work out to be a 24mm prime on crop sensor. Something which I would love.

oh yea id take that, L or not! just dont like a protruding front element or the fisheye photo look.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
badgerW
Senior Member
Avatar
438 posts
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Texas
     
May 28, 2010 18:11 |  #8

I have found the same thing with my 17-40 f/4L. Almost all the time I use it as effectively a 17mm prime. If Canon made a 17mm f/2.8 USM (non-L) for $500-$600 then I would probably give up the 17-40 in favor of the prime.

Basically I think there is a pretty wide focal-length gap between the 24L ($1700) and the 14L ($2100). Also I think there is a need for an update to the non-L 20mm f/2.8 USM (<$500). Make it wider (18mm, 17mm, 16mm, I don't care) and give it better image quality. It shouldn't be hard to take the 16-35, drop the zoom, and boom, you've got a 16mm f/2.8 prime that should be pretty economically priced.


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MMX
Senior Member
Avatar
418 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
     
May 29, 2010 16:58 |  #9

kaitanium wrote in post #10263383 (external link)
oh yea id take that, L or not! just dont like a protruding front element or the fisheye photo look.

Yeah, sure, for some mystical reason you don´t own the 14mm prime but you would definitely take the 15mm prime... I´m sure that even you don´t believe what you just said, I don´t know who are you trying to fool...


Canon EOS 40D, Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS, Canon EF 50 f/1.4, Sigma 120-400 f/4.5-5.6 OS, Canon Speedlite 580EX II
Manfrotto 055 XPROB + Manfrotto 322RC2, Manfrotto 679B + Manfrotto 234

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MMX
Senior Member
Avatar
418 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
     
May 29, 2010 17:00 |  #10

badgerW wrote in post #10263833 (external link)
Basically I think there is a pretty wide focal-length gap between the 24L ($1700) and the 14L ($2100).

There is the 17mm tilt-shift if you REALLY need something wider than 24mm but longer than 14mm.


Canon EOS 40D, Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS, Canon EF 50 f/1.4, Sigma 120-400 f/4.5-5.6 OS, Canon Speedlite 580EX II
Manfrotto 055 XPROB + Manfrotto 322RC2, Manfrotto 679B + Manfrotto 234

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kaitanium
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,966 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco USA
     
May 29, 2010 18:30 |  #11

MMX wrote in post #10268175 (external link)
Yeah, sure, for some mystical reason you don´t own the 14mm prime but you would definitely take the 15mm prime... I´m sure that even you don´t believe what you just said, I don´t know who are you trying to fool...

all based on price. forgot to mention it. along the lines of what badger said. that 17mm is good but for the price, it does not fit between 24 and 14. even a 15mm non L would be nice. that fisheye at ~$600 is quite nice. yea i know canon wont create a lens specific to everyones wants but i do dream of a small ultra wide prime in that 16mm range-ish, L or not. last time i checked, i didnt see that it was wrong to dream here. ok maybe i wasted some kb of memory on POTNs servers.

geez louiez. this is the first time ive seen such negativity here on the boards. cant we just dream here on the predictions board (or someone correct me if im mistaken)? i hope you guys stick around longer and let that killjoy attitude fade. and yea id take a 15mm L because it would probably be cheaper than a 14mm.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kaitanium
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,966 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco USA
     
May 29, 2010 18:59 |  #12

k well anyways, im done here. you guys win.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MMX
Senior Member
Avatar
418 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
     
May 30, 2010 06:47 |  #13

O RLY? :D
And what exactly makes you think that the 15mm prime would be significantly cheaper than the 14mm prime?
If you want something cheaper, buy the 16-35 (if you have FF) or 10-22 (if you have APS-C). The answer to your request is already here, if you don´t accept it for some reason it´s your problem, Canon can´t satisfy everyone´s "I want this but I don´t want it to have this but I also want it to do that but I don´t want it to have that" conditions.

"cant we just dream here on the predictions board"
No, you can´t, that´s why the board is called "predictions", not "dreams". And I´m not negative, I just want to "keep it real". I´m pretty sure that if all the dream gear was introduced right tomorrow, most of the dreamers wouldn´t purchase it anyway. (Excluding the dream lenses and cameras which are physically impossible to be produced in real world.) With all the breathtaking photos which were taken with the current gear I can hardly believe someone who has a 1000D with kit 18-55 but swears that he could be the best photographer on the World if only Canon made the 135 L with f/1.8 instead of f/2 which is probably not worth being used by him.


Canon EOS 40D, Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS, Canon EF 50 f/1.4, Sigma 120-400 f/4.5-5.6 OS, Canon Speedlite 580EX II
Manfrotto 055 XPROB + Manfrotto 322RC2, Manfrotto 679B + Manfrotto 234

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,604 posts
Likes: 40
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
May 30, 2010 17:23 |  #14

MMX wrote in post #10270315 (external link)
O RLY? :D
And I´m not negative, I just want to "keep it real". I´m pretty sure that if all the dream gear was introduced right tomorrow, most of the dreamers wouldn´t purchase it anyway.

I've known a lot of miserable people who use that as an excuse. "I'm not negative, just a realist." What's it matter if the net effect is the same?

Also, what is wrong with thinking of other gear that might make photography more enjoyable or easier? If the camera companies thought the way you do, we'd all be shooting 1940's rangefinders.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MMX
Senior Member
Avatar
418 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
     
May 30, 2010 18:30 |  #15

Do you know when is photography most enjoyable? When you stop talking, take your camera, go outside and start taking photos. And if you realize that a part of your gear hampers you somehow, then you can return back and say what should be improved.

By the way, look at Photographer Of The Year 2009 winners and their cameras: Canon EOS 5D, 30D, 350D, 1D Mk. III, 20D, 450D, 400D, Nikon D200, Nikon D80, D700, D3, D60, D100, D70s, D90. What does it mean? Your gear doesn´t matter at all, you can have a €180 Canon 350D and outperform someone with €1800 Canon 1D Mk. III if you know how to do it.
Or do you know about something more enjoyable than winning POTY?

PS: I believe that if one of the winners grabbed a 1940´s rangefinder, he would still take better photos that most of these people who are able to spend whole day arguing whether Canon should make the new 135L with f/2 or f/1.8.


Canon EOS 40D, Canon EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS, Canon EF 50 f/1.4, Sigma 120-400 f/4.5-5.6 OS, Canon Speedlite 580EX II
Manfrotto 055 XPROB + Manfrotto 322RC2, Manfrotto 679B + Manfrotto 234

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

6,187 views & 0 likes for this thread
if canon made a 16mm prime...
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is oliverkell
1114 guests, 222 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.