Canon Lens Roadmap?

http://www.canonrumors​.com/2012/02/a-lens-roadmap-cr1/

Got my attention with the 50mm f/1.8 IS and the 200mm f/2.8L IS Macro

I would buy the 50mm f/1.8 IS provided its priced reasonably ($500 or under) and has USM and a rounded aperture...I'd have to see the specs of the 200mm f/2.8L IS macro, but its a possible buy for me as well.... and the 60L actually might just be something id be interested in as well

That EF-S 70-400...Sounds very interesting... the other lenses are curious as well, Hard to really evaluate without knowing apertures and other bits of the designs... IE what if that 45-105 IS was an f/2 zoom? Thatd be a cool portrait zoom for APS-C

As for timeline, the 24-70 f/2.8L II is on there with "winter 2011" as a timeframe, Given the events last year its very plausible the lens was going to ship last year but got pushed to now... I know the D800 was delayed for instance (Someone pointed out one of the shots done with the D800 was taken in about April last year..)

Disappointed theres no EF-S 30-ish prime in there..but I do think its a good plausible release lineup

No UWA EF-S 11 f/2 prime listed.

The EF-S 55-70 IS and 45-105 IS sound a bit wonky to me. It would be nice if there were some typos here and they turned out to be a 15-70 f/4 IS and a 45-135 f/2.8 IS.

YankeeHotelFoxtrot wrote in post #13876789
The EF-S 55-70 IS and 45-105 IS sound a bit wonky to me. It would be nice if there were some typos here and they turned out to be a 15-70 f/4 IS and a 45-135 f/2.8 IS.

A 45-105 IS would be a 72-168mm lens, I can actually see it making some sense if it had a very quick aperture, ie, f/2

Think of it as an all in one portrait zoom.... could cover the job nicely

The 20-65 could be something similar, Sacrifice the wide end for f/2 speed and isolation, it would be a 32-104mm f/2 IS equivalent... For portrait work i can see that being a very popular lens (Since most portrait folks i see use 35-85-135 combos this zoom would probubly work well for them to carry one lens..)

I think EF-S f/2 zooms are easily doable in a decent package...

I'd like to see some more TS-E lens updates.

KenjiS wrote in post #13877156
I think EF-S f/2 zooms are easily doable in a decent package...

I suppose it's possible, though Olympus has a 14-35 f/2 and a 35-100 f/2 for Four Thirds, and I don't think that I'd call either a "decent package." The 14-35 weighs 900g (as much as the EF 24-70 mkI) and costs $2300 (as much as the EF 24-70 mkII). The 35-100 weighs 1650g (more than the EF 70-200 f/2.8) and costs $2500 (more than the EF 70-200 f/2.8). An EF-S zoom would have to cover a larger imaging area than these 4/3 zooms (at least on the wide zoom) and, granted, there are some focal length differences. Still, I would say that the prospects are not good here--you are not getting a package that is any cheaper or any smaller for the benefit of moving to a smaller sensor. I would guess that people looking for ultimate depth of field control would move to full frame; I don't see any benefit to f/2 EF-S zooms. How many people do you see choosing Olympus 4/3 over Canon or Nikon full frame just because they have f/2 zooms?

^- also keep in mind that those Olympus zooms are completely weathersealed and built to an L-level specification, the EF-S ones wouldnt be...

and true i suppose... f/2 zooms on EF-S arent really better than f/2.8 on FF

KenjiS wrote in post #13870914
I would buy the 50mm f/1.8 IS provided its priced reasonably ($500 or under) and has USM and a rounded aperture...

After launching a 24/2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS for 850/850, respectively, what do you figure the odds are that the 50/1.8 IS is going to be HALF as much as either of those?? I'd figure the odds ain't good.

AngryCorgi wrote in post #13891007
After launching a 24/2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS for 850/850, respectively, what do you figure the odds are that the 50/1.8 IS is going to be HALF as much as either of those?? I'd figure the odds ain't good.

The old 24mm f2.8 was $350, though, so it's already 3x the cost of the 50mm f1.8. If we figure the 50mm stays 1/3 the cost of the 24mm f2.8, we are looking at a $300 lens.

Although with Canon's recent releases, $600 for a 50mm f1.8 would not surprise me at all. "But it is going to be so sharp AND stabilized" say all the apologists.

AngryCorgi wrote in post #13891007
After launching a 24/2.8 IS and 28/2.8 IS for 850/850, respectively, what do you figure the odds are that the 50/1.8 IS is going to be HALF as much as either of those?? I'd figure the odds ain't good.

I can still hope a little?

tkbslc wrote in post #13891078
Although with Canon's recent releases, $600 for a 50mm f1.8 would not surprise me at all. "But it is going to be so sharp AND stabilized" say all the apologists.

I dunno, if it did retail at $400-500 mark and was small/light, I could see it being an interesting option, the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 is priced around there, as is the Canon 50mm f/1.4...

Sacrifice the slight stop in speed, but gain stabilization which is useful for video and can be useful if you need to stop down the lens for DoF, ring-type USM, a rounded aperture and ETC and I could actually be bothered to buy one...

For me, i buy primes to get something small, light, cheap, sharp, and FAST.. the reason the 24 and 28 were such fail to me is because while they got the small light and sharp (im assuming they are at least..) bits right, they're not really "fast" in my book as they're -only- f/2.8 lenses and at $800 they're really pricey for what they are...

Unless Canon's MSRP policies changed..

tkbslc wrote in post #13891078
The old 24mm f2.8 was $350, though, so it's already 3x the cost of the 50mm f1.8. If we figure the 50mm stays 1/3 the cost of the 24mm f2.8, we are looking at a $300 lens.

Although with Canon's recent releases, $600 for a 50mm f1.8 would not surprise me at all. "But it is going to be so sharp AND stabilized" say all the apologists.

Yeah, but it was 1/3 the price while being the cheapest feeling prime I've ever used. Super-plasticy. If the new one is built well, I'd assume the pricing is going to be similarly stupid-high. But I'm just guessing too.