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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 20 Oct 2013 (Sunday) 22:59
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why still no 14-24 lens?

 
light_pilgrim
Senior Member
Avatar
922 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 145
Joined Jan 2012
     
Oct 20, 2013 22:59 |  #1

Anybody with knowledge on the topic...what is the reason that is stopping Canon from producing a nikon quality 14-24 lens? It seems like people are waiting for years and I think people would pay solid money for it. Still nothing from Canon......

Whay cannot Canon crack it?


www.lightpilgrim.com (external link) ||1x.com (external link) ||500px.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
RayinAlaska
Senior Member
425 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 39
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Alaska's interior
     
Oct 20, 2013 23:16 |  #2

light_pilgrim wrote in post #16386343 (external link)
Anybody with knowledge on the topic...what is the reason that is stopping Canon from producing a nikon quality 14-24 lens? It seems like people are waiting for years and I think people would pay solid money for it. Still nothing from Canon......

Whay cannot Canon crack it?

No idea why not, but the bulbous glass in front of a 14-24 takes some work to maintain flare to a minimum. Just go to the Nikon forums and search "14-24 flare problems." You will find plenty.

That said, this 14-24 (Nikon) is supposed to be a great lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,625 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 122
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Oct 20, 2013 23:31 |  #3

I don't know either. I mean, there is certainly a lot of people who want it. I have a feeling that they're sort of content with the role that the new TS-E lens have taken in their lineup and they might feel that they suffice for landscapers and of course they are an edge that Nikon has not been able to match.

That's really my only guess. There's no reason why Canon isn't capable of producing this lens. So, it must be market driven and my suggestion above lends to that... and it's smart on their part, why sell one lens, when you can sell two?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ginga
Senior Member
Avatar
370 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Jokkmokk - Sweden
     
Oct 21, 2013 02:49 as a reply to  @ post 16386632 |  #4

The 14-24 will come, but it will be a cinema lens.

It will debut alongside the new super cinema video movie hollywood videography camera.


Sony A7R * 70-200 2.8L II * 24-70L II * Samyang 14
Recently sold: 5DIII * Sigma 35 *

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Osiriz
Senior Member
Avatar
622 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Norway
     
Oct 21, 2013 03:37 |  #5

Ginga wrote in post #16386644 (external link)
The 14-24 will come, but it will be a cinema lens.

It will debut alongside the new super cinema video movie hollywood videography camera.

:lol: Who would be surprised?

On topic. Yes, the wait for a sharp UWA-zoom from Canon is starting to feel a bit ridiculous. People have practically been begging for a 14-24L since 2008, but the response has been nothing but silence. There is another rumor floating around about a hopefully sharp 16-50L, but who knows how many years it'll be before we see these lenses?

And what about the 35L II, 50 1.4 II, 135L II, e.t.c?

I have a bad feeling that Canon's R&D is too busy with other things that us still photographers does not care about.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Abu ­ Mahendra
Senior Member
368 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
     
Oct 21, 2013 04:24 |  #6
bannedPermanent ban

Hmmm, an EF 20-55 f/2.8 L would be an interesting lens. But it'd have to have little barrel, and sharp in the center right from f/2.8.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DBNissan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,019 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 203
Joined Mar 2010
Location: NorCal's Delta Valley
     
Oct 21, 2013 04:29 |  #7

Isn't Canon's answer to the 14-24 the 16-35L? Does the extra 2mm make that much of a difference? I have a friend with the Nikon 14-24 on his D800E and he's usually in the 20-24mm range of that lens.


~Dan Sony Kit: a6500 | a7iii | 18-105mm f/4 G | MC-11 | TT685S | TT350S | X1T-S | Canon Kit: 6D | 80D | 50D | S120 | 16-35mm f/4L | 24-105 f/4L | 17-55mm f/2.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 50mm f/1.8 STM | 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM | Sigma 8mm f/3.5 | Tamron 18-270mm VC | Tamron 70-300mm VC | Tamron C-AF BBAR MC7 2xTC | 580EXII | 430EXII | YN-500EX | YN-622C | Flashpoint RoveLight 600
www.DBNphotography.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidfarina
Goldmember
Avatar
3,357 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1033
Joined May 2013
     
Oct 21, 2013 04:36 |  #8

DBNissan wrote in post #16386732 (external link)
Isn't Canon's answer to the 14-24 the 16-35L? Does the extra 2mm make that much of a difference? I have a friend with the Nikon 14-24 on his D800E and he's usually in the 20-24mm range of that lens.

What i think^^

I would like to have 14mm on the wide end. but honestly, i rather have 16mm instead of only 24mm on the long end. 35mm feels just about right with the 16-35


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Osiriz
Senior Member
Avatar
622 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Norway
     
Oct 21, 2013 04:37 |  #9

DBNissan wrote in post #16386732 (external link)
Isn't Canon's answer to the 14-24 the 16-35L?

davidfarina wrote in post #16386739 (external link)
What i think^^

Far from it.

The 16-35 would be a nice contender if it was razor sharp across the frame. Its fairly sharp at the center, and a fine lens for photojournalism and weddings. Not so much for landscapes.

There is a reason to why so many canonites buys the Nikon 14-24, rip out the weather sealing and use it with the Novoflex adapter.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DBNissan
Goldmember
Avatar
1,019 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 203
Joined Mar 2010
Location: NorCal's Delta Valley
     
Oct 21, 2013 04:42 |  #10

Osiriz wrote in post #16386741 (external link)
Far from it.

The 16-35 would be a nice contender if it was razor sharp across the frame. Its fairly sharp at the center, and a fine lens for photojournalism and weddings. Not so much for landscapes.

There is a reason to why so many canonites buys the Nikon 14-24, rip out the weather sealing and use it with the Novoflex adapter.

Makes sense if the corner-to-corner sharpness is tack-sharp.


~Dan Sony Kit: a6500 | a7iii | 18-105mm f/4 G | MC-11 | TT685S | TT350S | X1T-S | Canon Kit: 6D | 80D | 50D | S120 | 16-35mm f/4L | 24-105 f/4L | 17-55mm f/2.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 50mm f/1.8 STM | 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM | Sigma 8mm f/3.5 | Tamron 18-270mm VC | Tamron 70-300mm VC | Tamron C-AF BBAR MC7 2xTC | 580EXII | 430EXII | YN-500EX | YN-622C | Flashpoint RoveLight 600
www.DBNphotography.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
YashicaFX2
Goldmember
1,003 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2013
Location: A quiet place in the country.
     
Oct 21, 2013 04:53 |  #11
bannedPermanent ban

Osiriz wrote in post #16386741 (external link)
...
The 16-35 would be a nice contender if it was razor sharp across the frame. Its fairly sharp at the center, and a fine lens for photojournalism and weddings. Not so much for landscapes....

That sounds suspiciously like you are after the 10-22 on a crop body.


Dedicated APS-c shooter. Gripped 60D, 60 2.8, 10-22, 15-85, Σ70-200 OS and a big white something or other! Plus a 5D w/28-75.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidfarina
Goldmember
Avatar
3,357 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 1033
Joined May 2013
     
Oct 21, 2013 06:25 |  #12

Osiriz wrote in post #16386741 (external link)
Far from it.

The 16-35 would be a nice contender if it was razor sharp across the frame. Its fairly sharp at the center, and a fine lens for photojournalism and weddings. Not so much for landscapes.

There is a reason to why so many canonites buys the Nikon 14-24, rip out the weather sealing and use it with the Novoflex adapter.

You cant just quote the things you want to hear. My "what i think" was pointing at the statement about the focal length usage, not about it would be canons answer to the 14-24. I was literally saying that a 16-35mm focal length is more usable for my preferences than a 14-24


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Osiriz
Senior Member
Avatar
622 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Norway
     
Oct 21, 2013 06:27 |  #13

davidfarina wrote in post #16386815 (external link)
You cant just quote the things you want to hear. My "what i think" was pointing at the statement about the focal length usage, not about it would be canons answer to the 14-24. I was literally saying that a 16-35mm focal length is more usable for my preferences than a 14-24

Then we are in agreement. I would rather see a 16-35L III or the rumored 16-50L than a new 14-24.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gnome ­ chompski
Goldmember
1,252 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 136
Joined Jun 2013
Location: oakland, ca
     
Oct 21, 2013 10:12 |  #14

i slapped on a 16-35L this weekend and took some rather uninspiring interior shots. Went home and corrected in Lightroom, pixel peeped a bit and concluded I would never spend cash on this thing.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kolor-Pikker
Goldmember
2,790 posts
Likes: 59
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Moscow
     
Oct 21, 2013 12:33 |  #15

DBNissan wrote in post #16386732 (external link)
Isn't Canon's answer to the 14-24 the 16-35L? Does the extra 2mm make that much of a difference? I have a friend with the Nikon 14-24 on his D800E and he's usually in the 20-24mm range of that lens.

If you specifically need the extra wide end, 2mm makes a huge difference, the shorter the focal length, the greater effect each additional mm makes.

Personally I think Canon is content with the 17/24mm TS-E lenses ruling their WA range, as nice as a super-wide zoom would be, having movements is probably even better. Using only the 24 TS-E, you can stitch together a few shots using shift to effectively widen the focal length, while also having tilt and no bulbous front element.

If your friend only uses the 14-24 at 20-24, he would be right at home using only the 24 TS, and although there's nothing from Canon to compete with the D800E as well, he could just get the upcoming A7r with an adapter instead.


5DmkII | 24-70 f/2.8L II | Pentax 645Z | 55/2.8 SDM | 120/4 Macro | 150/2.8 IF
I acquired an expensive camera so I can hang out in forums, annoy wedding photographers during formals and look down on P&S users... all the while telling people it's the photographer, not the camera.

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

5,742 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why still no 14-24 lens?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 somphotobooth
936 guests, 227 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.