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 17 Mar 2014 (Monday) 14:39
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

wish-list lenses that don't exist (have to be feasable)

 
andrikos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,905 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:01 |  #16

Canon EF 10-24mm f/2.8L


Think new Canon lenses are overpriced? Lots (and lots) of data will set you free!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,627 posts
Gallery: 25 photos
Likes: 371
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:05 |  #17

EF 10-24 f2.8 rectilinear lens for under $1500

EF 200-500 f(whatever) for under $2000

EDIT: Andrikos got in at the tape... Scary...


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
andrikos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,905 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:10 |  #18

MakisM1 wrote in post #16765462 (external link)
EF 10-24 f2.8 rectilinear lens for under $1500

EF 200-500 f(whatever) for under $2000

EDIT: Andrikos got in at the tape... Scary...

Great minds think alike! ;)


Think new Canon lenses are overpriced? Lots (and lots) of data will set you free!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RMH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,000 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canterbury
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:23 |  #19

dadgummit wrote in post #16765398 (external link)
a 50mm f1.2-1.4 with accurate and reliable (durable) autofocus and good background blur.

Oops, sorry. You did say it does have to be feasable!!

LOL

I'm hanging my hopes on the new sigma 50 art. I know it'll be sharp. I'm hoping for good bokeh too, but not holding my breath. If not then I'll probably end up buying the 50L. I really want something that is exactly the same as my 85L but a little wider and a little faster focusing.



All the stuff I've owned at one time or another

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jt354
Senior Member
401 posts
Joined Oct 2010
Location: Michigan
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:24 |  #20

35mm Tilt-shift EF-S (or full frame, but the 45mm fits the "normal perspective" pretty well on FF)
15-85mm f/4 L EF-S
28mm f/1.8 II


Zenfolio (external link)
flickr (external link)
Gear: Canon 60D / Canon G12 / Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 / Canon 35mm f/2 IS / Canon 85mm f/1.8 / Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 / Speedlite 430 EXII / Slik 700DX legs / Cullmann MB6 head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:33 |  #21

15-85mm f/2.8 IS lens yum!


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fogboundturtle
Senior Member
735 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Mar 2010
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:36 |  #22

MakisM1 wrote in post #16765462 (external link)
EF 10-24 f2.8 rectilinear lens for under $1500

EF 200-500 f(whatever) for under $2000

EDIT: Andrikos got in at the tape... Scary...

have to be feasible. if the 200-400 is 11k, the 200-500 would be 15k....


Canon 5D Mark III, Canon 70D, Canon EF 24-105L, Tamron 150-600mm, Tamron 70-200 F2.8 DI VC USD, Sony A7r, Sony FE 55mm F1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RMH
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,000 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canterbury
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:40 |  #23

might get there with a f5.6-f8 non-L. Not sure i'd be a lot of use thought



All the stuff I've owned at one time or another

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
InfiniteDivide
"I wish to be spared"
Avatar
2,844 posts
Gallery: 265 photos
Likes: 218
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Kawasaki, Japan
     
Mar 17, 2014 16:43 |  #24

1. A new f1.0 or even f.95 lens L with a non-floating element in whatever FL is easiet to produce a reasonably priced lens.
I am fully aware of the complexities, this is why I am dreaming.

2. A 35L II f1.2 lens with weather sealing. A mkII release after many year without low light ability it not exciting.

3. A 24-70 L f1.4 zoom would be perfection. Even if the front element must be 82mm.

4. Canon 12-24mm f2.8 ultra wide angle with AF


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
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
14,593 posts
Gallery: 154 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 4609
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Mar 17, 2014 17:31 |  #25

A 70-400mm f5.6, with the latest 4-stop IS

I believe this is feasible, because Sony makes one (without stabilization, of course), and it has great optics. I really want to see more L zooms that break the 4x barrier and get up into the 5x or 6x range, as Sony and Nikon have done.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,373 posts
Gallery: 219 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4399
Joined Dec 2008
     
Mar 17, 2014 17:36 |  #26

fogboundturtle wrote in post #16765524 (external link)
have to be feasible. if the 200-400 is 11k, the 200-500 would be 15k....

Depends a lot on the f/ .

Tamron has 150-600 f/5-6.3 VC for less than $1,100. It's gotten decent reviews. Why couldn't Canon build something similar (say 200-500 f/5-6.3 (or even 5.6) IS) for less than $2,000?


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,211 posts
Likes: 1865
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Mar 17, 2014 17:39 |  #27

55-165 f/4L IS - This would match up great with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS on crop cameras...


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,092 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 654
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Mar 17, 2014 17:50 |  #28

I would love an 800 mm F4 L IS - with built in 1.7 extender. Built to Mk2 standards the weight should be manageable at (probably) less than 6 kilos. Minimum focus distance of 5 meters (less if possible) would be nice.
In the past such a lens would have not been practical, but with current construction techniques and alloys it should be possible - just not affordable!


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 17, 2014 17:58 |  #29

frugivore wrote in post #16765397 (external link)
Give me a 100mm f/1.4L with IS. Then I would need neither the 85L nor the 135L. It'll fit perfectly between the upcoming Sigma 50mm and the yet-to-be-released Canon 200mm f/2.8 IS.

I was actually thinking the same thing. It would be quite large, but should still be hand holdable. It would cost a lot though...its a lot of glass....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tntadroit
Junior Member
21 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Oct 2013
     
Mar 17, 2014 18:00 |  #30

Canon used to have the 400mm f4.5 fd. This was a non-L so it should be cheap. They also used to have the 80-300mm f4.5. That would also be nice.




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

6,032 views & 0 likes for this thread
wish-list lenses that don't exist (have to be feasable)
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 AstroNate
1334 guests, 272 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.