17-40L to be discontinued

as this guy says, on what he thinks is true, but he says that that lens will be discontinued
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/35407​6

.me wrote:
as this guy says, on what he thinks is true, but he says that that lens will be discontinued
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/35407​6

I find this a little hard to swallow.

I don't believe it either, unless something better is introduced. I know that it's a full-frame lens, but its introduction and price-point were aimed squarely at the D60, 10D, & 20D shooters.

Personally, I could go for replacing it with something even wider (and full-frame) but I suspect that the price would go up as well.

There's another thread here -- talking about EF(S) 17-55 2.8 --- that could be the replacement...

tamron made this Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] which would cost under 500 i'd think..
why in the world would canon NOT make something that would cost more? like 1500

Unless this tamron is for 1.6x sensors

.me wrote:
tamron made this Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] which would cost under 500 i'd think..
why in the world would canon NOT make something that would cost more? like 1500

Canon rarely discontinues a lens, especially one that has a good track record (despite some complaints about partciular lenses here in the forum). But in case they do, better grab yours while you can!

why would canon discontinue one of their best selling lenses? its almost like cancelling their 70-200 IS...I somehow doubt they'd do that.

It is for 1.6x sensors. The Di II is for cropped sensor cameras.

I'd say that their best selling is 24-70
well which one would you get 70-200 IS or 50-250 2.8 IS? if it was the same price?
price point says almost the same in most cases (if not lower) but they give you more

ok.. than never mind.. but still i think that there was too much distortion on the edges with 17-40 if they fixed it - its great

That is possible, though the 17-55/2.8 would almost certainly be a 1.6X lens. At full-frame, going from ultrawide to "normal" is quite a feat. Even the 16-35 is touching up against the limits of reasonable design and manufacture.

I have to say though that given that the 17-40L's most likely buyer is shooting a 1.6X camera (17 mm is very wide on full-frame), perhaps Canon's thinking is that the 2.8 lens will serve that spot even better. Lord knows they need a fast lens in the normal zoom range for the 1.6X format.

agreed.. maybe they will just speeden up 17-40, but than it would kill 16-35, because 1 mm will not do any diffirence...

Unless they don't market it as an "L" anymore and make it an EF-S.

Oh sure Canon is going to run out and discontinue there biggest selling L lens...

You can't compare EF-S to Non EF-s.. remember that the EF-S won't work on the 5D or any 1 series..

That's four current models... (five if you count the fact that B&H is stocking 10Ds again) and the majority.. the vast majority of the historic models that won't take EF-S. And None of the film bodies..

The 17-40mm will continue to have a market in the larger than 1.6x framed cameras.