Canon EF 11-24mm F4L USM Lens is here!

I wonder if it's at least cherry flavored!

Pre-ordered and looking forward to playing with this monster!

I've no plans for a 50MP sensor but it'll be great on my 18MP body too... and the 1 series that comes after that.

It's pricey, for sure, but I wasn't a huge fan of the 16-35 and I'm in the market for a UWA lens. I've been saving for this for a while.

My holy trinity: 11-24, 24-70II, 70-200 II. 85L for portraits and I think I'm good.

DreDaze wrote in post #17421869
on the filter side of this, i'm really surprised they don't have some way of putting giant filters on it...yeah it would be expensive, but i figure if someone is going to go for ultimate landscape set up, this lens and one of the 50mp 5D's...they'd be willing to spend quite a bit for the ability to use filters

what's wrong with gel filters? this thing takes gels right?

I think a lot of people here have poor perspective. An 11-24 F4 zoom with MTF #s like that? In a few months you'll be able to get one for $2700. That's a bargain kids.
Look, I understand if one thinks it too expensive, or unnecessarily wide, or too big, or are satisfied with some other lens. Don't buy it.

I'm pleased to see Canon flexing their wide angle muscles and producing such high quality lenses. I've been around long enough to know this is a new age for them. Canon wides were weak for many years. Now, some are without peer.

Canon offers cameras and lenses for soccer moms and casual travelers as well as top spec'd equipment for very discriminating amateurs and professionals. If you find yourself somewhat between these two don't whine if Canon doesn't homogenize their line.

Charlie wrote in post #17422032
what's wrong with gel filters? this thing takes gels right?

There's a gel filter holder on the rear

Charlie wrote in post #17422032
what's wrong with gel filters? this thing takes gels right?

it takes gels, but do they make ND grad gels? and even so, they'd be right in the middle most likely...or polarizers

You'll probably have to wait for Fotodiox to come out with a filter system like they did for the TS-E17 and 14-24. If/when they do it should be quite satisfactory for filters.

DreDaze wrote in post #17422337
it takes gels, but do they make ND grad gels? and even so, they'd be right in the middle most likely...or polarizers

They do make nd and polarizer gels. And there are potentially better solutions than grad filters.

That said... I wonder if iq takes more of a hit from rear gels?

umphotography wrote in post #17421650
Well since Canon has decided they are not going to make a super wide below F/4 I tend to agree with some others. The 16-35 F/4 IS seems the way to go. At least it has IS and you could probably hold it at an 1/8 and get sharp images when in low light. I can honestly say that at receptions, they seem to be getting darker and darker every year. I am so frequently at f/2.5 at 1/30 at 6400 and pushing in post its not even funny. And thats with a flash. I cant use F/4 for a lot of my needs. 12800 iso is good, but i dont want to be at 12800 all night either......who knows.....maybe Canon has something in the works and 25K iso will be the current 3200 iso on a 5D3 and thats why they are making F/4 glass.

I was really looking forward to this lens and was hoping it was going to come in at F/2.8 and priced to compete with Nikons flagship 14-24. I for one, am very disappointed with this announcement. and 3K is just stupid for f/4 glass with no IS....lame move in my opinion

But im sure the canon fan club will drink this Kool-ade as fast as Canon can pour it

Really depends on what you need a wide angle for. Landscape and architecture shooters only care about the performance at f8 and above. Needs to be wide and sharp. The 11-24mm f4 is the lens many people have been begging for.

jmai86 wrote in post #17417762
I always find it amusing when things like this are announced and the naysayers come out in droves, lambasting the price.

$2999 sounds about right.

This is the world's widest rectilinear AF lens.
It has a gargantuan 87mm front element.
It is a constant F4.

This is a serious tool for a serious professional, no one else needs to pay any attention.

And if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it...so why waste your energy? Canon is a company, and they can charge whatever they want. The target market will respond accordingly.
I'm way more interested in finding out how I can import that new M3...

it has next to no distortion at 11mm

If you're interested in a good UWA at a reasonable price have a look at the Sigma 12-24mm f4.5 - 5.6 over here I got it for £525 - what about $750 instead of $4K+. I use it with the 6D and it is as sharp as a tack. Quirky distortion at 12mm.

Here is some more info on this lens with photos.http://cpn.canon-europe.com …the_new_ef11-24mm_lens.do

P4ulG wrote in post #17423236
If you're interested in a good UWA at a reasonable price have a look at the Sigma 12-24mm f4.5 - 5.6 over here I got it for £525 - what about $750 instead of $4K+. I use it with the 6D and it is as sharp as a tack. Quirky distortion at 12mm.

Yes but the new 11-24mm will be 8.3% wider than the 12-24. Add to that it is half to a stop faster, and constant aperture. By all accounts it looks like it will have much less distortion too. The Sigma is no doubt a stunning lens for the money, but the Canon it seems is designed to be the Ultimate quality UWA lens. Having the ultimate is always going to cost money. Hey compared to most of the big whites its a steal.

Alan

DreDaze wrote in post #17422337
it takes gels, but do they make ND grad gels? and even so, they'd be right in the middle most likely...or polarizers

Grads would definitely be an issue for some.

Polarizers, less of an issue since ultra wide typically don't do well with them.

IMO, just getting an ND for the UWA is super.

Xyclopx wrote in post #17422985
They do make nd and polarizer gels. And there are potentially better solutions than grad filters.

That said... I wonder if iq takes more of a hit from rear gels?

I use a gel like system for my ROK 14, hard to tell if any degradation is occurring.

Canon is still innovating !
Expensive or not, every year, new lenses or/and new version, yes it can be very expensive for some people, for other it's a bargain but when Canon put a new version of an ef-s lens at $300, complainers today, didn't complain last year, so this year let say it's the year of nice L lenses ... and L means ... Luxury = expensive
Canon have a huge range of choice AND prices, just be happy that your favorite brand continue to innovate in all direction