Why hasn't Canon made this lens?

Glenn NK wrote in post #3548624
Could you direct me to all the complaints on the 24/105?

https://photography-on-the.net …t=345269&highli​ght=24-105

https://photography-on-the.net …044&highlight=2​4-105+soft

https://photography-on-the.net …394&highlight=2​4-105+soft

https://photography-on-the.net …901&highlight=2​4-105+soft

glenn, please read all these threads since i took the time to search FOR you, i love my 24-105 by the way.

If Canon makes a lens like that including all features you mentioned , it would not be as cheap as you would like to speand your money on this type of lens.

There is the Nikkor 18-135 , but the Nikkor does not have the VR or VR 2 , I have had one so I know , and it focuses quite slow as compared with Canon USM lenses or Nikkor AF-S (faster kind of it).

The Nikon lens also has alot of CA at 18mm.

Not much better than the Sigma OS lens in terms of IQ and mechanics.

More importantly , the 18mm is not wide enough for an EF-S body like my XTI , it 'd have to be the EF-S17-135 F4 IS USM, if Canon were to replace the EF-S17-85IS, I prefer to have an improved version of the EF-S17-85IS ,though( for a Canon 1.6x crop body, it's important to be 17-xx not 18).

I notice the huge difference between the wide end of my Sigma OS and that of my 17-85IS , plus the 17mm wide end of my 17-85IS is wider than my Sister's 17-55IS and the Sigma's 18mm is not the true 18mm either, it is more like a 19.3 -170mm lens than a 18-200 lens.

It's very important to note the Nikon DX's crop factor is 1.5x, and so the 18mm on any Nikon body would be like 27mm on a FF, but on any 1.6x crop Canon body, the 18mm would be like 29.3mm on a FF body.

I dont think 29mm is wide enough for most of D-SLR shooters as for a walk around zoom, I think this 1mm difference in wide end of zoom is more important than the 50mm longer tele end of the 18-135mm than that of my 17-85IS for most of travel needs.

Actually, while I am traveling many countries , I seldom need any longer than the 85mm end of the lens, but I always want to go much wider than the 17mm end of the lens , so I always compliment this lens with my EF-S10-22.

I thought the OS would be the perfect travel lens for me , but it would not , I simply find the tele end of the lens useless(can not use my 500D close up lens with it) and I dont even use the 100-200 range of it much , when I know I need a tele zoom for a day, I prefer to have my 70-300IS or EF300F4IS wiht me because 200 is not long enough for most of tele photo applications, 300 on a crop body is about 480 on a FF so it is much longer than the 320mm (200x1.6 ) , with 1.4x TC , the 200mm of these Ultra zooms are useless.

And use of the 1.4x TC deteriorate IQ a lot even with these excellent 70-200Ls , so I think the 300 mm end of the 70-300Is is a bit sharper than that of 280 mm end of the 70-200f4 L IS with any 1.4 x TC from any maker.

Also , as you can see from the Size of the OS Sigma and Nikkor VR 18-200, it would be a huge lens if Canon were to make a similar lens with its latest version of IS, and I think its target market would not like the size.

The real reason why Nikon made the AF-S18-135 IF G without the super powerful VR2 probably was to make it reasonably small and cheap, as some people complaining about the size of the AF-S18-200 F3.5-5.6 IF VR2.

And also, Canon is not good at designing this kind of zooms , Nikon, Tamron are definitely better at it since they've been designing and developing this kind of lenses for a long time............

I think next year or end of this year , Tamorn will release VC equipped version of the 18-250 , I would like to replace my Sigma OS with that , I am sure Tamorn won't make it as big as the Sigma OS even with the VC.

Look at their 18-250 , it is even smaller than their 18-200 , and it is much much smaller than the Sigma OS , also, the 200 mm end of Sigma is, as I said many times in many threads ,actually like 170mm , while the Tamorn 200mm end is almost really 200mm...............

I think Canon wants to keep its brand image as professional as it can be, and therefore , the company mostlikely avoid designing this kind of ultra zooms.

Finally, I just bought an Olympus with 18-180 since the new Oly E510IS has in camera IS and it is effective, not like Sony Alpha's useless SSS or Pentax gimmick , and the Oly has the best Dust reduction technology. So although the 18-180 is not wide enough , the E510 and 18-180 combo is the best ultra zoom solution now available ...............

I think if you need an ultra zoom , you should look else where , and keep your Canon for more critical works with more serious lenses.

Try the Oly with the 18-180 ED or Nikon D80 with AF-S18-200VR2 , either of them should be much better than the Sigma OS and XTI or XT combo.

MaxxuM wrote in post #3544965
EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
$1000

That's some serious overpricing..

I doubt I will buy such a lens for such a price..

If it was a constant f/4 aperture.. I might think about it.

Hey, the EF-S17-135 or like that is on the way to the market , I have confirmed it at the most trusted shop in Tokyo and I am sure it will be out by September.

Usually , Canon announces a couple of lenses with its new body , so I am guessing that the EF-S17-135IS will be announced with EF 28f1.8 USM mark2 and the long waited and long talked about EOS40D in next month.

So better not buy the Sigma crappy lens.

That said, after having spent a lot of time with my new 17-55IS, I relaize that I do not need longer zooms with compromising quality, my most used focal length was 45 mm ,followed by 35mm , 55mm and 17mm .

It is better to have a great zoom of optically and mechnically lest compromised than having so many just ok kinda lenses to cover all range ...........

Many people are in initial excitment of their purchase of the Sigma OS and get angry when people do not share the same value in super zooms as theirs, though they eventually wake up and see the reality , the OS does not work reliably and the AF so slow and inaccurate.

Also, the OS longevity is questionable , efficiency seems ok , though.

So it is too early to ask a person so excited about the Sigma and thinking he or she bought a right lens about how good the lens is(of course , they rave about it , or you get critised as narrowminded ).

Just wait a few more weeks and ask them what they think of the same OS lens that they have been raving about, I am sure they say something dorastically different .

I was like many others initially so excited that forgot about all negatives of the lens , or maybe denying or trying not to see these negaitves of the OS lens.

But fortunately, when I bought it , I was at my grand mom's home in Japan and read so many AF issues and AF-MF issues, to be able to realize that this lens would not be as good as I thought it would be and would not be able to replace any of my lenses.

The AF /MF issue of the OS is serious , once you use MF for a while , the lens will refuse to AF until you turn your camera off for more than 10munites.

I had this problem and sent the lens back to Sigma , so I was forced to stay in Japan longer than I thought I would.

My second copy had more serious issue , the famous one , the left side softness, I mean really soft, so I returned it .

The non-OS was about the right size , but this OS one is simply too big and heavy for a travel light lens , and I can confirm the build of it is not as good as many at dpreview brag about it , I think they misunderstand to beleive that the heavier the better build lens .............seriously , there is nothing to write home about it.....

If I go travel light , I 'd use my Oly E510IS with Panasonic Leica 14-150 , it is much smaller and much better than the Sigma OS.

Even the Oly's 14-42 kit lens out perform the crappy( wanna say ****ty but can not be allowed to type the word here) Sigma.

I am very fairly and logically speaking since I have no love for any brand and as I think I am the one of these people having used the OS for longest time period , if you need or wanna get this kind of zoom and that is your main reason to use an SLR , then go with the Oly E510 , it is much better for travel photography in day light at tourist attractions(less conspicuous and smaller).

In addition to the exceptional color the Oly cameras are being famous for , the new E510IS has very good high ISO performance , the noise level of the new Panasonic sensor is very well controlled , and is arguably the best at ISO1600 in the consumer cameras(the 30D is not a consumer camera), I think the E510IS is a huge improvement over the old E400 built around the Kodak noise box.

Any way, do not be limiting yourself to one brand , and try the Oly or even a Nikon , they are all good , though the Oly or the D40X is not good at sport photography since the AF of them is so lousy..........only 3 point AF, worse than the AF on my xtI , and the Oly burst mode is so lousy as well.

I think a 30D or a new 40D with an Oly comb is my ideal camera combo.

I think with the 2.0x crop factor and the in-body IS, the Oly is a great great tele photo camera , so I use my Canons for low light, macros and super wide.

Note : if you are interested in macros , you 'd better look elsewhere than the Oly camp since Oly has no excelelnt macro lenses like Canon 100 f2.8 and Tamron 90mm f2.8 (Tamorn does not even make any lens for Olympus).

I think there is no one perfect system choice, but with two brand systems, you can do almost all.

What they really need is a EF- 10-600mm f/2.8 IS USM with min focus distance of 20cm and a macro setting from 1x-10x with a built in flash around the edge of the lens for macro/portrait/anythin​g u want a flash for shooting. Preferably for under $10,000 and under 5 kg. WHEN CANON CAN DO THAT I WILL BE THE FIRST TO BUY IT

lance v wrote in post #3588925
What they really need is a EF- 10-600mm f/2.8 IS USM with min focus distance of 20cm and a macro setting from 1x-10x with a built in flash around the edge of the lens for macro/portrait/anythin​g u want a flash for shooting. Preferably for under $10,000 and under 5 kg. WHEN CANON CAN DO THAT I WILL BE THE FIRST TO BUY IT

Why skimp, let's make it a f1.4 L lens while we're at it.

Oh, ha ha...

I don't expect a mirical :P but I don't think it was that odd of a request of Canon. Here are some examples:

Nikkor AF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 G IF-ED DX – Cost: $250

I would purpose Canon add some L glass and a new generation IS which would push the price up at least $500 on Canon's past track record.

Sigma AF 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 DC (PentaxK ver.) – Cost: $250

Again, not a 'bad' lens, the Pentax version was pretty good. Add superior glass and an IF and it would be a serious lens.

Canon EF 28-105 F/3.5-4.5 II USM & Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM both prove that a moderate wide zoom can be made and done so with quality. The 24-105 will probably be the way I go after my credit card recovers from buying the 70-200 f/4L in two weeks – but will will keep my Tamron as it has proven itself repeatedly.

The 24-105 is an great lens, the IS is amazing. I handheld this one...3 second exposure @ f/4...pretty sharp