IS in medium length primes?

Any idea if Canon will ever put IS into the primes in the 80mm to 200mm range? A 135L with IS would be beyond description.

What was that about being able to predict the future and betting on horses? Probably no one here knows.

Yea, yea, I guess your right. Let me rephrase the question then.

Do you (y'all, any of you, all of you) think it would be a good move to put image stabilization into the medium length primes? (I think it is).

Do you think it likely that Canon would do that? (I think it is not).

About as likely as the Steelers and Eagles going to the Super Bowl.

ef2 wrote in post #7059456
About as likely as the Steelers and Eagles going to the Super Bowl.

there are two 70-200L zooms with IS that cover that range plus the 24-105L. i doubt the lenses would sell very well.

ed rader

Hi Keith,

Yes, definitely. I'd love to see a 135/2 IS! The 200/2.8 should get it too, or there should be a second version of that lens with it. In longer lenses, the 400/5.6 should be offered in an IS version, too. And, the 300/4 IS is probably due for an update.

Even the 300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4 and 600/4 with IS are using an older generation of it now. The 200/2 and 800/5.6 released this year have a "four stop" version now. Those older models use a two to three stop version.

And, while the 200/2 got it, but it seemed to add a wee bit to the lens' price!

Thankfully my 70-200/2.8 has it.

I don't really care if they put IS on lenses 100mm and shorter. I'm pretty capable of hand holding those steady already. Unfortunately, that seems to be where the general consumers want to see it, and they also demand zooms, so instead of updated primes we've gotten lenses like the 24-105/4 IS and EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS out of Canon in recent years.

It's a competitive thing, of course. Canon started the IS craze over a decade ago, and won a lot of converts because of it. All the other manufacturer's have had to follow suit with their own versions of stabilization, either optical/in-lens or sensor-based/in-camera. Heck, even most of the little point n shoots have it now.

I'm sure Canon will eventually add it to most of the lenses it offers, that don't already have it. However, the primes tend to get updated last... most demand is for zooms these days.

Before you wish too hard remember that adding IS does tend to add a bit of weight and double the price.

ef2 wrote in post #7059456
About as likely as the Steelers and Eagles going to the Super Bowl.

The Steelers ARE going, the Faggoty Eagles are NOT!

-Alan
Diehard Giants Fan

nureality wrote in post #7060305
The Steelers ARE going, the Faggoty Eagles are NOT!

-Alan
Diehard Giants Fan

wow that must be real important to you !

ed rader

I'm more lenient to IS, though it's such a limited accessory with very little practical use, one of those "save the shot taken from the hip" kinda things. I think the first 135 is good enough, its cheap and it's hella good. Adding IS to it would add $400-500 on it and muddle up the quality.