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 27 Mar 2009 (Friday) 13:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why is there...

 
joe ­ mama
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 27, 2009 13:34 |  #1
bannedPermanent ban

...a 70-300 / 4-5.6 DO IS, 70-300 / 4-5.6 IS, 70-200 / 4L IS, 70-200 / 2.8L IS, 200 / 2L IS, but no 200 / 2.8L IS?

For that matter, why does every single prime with a focal length longer than 200mm have IS except for the 400 / 5.6L?

I'll have to guess that they're coming eventually, but one would have thought that simply adding IS to a lens would not take that long to incorporate. I know that both the 70-300 / 4-5.6 IS the 70-200 / 4L IS also got a work-over in optics, so one would hope that these last two on the list might as well.

Makes one wonder what Canon will charge for them.


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Madweasel
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,224 posts
Likes: 61
Joined Jun 2006
Location: Fareham, UK
     
Mar 27, 2009 13:37 |  #2

I would expect that most lens designs would have to be modified to incorporate the IS unit. But I think you're right that IS is being brought in progressively across the range, certainly at the longer end.


Mark.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
khall
Goldmember
3,803 posts
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Wollongong Australia.
     
Mar 27, 2009 13:52 |  #3

Could well be the cost factor.


YNWA.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 27, 2009 13:54 |  #4
bannedPermanent ban

khall wrote in post #7611189 (external link)
Could well be the cost factor.

That doesn't fly, at least, not merely for IS. Look at the prices of the 18-55 IS, 55-250 IS, and 70-300 IS. In the case of the 70-200 / 4L IS, I think the price increase was not merely IS, but optics as well.


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rcaq
Member
74 posts
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Europe
     
Mar 27, 2009 13:54 |  #5

of all the alternative stuff canon mde to the L series, the biggest disappointment is the DO stuff - while the 70-300 seems to be ok to me, the 400 f4 DO, considering the price tag and what you could get instead, is far from acceptable -


Official Website: http://www.rcaq.net/ (external link)
Blog: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/rcaq/ (external link)
5D2, 24L, 50 1.2 AI

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sean
Goldmember
Avatar
1,714 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
     
Mar 27, 2009 14:15 |  #6

joe mama wrote in post #7611093 (external link)
...a 70-300 / 4-5.6 DO IS, 70-300 / 4-5.6 IS, 70-200 / 4L IS, 70-200 / 2.8L IS, 200 / 2L IS, but no 200 / 2.8L IS?

For that matter, why does every single prime with a focal length longer than 200mm have IS except for the 400 / 5.6L?

I'll have to guess that they're coming eventually, but one would have thought that simply adding IS to a lens would not take that long to incorporate. I know that both the 70-300 / 4-5.6 IS the 70-200 / 4L IS also got a work-over in optics, so one would hope that these last two on the list might as well.

Makes one wonder what Canon will charge for them.

There is no need with the 70-200 F2.8L IS and the 200 F2L IS


Canon 50D - 17-55mm F2.8 IS - 300mm F4L IS - 70-200mm F4L IS - 50mm F1.8 - 580EX II & 430EX - Full Gear Listing
Flickr (external link) - C&C Always welcome.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nureality
Goldmember
3,611 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
     
Mar 27, 2009 14:22 |  #7

a) DO is a total failure in most people's eyes and rightfully so. The "bulls-eye" bokeh is really distracting. I think Canon has abandoned development of DO for now, because we haven't seen any other lenses drop with DO since the initial 2 and the most recent dates back to Summer '04 (70-300 DO IS), the 400 DO came out in '01. And since nothing for 5 years. The response to these lenses has been tepid at best, and while they aren't discontinuing production, you don't see anything new coming with DO.

b) The 70-200 f/4L USM debuted in September 1999. The 70-200 f/4L IS USM debuted 7 years later in November of 2006. Frankly, they take their time with updates of lenses.

the 70-200 f/2.8L USM came out in March 1995, The 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM came out in September 2001 (thats a 6 year stretch). And mind you in both cases, the IS version was a debut, not a "Mark II".

The 28-80 f/2.8-4L came out in April 1989, it was replaced by the 28-70 f/2.8L USM in November 1993, which finally was replaced by the 24-70 f/2.8L USM in November 2002. That last upgrade took 9 years.... arguably the 24-70 f/2.8L USM is due for a replacement anytime now.

The price differences are an amalgam of many factors, optics, build quality (materials), labor costs to handle more precise instruments and tools for construction, and also product line dilution. Canon has over 60 lenses in their line, with many segments having clearly defined LOW PRICE, Mid-Range, and LUXE (L) models. They must keep the models separated by price. $500 bux difference between the 70-200L's IS and NON-IS models is meant to keep 4 models on the market and offer the client more options that will ultimately keep them buying a CANON-branded product as opposed to something from the 3rd parties. Although many people here do their homework and are willing to look at comparable and in many cases BETTER products from Tokina and Sigma, the average buyer is a brand-zombie. By having 4 differently priced 70-200's they give the customer enough options to almost gaurantee a Canon sale.


Alan "NuReality" Fronshtein
Gear List | PBase |  (external link)flickr (external link)
Lots of Fun, Lots of Laughs, Happy Trigger Finger!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BiPolarBear
Senior Member
Avatar
377 posts
Joined Oct 2006
Location: The Forest City, Canada
     
Mar 27, 2009 14:32 |  #8

Sean wrote in post #7611321 (external link)
There is no need with the 70-200 F2.8L IS and the 200 F2L IS

Maybe.
But i'd prefer a $1,200 200 f/2.8IS prime over the bigger heavier whiter 70-200 f/2.8IS ($2,100 in Canada).
As for the other one, $7K (in Canada) for the 200 f/2 is a bit of a reach for us po folk.
Greg


Best wide angle lens? Two steps backward. Look for the "ah-ha". - Ernst Haas

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 27, 2009 14:38 |  #9
bannedPermanent ban

Sean wrote in post #7611321 (external link)
There is no need with the 70-200 F2.8L IS and the 200 F2L IS

That's like saying there's no "need" for cropped DSLRs because FF DSLRs exist. So while there may be no "need" for wealthier people don't mind, or even prefer, large and heavy lenses, but there is most certainly a "want" for less wealthy people who prefer smaller and lighter lenses.


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 27, 2009 14:43 |  #10
bannedPermanent ban

nureality wrote in post #7611369 (external link)
b) The 70-200 f/4L USM debuted in September 1999. The 70-200 f/4L IS USM debuted 7 years later in November of 2006. Frankly, they take their time with updates of lenses.

the 70-200 f/2.8L USM came out in March 1995, The 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM came out in September 2001 (thats a 6 year stretch). And mind you in both cases, the IS version was a debut, not a "Mark II".

The 28-80 f/2.8-4L came out in April 1989, it was replaced by the 28-70 f/2.8L USM in November 1993, which finally was replaced by the 24-70 f/2.8L USM in November 2002. That last upgrade took 9 years.... arguably the 24-70 f/2.8L USM is due for a replacement anytime now.

Got it -- they're slow. Perhaps lenses are designed with a production run in mind, and updates will not come until that run has finished.

The price differences are an amalgam of many factors, optics, build quality (materials), labor costs to handle more precise instruments and tools for construction, and also product line dilution. Canon has over 60 lenses in their line, with many segments having clearly defined LOW PRICE, Mid-Range, and LUXE (L) models. They must keep the models separated by price. $500 bux difference between the 70-200L's IS and NON-IS models is meant to keep 4 models on the market and offer the client more options that will ultimately keep them buying a CANON-branded product as opposed to something from the 3rd parties. Although many people here do their homework and are willing to look at comparable and in many cases BETTER products from Tokina and Sigma, the average buyer is a brand-zombie. By having 4 differently priced 70-200's they give the customer enough options to almost gaurantee a Canon sale.

Time's are a'changin', though, as 3rd party manufacturers begin to pump out more and more quality glass. The primary reasons I think people may stay with Canon are not IQ, but USM and AF consistency. Sigma is now coming to understand the importance of USM in their lenses, so when Tamron and Tokina get that message, there will be even stiffer competition. But they most certainly need to address the AF issues, which, ironically enough, Canon may have addressed with micro AF adjust. Of course, that will only help for AF that is consistenly off; it won't help for inconsistent AF.


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KarlosDaJackal
Goldmember
Avatar
1,740 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Dublin, Ireland
     
Mar 27, 2009 16:19 as a reply to  @ joe mama's post |  #11

People took great photos before IS ever existed, in fact anybody using an Medium or Large format camera seems to do fine without IS also.

IS is not essential.


My Website (external link) - Flick (external link)r (external link) - Model Mayhem (external link) - Folio32 (external link)
Gimp Tutorials by me on POTN
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Mar 27, 2009 16:33 |  #12

Ya, but the MF and LF cameras were usually found supported by tripods taking pictures of static subjects.

As far as new lenses...... Canon only has the manpower/budget, as well as, factory space/capacity to produce a few new designs per year.... with that said... most lenses will have a very long life cycle.


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
joe ­ mama
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
666 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Earth
     
Mar 27, 2009 16:41 |  #13
bannedPermanent ban

KarlosDaJackal wrote in post #7612121 (external link)
People took great photos before IS ever existed, in fact anybody using an Medium or Large format camera seems to do fine without IS also.

IS is not essential.

People took great photos before AF ever existed. People took great photos before digital. People take great photos without zoom lenses. I fail to see your point.


--joe

www.josephjamesphotogr​aphy.com (external link)
www.pbase.com/joemama (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KarlosDaJackal
Goldmember
Avatar
1,740 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Dublin, Ireland
     
Mar 27, 2009 17:13 |  #14

bohdank wrote in post #7612201 (external link)
Ya, but the MF and LF cameras were usually found supported by tripods taking pictures of static subjects.

As far as new lenses...... Canon only has the manpower/budget, as well as, factory space/capacity to produce a few new designs per year.... with that said... most lenses will have a very long life cycle.

Flash can freeze, and MF are capable of high shutter speeds also, as for support, you would expect a long lens 400+ to be supported also. Certainly most pro's use support and don't handhold because they can.

joe mama wrote in post #7612252 (external link)
People took great photos before AF ever existed. People took great photos before digital. People take great photos without zoom lenses. I fail to see your point.

You just proved it for me. Some people still use MF and you can still buy this stuff, some people still use Film and you can still buy this stuff, some people still use primes....... and yes some people still don't "need" or want IS and they buy lenses also.


My Website (external link) - Flick (external link)r (external link) - Model Mayhem (external link) - Folio32 (external link)
Gimp Tutorials by me on POTN
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Mar 27, 2009 17:40 |  #15

KarlosDaJackal wrote in post #7612467 (external link)
Flash can freeze, and MF are capable of high shutter speeds also, as for support, you would expect a long lens 400+ to be supported also. Certainly most pro's use support and don't handhold because they can.
.

You're picking and choosing your rebuttal arguments. I'll play.

Flash is a last resort and won't help you shooting handheld with a 200mm at something 50 feet away, or an evening shot of a large vista.

What's the crop or 35mm equivalent of a 400mm on a MF ? I seriously doubt you'd HAVE to put it on a tripod.

IS is great for hand holding at slow shutter speeds when you don't have another option, which can be often. I don't carry my tripod in my back pocket.

When's the last time you saw a handheld 100+mm, panning shots taken with a MF at 1/100s or slower ?

I'll second the "what's your point ?"


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

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

1,856 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why is there...
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 Mbagwu
759 guests, 176 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.