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
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff Photography Industry News 
Thread started 27 Nov 2010 (Saturday) 17:19
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

L lenses that needs a "Series II" or IS upgrade

 
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Nov 29, 2010 19:57 |  #16

My big "wanted" upgrades would be:

300 f/4L IS (upgrade optics, 4-stop IS)
400 f/5.6L (upgrade optics, add IS!)
100-400 f/4.5 -5.6 IS (upgrade optics, 4-stop IS, and maybe make the wide end even faster? f/4?)
24-70 f/2.8L (upgrade optics and add IS)


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KhanhD
"I need a grip . . . on my life"
1,523 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA
     
Nov 29, 2010 20:39 |  #17

24-70 2.8L > 24-70 2.8L IS
24-105 4L IS > 24-105 2.8L IS

Id be the first in line for either one.


Khanh Duong | KHDPhoto.com (external link) | flickr (external link) | facebook (external link)
iPhone 5s + Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
YankeeHotelFoxtrot
Member
189 posts
Joined Jun 2009
     
Nov 30, 2010 01:48 |  #18

I wish they'd get the 24-70 IS, 14-24, and 100-400 overwith so we can move on to the good stuff, like a 50/1.4 II, an EF-S 30/1.4, and a couple wide EF-S primes like a 15/2.8 and a 22/2. Who needs those expensive L's anyway? :-)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ W
Canon Fanosapien
Avatar
12,749 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Feb 2003
Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
     
Nov 30, 2010 12:18 |  #19

tkbslc wrote in post #11365088 (external link)
The non-L primes are all "good enough" and very affordable. I'd bet a new 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8, 100mm f2 and 28mm f1.8 would be $600 a piece or more. We already know how much the mk2 premium on the white teles is (50%!)

Well, I don't think that they're good enough when compared to the competition. Sigma's made great inroads in the market with decent, well-priced alternatives. The 30/1.4 has had good reviews, as has their 50/1.4. It's almost like Canon doesn't want to compete at that level, at least not with primes. Or perhaps they feel that mid-priced primes won't sell enough to warrant an upgrade.


Tom
5D IV, M5, RP, & various lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TweakMDS
Goldmember
Avatar
2,242 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Netherlands
     
Dec 01, 2010 06:04 |  #20

The only lens I want them to fix right now (read: I would buy after an upgrade) would be the 50mm f/1.4: give it real USM (the same as in the 28mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 etc) and 9 rounded aperture blades.
If they make it an L and raise the price - fine with me as long as it's nothing ridiculous. There are a few more budget L's that don't have weathersealing like the 70-200 F/4. Any new revision would probably raise the price a bit.

I'd also really like to see a high end crop zoom - with a focal length range of between 45-55 to 135-150mm and a constant aperture of f/2.8 but with IS and internal zoom/focus.
Kind of an alternative to the amazing Tokina 50-135 and Sigma 50-150.
Not that I'd immediately buy one since I have the Tokina and love it, but IS on it would make it a great option. It would also be a great addition to the 17-55 in a two-lens kit...


Some of my lenses focus beyond infinity...!
~Michael
Gear | Flickr (external link)
"My featured shots" (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nate42nd
Senior Member
Avatar
767 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2010
Location: The Wild West
     
Dec 01, 2010 06:57 |  #21

KhanhD wrote in post #11366875 (external link)
24-70 2.8L > 24-70 2.8L IS
24-105 4L IS > 24-105 2.8L IS

Id be the first in line for either one.

This is exactly what Canon needs to do. I went through this when I got my 17-55 F/2.8 IS That's why I love the 17-55 2.8 IS so much. I also got a 24-104 F/4L bu I wish it was a 2.8!


7D - - 17-55 F/2.8 - 24-105 F/4L - 100mm F/2.8 - 50mm F/1.8 - S95 / To see all click here
My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
14,374 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 1379
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Dec 01, 2010 07:13 |  #22

toxic wrote in post #11365785 (external link)
Why do I need to compare to something? Their performance is pathetic, period. I have to choose between $1300+ lenses if I want a good AF lens below 50mm.

Of course you have to compare them to something. If you have to spend $1300+ to get something better than a $300 lens, then that $300 lens is actually pretty good.

And maybe it takes $1300 to get anything better.


TANSTAAFL--The Only Unbreakable Rule in Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SMP_Homer
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,709 posts
Gallery: 29 photos
Likes: 541
Joined Mar 2008
Location: London, Ontario
     
Dec 01, 2010 09:25 |  #23

KhanhD wrote in post #11366875 (external link)
24-105 4L IS > 24-105 2.8L IS

Not a lot of lenses have more than 3X zoom at 2.8 - those that do are barely over 3X... Nothing is 4X plus in existance... I wouldn't hold out for someone to come out with one now!


EOS R6’ / 1D X / 1D IV (and the wife has a T4i)
Sig35A, Sig50A, Sig85A, Sig14-24A, Sig24-105A, Sig70-200S, Sig150-600C
100-400L, 100L, 100/2, 300 2.8L, 1.4x II / 2x II
600EX-II X3, 430EX-III X3

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KhanhD
"I need a grip . . . on my life"
1,523 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Boston, MA
     
Dec 01, 2010 10:51 |  #24

Its a long shot, I know. The 24-70 2.8L IS is plausible, though.

Id imagine the 24-105 2.8L IS would be the size and weight of a 70-200 2.8, and cost in the same neighborhood too.


Khanh Duong | KHDPhoto.com (external link) | flickr (external link) | facebook (external link)
iPhone 5s + Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mansalim
Goldmember
1,105 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: 16801
     
Dec 01, 2010 11:29 |  #25

i think i can live with 24-105 f2.8L, no IS..
and 10-22 on FF would be real nice!


:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,604 posts
Likes: 45
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Dec 01, 2010 11:32 |  #26

Why does everything have to be f2.8 or f4? Let's compromise on a 24-105 f3.4 IS for size and weight.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mansalim
Goldmember
1,105 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: 16801
     
Dec 01, 2010 11:43 |  #27

tkbslc wrote in post #11376377 (external link)
Why does everything have to be f2.8 or f4? Let's compromise on a 24-105 f3.4 IS for size and weight.

but we already have 24-105 f4 IS which is just 1/3 stop slower than f3.5..
i doubt it will sell


:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,604 posts
Likes: 45
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Dec 01, 2010 11:44 |  #28

mansalim wrote in post #11376447 (external link)
but we already have 24-105 f4 IS which is just 1/3 stop slower than f3.5..
i doubt it will sell

1/2 a stop from f3.4 actually.

I just don't get why everything has to be whole stops.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
EOS Rp | iPhone 11 Pro Max

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mansalim
Goldmember
1,105 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: 16801
     
Dec 01, 2010 11:45 |  #29

Idk..
maybe they can add another 400bucks to the price?

70-200mm f4 MSRP: USD709
70-200mm f2.8 MSRP: USD1449

*from canon usa website* (external link)

holy moly! thats more than 100% increase for a stop!


:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
14,374 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 1379
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Dec 01, 2010 14:39 |  #30

mansalim wrote in post #11376463 (external link)
Idk..
maybe they can add another 400bucks to the price?

70-200mm f4 MSRP: USD709
70-200mm f2.8 MSRP: USD1449

*from canon usa website* (external link)

holy moly! thats more than 100% increase for a stop!

A stop is a 100% increase in lens speed.


TANSTAAFL--The Only Unbreakable Rule in Photography

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

5,527 views & 0 likes for this thread, 18 members have posted to it.
L lenses that needs a "Series II" or IS upgrade
FORUMS Community Talk, Chatter & Stuff Photography Industry News 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

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 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Thunderstream
1206 guests, 122 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, 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.