11-13-2012 10:55 PM - edited 11-14-2012 03:14 AM
What would be you wish list in terms of lens ?
Post yours here and let's hope the voices will go all the way to Tokyo.
Personally, considering Canon has not announced any bright EF lens (less than 2.8) since 2008, I really miss some exciting fast primes.
The just-announced 35mm f2 IS is the exception to the above, but considering the older canon f1.4 and the new and affordable sigma 35mm f1.4, the 35mm f2 does not qualifies as exciting to me. If you're doing video or like small form factor, you must be quite happy (except your wallet).
Other than this, there is a lot of dark plastic zoom, a lot of Cinema lens (obviously repackaging of existing lenses), and the new M line. But little seems to be done for the FF lover of fast primes. That's too bad considering they have done some amazing lens such as 85II, 200 f2, the new 400mm etc.
The first lens I’d really like is a baby brother to my 200 f2.0 IS. A 135mm f1.4 IS would be perfect, or make it f1.8 if f1.4 is too big. Would clearly buy without second thoughts ! Competition has 135 f1.8 already. I'd rather go for the aperture than the IS.
Then, I really miss the 45mm and 90mm TS-E revisions, why stop at the 24mm for MkII updates ? It’s been a long time and nothing comes, but I would buy both lens very quickly.
I love the 85mm II but the slow AF is not always nice. A faster version would be most welcome. Weather sealed would be nice too.
Then, I have a request for the future 200mm or 400mm.
The idea to have an integrated converter is great, but I can always add this at the back of the lens (wether there is internal converter or not).
But what I cannot do, is make the lens brighter. So I would rather love a brighter lens than a longer lens.
For example, a 135mm 1.4 that would have an internal converter to become a ~200mm f2.0 would be much better to me than a 200mm f2.0 with a internal converter to be a ~300mm f2.8.
In the same way, a 300mm f2 that would internally internally convert to 400mm 2.8 would be better than a 400mm 2.8 that would convert into a 600mm f4. Got it ?
So my top would be :
1/ 135mm f1.4 (1.8) (IS)
2/ TS-E !
3/ Faster 85mm
4/ more bright primes !
Last but not least, you need to get the lens prices down. The new versions are very expensive, while techonology gets betters, electronics get cheaper, production process gets better, the production volumes are increasing a lot - but we don't see the benefit of it. You now produce one million lens a month, the same as the 1995-2001 period (taken from your own press release). You can't blame it all on the R&D. Make lens much cheaper and we'll buy much more.
So guys, what are your needs and hopes ?
11-13-2012 11:53 PM
I want to see a collapsible standard zoom, like Sony and Panasonic, for the EOS M. Carry around a 5D3 with the 24-105 in a Think Tank Hubba Hubba Hiney is just too much work during vacation.
11-14-2012 03:01 AM
Yes, I'd love to see a 135mm IS. I'm ok with the current f2. It would become a beast with both the IS and a faster aperture. I'm also all for Mark II TS-E's 45 and 90mm. A new 50mm f1.4L and a 20mm f2.8L would be nice too.
And I wish they would make a filter holder for the TS-E 17mm, preferably in conjunction with a reputable filter maker like Lee, Hitech, or B+W.
11-14-2012 04:46 AM - edited 11-14-2012 04:47 AM
1. 50 mm F/1.4 IS - which would be Sharp wide open.
I would dare to say that I'm not so interested so much in IS - I will trade the IS for having good-to-very-good results (corner sharpness, not-so-much vignetting) at F/1.4
2. Better (U)WA at f/2.8 - better (lesser) distortions, vignetting aso. on a 16-35 f/2.8 - I'm not interested so much in having reach on tele side - In fact I'm doing my work now with Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 FX exactly because it has lesser distortions on the wide end.
3. I think that's possible to have a short zoom with an aperture lower than f/2.8. I think that this will be a killer. Having for example something like 40-60 at f/2 will be quite neat. However I'm reserved if this thing would be achievable. Perhaps is better to mention that I would carry a little weight in plus for this (because most probably this will be little bigger and heavier lens than a 24-70).
just my 2c & HTH
11-14-2012 06:50 AM
The Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm f/1.8 ZA ( Sony SAL-135F18Z) weights 1050g for 89x115mm, and can be found for about 1800 USD.
It is excelent (Photozone test), at f1.8 it beats the canon at f2.0 on everything (impressive gap in resolution) except chromatics, the most easily automatically corrected defect.
The canon stay excelnt for his price and a lens it is easy to recommend.
The current 135mm f2 is 83x112mm and 750g, that is not very far away. The 85II is already a kilo.
Needeless to say I'd choose f1.8 over having the IS + f2.0, but I would gladly take both. My 200/2 is 2.5kg, so I would not mind more weight than a kilo for the 135mm.
So Canon, give us a new 135mm dreams are made of
11-14-2012 04:52 PM
1) EF 100-400mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM with 4-stop IS and same image quality as the 70-200 II and 24-70 II
2) EF 20mm f/2.8 L USM with the same image quality as the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 in particular sharp corners
3) EF 300mm f/4 L IS USM II with 4-stop IS and better image quality compared to current model
I'd get 2 and either 1 or 3 as soon as they become available, otherwise it will be the Zeiss and I don't know what to do on the long end.
11-14-2012 05:16 PM - edited 11-14-2012 05:59 PM
Quite simple really...a decent, affordable 50mm L preferably f/1.4 but I'd settle for f/1.8
I think most of what can be said about the Canon 50mm lenses has been said;
50mm f/1.8 II Toytown plastic appearance. No full time manual focus, Non-USM & noisy focus. Surprisingly optically very sharp. Cheap to look at but then again cheap to buy!
50mm f/1.4 Much better build quality with full time manual focus. Micro USM not ring USM and once again is noisy when focussing. Optically very sharp and of course a little faster but prone to autofocus failure? Better background blur.
50mm f/1.2L Built like a tank, is a little bit faster still, has the all-important red ring around the lens barrel (if that might be important) but larger, heavier and much more expensive! A little faster again and the smoothest background blur of them all as you would expect when wide open but shockingly when stopped down not much sharper than the two lenses above it. Also many complaints about variable focussing issues.
There is also the 50mm f/2.5 Macro which goes down to half-lifesize but like the 1.8 above doesn't have USM or full time manual focus and the lens barrel extends while focussing.
I for one am still waiting for Canon to release a great 50mm lens that ticks all the boxes but looking at the trending on recent lenses am worried that if/when they do it might be priced out of reach of many of us...
But as much as I would like a great 50mm I would also like to see an updated Eye Control Focus back in a Canon EOS body as that would upgrade all of my lenses!