Canon Community Canon Community
 


Reply
Highlighted
Honored Contributor
Posts: 5,484
Registered: ‎06-25-2014

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”


@kvbarkley wrote:

@ChrisPBacon wrote:

In my area on the left coast, television stations converted to digital broadcast transmission and countless people were without television until they threw away their old TVs and bought those high-definition models. 

 


It is their fault, if they were left without broadcast. It was *heavily* advertised. Most people bought an adapter. I did, and still have mine - somewhere. 8^)

 

I still have one analog TV station here in Albuquerque, but it is in Spanish.


Not everyone was as lucky as you apparently were. In the Boston area, yes, we were told about the conversion to digital, and we bought the necessary adapters. But what we were not told was that each digital channel would be divided into sub-channels, most reserved for the stations' private commercial use and all of them transmitting at such a low power level that they couldn't be received out in the suburbs. The net effect was just as Chris stated: a large number of people were left with no usable over-the-air TV reception.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 77
Registered: ‎11-16-2012

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

Canon say: "Our focus is on RF,’ says Canon: no new EF lenses unless the “market demands it.”  Canon confirms to focus development on RF-mount optics for the Canon EOS R family of lenses."

 

"Canon has confirmed that it is focusing development on producing RF-mount lens for its full-frame mirrorless system. As it stands today, while the EF mount for DSLRs is still supported, there won't be any new EF lenses unless they are demanded by the marketplace.

 

"The news comes as the company celebrates the launch of its new flagship camera, the Canon EOS-1D X Mark III – a camera that, like all Canon's full-frame DSLRs, can only use EF lenses. 

 

“ 'As you know, last year we launched the RF mount and EOS R system,' said Richard Shepherd, pro product marketing senior manager at Canon Europe. 'To date we’ve launched ten critically acclaimed lenses, and as it’s a new system we plan to continue this, launching more RF lenses while still fully supporting the EF lens system. And of course, should the market demand it, we are ready to create new EF lenses. But for now, our focus is on RF."

 

I say: Well, I am the marketplace, and I having a shopping list of Canon lenses, which I plan to add, as I am able to fund them, so, please do keep making  them:

 

1. EF 8-15mm Fisheye.

 

2. EF 11-24L.

 

3. One of the EF 16-35mm L lenses. I had the EF 16-35/2.8L II, but it showed its weaknesses when I added my 5Ds R.

 

4. EF 24-70/2.8L II.

 

5. EF 40/2.8 STM. I had one of these, but it was submerged in water, during a storm, so requires replacement.

 

6. EF 300/2.8L II IS. I have an EF 300/2.8L IS, but sooner of later, attrition may claim it, and it would be nice to have two 300/2.8 lenses, anyway, when photographing owls, Night Herons, and such, at night, with both a 7D II and a 5D IV.

 

7. EF 400mm DO II.

 

Thanks for your consideration.

Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 9,896
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

[ Edited ]

Here is what came to mind when I read your list.

 

1.  Sounds like a fun lens.  It is probably a must have for a wedding photographer.  It would [be] a novelty for me.

 

2. This is the wide angle lens I would want if I were a professional shooting architecture.

 

3.  I have the Mark II version, and love it [on a 6D and 6D2].  It looks much better without the lens correction, which seems to soften the images.

 

4.  THIS!  Make sure you buy this one first!

 

5.  If you want a pancake [lens], then go for it.  The EF 24-70 f/2.8 II USM covers that focal length and aperture, too.  [And will do a MUCH better job of covering it, too!}

 

6.  Now you talking over my head.  I have been tempted to buy one, and would done so a couple of years ago.  But, age is catching up with me, and I do not shoot as many sporting events as I used to.  Bad back!  I used to be the athlete in front of the camera way, way back in the day!

 

7.  I do not know anyone with this lens.  The couple handfuls of professional sports, Canon shooters that I know all use the EF 400mm f/2.8L II/III USM lenses.  I think it is worth the extra 15% for another full stop of aperture.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Doctor told me to get out and walk, so I bought a Canon."
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 109
Registered: ‎09-13-2014

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

[ Edited ]

I am curious about your comment regarding the 5dSr and EF 16-35/2.8L II combination, I utilize this combo and for landscape shots I have found it to perform well, I also have the previous version of the 16-35 and prefer the v2
So I am wondering about your opinion regarding performence, I have had good luck.

Highlighted
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 77
Registered: ‎11-16-2012

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

[ Edited ]

@Mitsubishiman wrote:

I am curious about your comment regarding the 5dSr and EF 16-35/2.8L II combination, I utilize this combo and for landscape shots I have found it to perform well, I also have the previous version of the 16-35 and prefer the v2
So I am wondering about your opinion regarding performence, I have had good luck.


The edges and corners were, well, uninspring. Maybe it was because I had such a wonderful sample of the EF-S 10-22mm lens, to use on 7D/7D II cameras, and because I was really liking the results when using my EF 35/2 IS on the 5Ds R, but the EF 16-35/2.8L II was not earning a place, in the case/bag, when I went shooting. 

 

My EF 16-35/2.8L II had competition from the Nikon side, too. I actually bought my Nikkor 14-24.2.8G at about the same time as my Canon L, and, I soon favored the Nikkor, on a D3s camera. (My wife was/is a dedicated Nikon shooter, and we can economize on some lenses and accessories by sharing a common lens mount system. I started adding pre-owned Nikon DSLRs in 2014.)

 

By the time I sold/traded my EF 16-35/2.8L II, I knew there were better ultra-wide Canon zoom lenses, either in production, announced, or strongly rumored. By now, these are the 11-24L, the 16-35/2.8L III, and the 16-35/4L IS, any of which I may add, sooner or later. I am currently experimenting with my EF 14/2.8L II, and a new EF 28/2.8 IS, moving UWA zooms to the back burner.

Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 12,701
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

The EF 16-35/2.8L II  is the only Canon lens I bought that I wished I didin't.  Bad thing about it is, I had a very good 17-40mm f4L and sold it.  In my defence I sold it before I used the EF 16-35/2.8L II. A far better choice is the Tokina 16-28mm F/2.8 AT-X Pro FX lens.

BTW, the Tok is at the very least as good as any of the Nikkor entries in this range and it costs 1/4 as much.  

EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 109
Registered: ‎09-13-2014

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

[ Edited ]

Everyone, I stand corrected, I have V2 & V3, I have been using V3 and I have not used the V2 in quite some time, I have had extremely good luck and it is far better than the V2 and I would seel the older one in a heatbeat.

It is a good combo on the 5DsR

My apologies on the initial comment, I agree the V2 had significant issues unlesss the lens hood was removed, even then occasionally there was viginetting, V3 was a vast improvement.

Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 9,896
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”


@Mitsubishiman wrote:

Everyone, I stand corrected, I have V2 & V3, I have been using V3 and I have not used the V2 in quite some time, I have had extremely good luck and it is far better than the V2 and I would seel the older one in a heatbeat.

It is a good combo on the 5DsR

My apologies on the initial comment, I agree the V2 had significant issues unlesss the lens hood was removed, even then occasionally there was viginetting, V3 was a vast improvement.


I guess my bad eyes are not seeing what everyone else is seeing.   I rarely shoot with this lens wide open.

 

EOS 6D Mark II2019_10_101005392.jpg

 

Most of the time I am at f/4 or f/5.6.  Also, I am cropping most of the images slightly when the subject is fairly close, anyway.

 

30EA8A1A-B7D0-4881-823B-083F0E24854E.jpeg

 

Might Mouse is cropped from a portrait orientation, while the rainbow is not cropped, at all.  The rainbow could not fit in the frame with a 24-70, so I had to shoot it at 16mm.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Doctor told me to get out and walk, so I bought a Canon."
Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 12,701
Registered: ‎12-07-2012

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

It's not going to distort a blue sky or a center cropped photo for pete's sake. And, nobody buys a f2.8 lens so they can use it at  f4 or f5.6 exclusively or to crop to the center of everything.  

EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and several lenses!
Highlighted
VIP
Posts: 9,896
Registered: ‎08-13-2015

Re: Canon: “No new lenses.”

[ Edited ]

@ebiggs1 wrote:

It's not going to distort a blue sky or a center cropped photo for pete's sake. And, nobody buys a f2.8 lens so they can use it at  f4 or f5.6 exclusively or to crop to the center of everything.  


The rainbow shot is not cropped. Most landscape shots are not shot a f/2.8.  The sweet spot of most lenses is around f/8.  It just happens to be a happy coincidence that the  lenses with the best IQ also have wide apertures.  

 

I am not aware of any law that says I must always shoot at the widest aperture.  Do you?

 

178BF55A-3F30-486C-B5F7-58F037D16FF9.jpeg

 

I do use the lens indoors at f/8 quite frequently.  It captures great photos.  The only crop on the above image was to level the horizon.

 

5FBB62E1-B254-45DC-BBD8-CC76CDA85733.jpeg

 

I like to use it indoors when shooting in close quarters.  

 

29E58ADB-E34E-4194-ADEE-024AB3ABEE52.jpeg

 

Guess what happens when shooting at f/2.8 indoors at close quarters. The DoF [so] is narrow that the edges will be OOF, anyway. The soft edges do not matter.  The DoF "cropped" the image for me.

 

9F4C13DA-9A3A-467C-AED8-6C05CBB848A3.jpeg

 

I do shoot indoors with a narrow apertures, too.  It needs a high ISO.  The above is an HDR shot, while the below is not.  Neither shot has been cropped, other than to level the horizon slightly.  One of the consequences of shooting handheld is that my horizons are rarely perfect.

 

62D8585D-83B6-4FC0-984C-49D3AA878C05.jpeg

 

The lens does what I need it do do.  As you are so fond of saying, all gear has limits.  

 

I suggest that you practice what you preach.  Get off of my case, dude.  I never start these flame wars, my argumentative friend.  I just make sure they come end in short order.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Doctor told me to get out and walk, so I bought a Canon."
powered by Lithium

LIKE US on Facebook FOLLOW US on Twitter WATCH US on YouTube CONNECT WITH US on Linkedin WATCH US on Vimeo FOLLOW US on Instagram SHOP CANON at the Canon Online Store
© Canon U.S.A., Inc.   |    Terms of Use   |    Privacy Statement