# I want a ef 18 mm f.1,8 L is. Canon can you here me



## Heidrun (Jun 8, 2011)

This one i deffenitly missing from the canon lenses. Do you think it ever will happen that Canon make such a lens ?


----------



## foobar (Jun 8, 2011)

Is that another "I want Canon to makes lenses for APS-H" threads? (18mm on APS-H equals the FOV of a 24mm on FF)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 8, 2011)

Or, is the point that you want very wide and very fast? Those are among the most difficult lenses to design - Canon has taken two tries at 24mm f/1.4, and even the MkII has it's flaws (very mushy corners and substantial vignetting). The only wider fast lens that I'm aware of is the Sigma 20mm f/1.8, and it gives new meaning to the term 'soft corners' (even on APS-C they're mush, and on FF, well....), and the center isn't much better wide open.


----------



## Admin US West (Jun 8, 2011)

I doubt that they will make a lens that wide and fast. they could, but the market might be small for the price. They still have not updated older lenses yet that are standard focal lengths, and seem to only turn out a few new models a year.


----------



## LuCoOc (Jun 8, 2011)

An 18mm or 20mm ef-s prime would be usefull. Third party manufacturers already started to produce 50mm equivalents (Sigma 30mm 1.4 DC)... how about a 35mm equivalent?


----------



## sb (Jun 8, 2011)

LOL and I want a 5mm-1000mm f/0.5 with triple IS, weighing less than a feather, with warp speed auto focus. And it better be sharp!


----------



## EYEONE (Jun 8, 2011)

Canon really does need to update it's Non-L EF Primes. The 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm are all ancient.


----------



## foobar (Jun 8, 2011)

LuCoOc said:


> how about a 35mm equivalent?


+1

A cheaper, EF-S version of the 24L would be very nice.


----------



## Heidrun (Jun 8, 2011)

foobar said:


> LuCoOc said:
> 
> 
> > how about a 35mm equivalent?
> ...



Still i dont understand why Canon makes 2 sets of lenses. and one set doesent fitt on procamera


----------



## epsiloneri (Jun 8, 2011)

Heidrun said:


> Still i dont understand why Canon makes 2 sets of lenses. and one set doesent fitt on procamera



That's not really difficult to understand. It's more expensive to manufacture lenses that produce an image that covers a larger sensor. Thus to make lenses cheaper for the large consumer market, they produce a special "cheap version" (EF-S) that only cover a small sensor (APS-C).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2011)

Heidrun said:


> Still i dont understand why Canon makes 2 sets of lenses. and one set doesent fitt on procamera



How many pro cameras does Canon sell, compared to the number of consumer cameras? They don't publish specifics, but I am sure they sell hundreds of Rebel cameras for every single 1-series body. Since the consumer cameras use a smaller sensor, and smaller/cheaper lenses can be designed for that smaller sensor, why is it surpirsing that they make class of lenses compatible only with that smaller sensor?


----------



## EYEONE (Jun 9, 2011)

epsiloneri said:


> Heidrun said:
> 
> 
> > Still i dont understand why Canon makes 2 sets of lenses. and one set doesent fitt on procamera
> ...



True, but Canon doesn't really make EF-S Primes (except for the 60mm Macro). In this case, they make a cheaper Non L with lower build quality and a L version with top quality. But it has nothing to do with EF and EF-S regarding primes.


----------



## epsiloneri (Jun 9, 2011)

EYEONE said:


> True, but Canon doesn't really make EF-S Primes (except for the 60mm Macro). In this case, they make a cheaper Non L with lower build quality and a L version with top quality. But it has nothing to do with EF and EF-S regarding primes.



I guess it's because these non-L primes are from the old film days, when even the cheaper SLRs where FF. In particular wide-angle primes would benefit from going EF-S (price- and size-wise). I find it a bit perplexing that Canon hasn't put more effort into producing such lenses, I guess the reason is that zooms are relatively so much more popular in that sector. It shouldn't be impossible to make, e.g., an EF-S 10mm/2.8 lens, I look forward to the day we see one


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2011)

epsiloneri said:


> I guess it's because these non-L primes are from the old film days, when even the cheaper SLRs where FF.



I think that's exactly the reason. In the days of film, there were still cheap SLR bodies, and budget lenses had to be available for that segment. Now that APS-C is more common, that's the market segment for the less expensive lenses.



epsiloneri said:


> In particular wide-angle primes would benefit from going EF-S (price- and size-wise). I find it a bit perplexing that Canon hasn't put more effort into producing such lenses, I guess the reason is that zooms are relatively so much more popular in that sector. It shouldn't be impossible to make, e.g., an EF-S 10mm/2.8 lens, I look forward to the day we see one.



I'm sure it's possible - Canon makes a zoom that covers 10mm with a narrower aperture, and Tokina makes an f/2.8 zoom that goes to 11mm. 

But, I think the main argument against it is the one you stated - the popularity of zooms. When some of the 'current' non-L wide and normal primes were developed, zoom lenses were still regarded as sub-par for image quality, although the gap was pretty narrow. Today, the IQ of a zoom lens can match a prime (e.g. the 70-200 II vs. the 135L). More importantly, zooms are convenient - and that accounts for their popularity with the consumer segment. It's conceivable that Canon will make a wide angle EF-S prime, but they'd be the first (at least, as I interpret it - an APS-C format prime lens at 22mm or wider, excepting the existing APS-C fisheye lenses).


----------

