# ? on why Canon ignored...



## psycho5 (Nov 16, 2011)

maybe this question has already been asked, but can anyone offer a good explaination why Canon never decided to make any "L" branded EF-S lenses?

Personally, I love my 7D and 60D and own the 16-35ii, 24-70, and the 70-200isii... all L quality but always wondered why Canon ignores building luxury lenses in the crop flavor. The only reason why I own L quality is because of:

f/2.8
build quality
best optics
USM
IS

... of all of these, build quality tops the list!

Lastly,

They go ahead and build the 7D and kit it with a cheap lens, how awful IMHO.... its like if ford decided to put a 4 cylinder in the f-150 raptor.


----------



## JR (Nov 16, 2011)

Likely only marketing and positionning but your question sparked another question in my mind. I remember when I has the 17-55 2.8 IS on my 7D and I love having the IS for video shooting. Since moving to the 5D mkII, I am a bit frustrated that they dont have an equivalent 2.8 zoom with IS (the 24-70 2.8 I mean) and that the only option for IS would be the get the 24-105 f4 which is a no go for me for indoor shooting.

I agree the 17-55 EF-S is one of the sharpest zoom I ever had and definitively is an "L" quality lens in my book. So you did not get the "L" in the name, but at least you got the IS 

I really hope they eventually make the equivalent of the 17-55 2.8 IS for the EF lens on FF...


----------



## Cetalis (Nov 16, 2011)

Honestly, the only reason there aren't any APS-C L lenses is because Canon's marketing decided not to. Even for FF, there's no clear criteria for what lenses get the L designation. That said, the 10-22, 17-55, and 15-85 are supposedly very good EF-S lenses.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 16, 2011)

L series lenses are 'professional' lenses. 1-series bodies are 'professional' bodies. So, an EF-S 'professional' lens, which wouldn't work on a 'professional' body, is a non-starter. 

I suppose Canon could slap a blue ring, magenta ring, whatever, on a new series of lenses that are 'semi-pro' EF-S lenses with better build and sealing. But consider - among APS-C cameras, currently only the 7D has a reasonable level of weather sealing and high-end build quality. Comparing that to the the sheer number of other APS-C models with lesser build/sealing, it may not make a lot of (financial) sense for Canon to develop sealed lenses for a small image circle camera since the market just wouldn't be there.



JR said:


> I remember when I has the 17-55 2.8 IS on my 7D and I love having the IS for video shooting. Since moving to the 5D mkII, I am a bit frustrated that they dont have an equivalent 2.8 zoom with IS (the 24-70 2.8 I mean) and that the only option for IS would be the get the 24-105 f4 which is a no go for me for indoor shooting.



It's a common fallacy. In fact, the 24-105mm f/4L IS on FF outspecs the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS on APS-C in nearly every way. Consider - in terms of focal length and DoF for the same framing, the FF equivalent of the 17-55mm f/2.8 is 27-88mm f/4.5. So, the 24-105mm f/4 is wider and longer, has 1/3-stop shallower DoF, and still has IS. Going from an APS-C sensor to a FF sensor gains you 1.3 stops of improved ISO noise performance based on total light gathered, meaning you can bump up the ISO on the 5DII by one stop to compensate for the loss of light going from f/2.8 to f/4, and _still_ get nearly 1/3-stop less noise. The only thing you really lose is the functionality of the high-precision f/2.8-sensitive center AF point - in every other way, the 24-105mm on FF will be better than the 17-55mm on APS-C.


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 16, 2011)

@JR

positioning could very well be a huge factor and Canon may think 1.6 crop is only for families and trips to disneyland, but then why even bother making the 7D? kind of pointless without lenses to match in quality.

@cetalis

I love knowing my camera and lens has a very good chance in maintaining performance in katrina-like weather. As a soldier, longevity and durability are equally important as performance. sure the lenses you mentioned are nice, but not after the first dust storm or heavy rain. 

@neuroanatomist

professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill.... with that, I dont get paid but still consider pro equipment a necessity and the 7D to me is the smallest "1D" Cannon makes. Furthermore, if apple engineers can make something like the ipad, is there really a need for the 1D to be as big as it is anymore???


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 16, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> L series lenses are 'professional' lenses. 1-series bodies are 'professional' bodies. So, an EF-S 'professional' lens, which wouldn't work on a 'professional' body, is a non-starter.



I wasnt trying to be rude in my last post even if it reads like I was trollin' 

but why should the majority of Cannon's customers conform to the small minority of those who are 1D or FF users? I truely believe I am not the only amateur out there who enjoys making great pictures no matter what part of the world or envirnoment I am in. I would only move to FF if Canon decided to put the 1Dx sensor in a body like the 7D... I may then be happy ;D but untill then, the 1Dx is too big and the rumored 36mp 5D3 is a step backwards IMO.


----------



## EYEONE (Nov 16, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> @neuroanatomist
> 
> professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill.... with that, I dont get paid but still consider pro equipment a necessity and the 7D to me is the smallest "1D" Cannon makes. Furthermore, if apple engineers can make something like the ipad, is there really a need for the 1D to be as big as it is anymore???



an Ipad and a Professional grade DSLR are very different animals. The Ipad is strictly electronics which are always getting smaller. But a DSLR has several components that are simply the size that they are. You can't make the Penta Prism any smaller and maintain the coverage and magnification. The sensor must stay the same and for the most part the mirror box must remain the same size.

And all that asside, a DSLR is the size that it needs to be. If it were smaller it would be hard to hold or easier to drop.

The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.

There are so many arguments against what you just said...

But anyway, I believe a qualification of an L-Series lens is that it has to work on every EOS camera. An L-Series EF-S lens would not mount on a EOS film camera. Case closed.


----------



## JR (Nov 16, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> L series lenses are 'professional' lenses. 1-series bodies are 'professional' bodies. So, an EF-S 'professional' lens, which wouldn't work on a 'professional' body, is a non-starter.
> 
> I suppose Canon could slap a blue ring, magenta ring, whatever, on a new series of lenses that are 'semi-pro' EF-S lenses with better build and sealing. But consider - among APS-C cameras, currently only the 7D has a reasonable level of weather sealing and high-end build quality. Comparing that to the the sheer number of other APS-C models with lesser build/sealing, it may not make a lot of (financial) sense for Canon to develop sealed lenses for a small image circle camera since the market just wouldn't be there.
> 
> ...



Thanks Neuro for the clarification, I keep forgetting about the APS-C versus FF differential in light capturing sometime... 

My comparaison of the 24-105 and the 17-55 was somewhat wrong indeed. I may have confused the facts here that on my FF _today_, I still feel I need at least f2.8 (on my FF) to properly shoot inside for my specific situation where I need to "freeze" my 20 month old baby girl (she is getting fast!). I tried the 24-105 f4L many time inside but always found i was missing a stop so I dont end-up with an ISO too high...

Also, I naively thought that if the 24-70 2.8L was not IS it was because of some sort of technical limitation or the fact the resulting lens would be bigger and heavier (maybe...). So given they are making a 17-55 for APS-C sensor with f2.8 and with IS, why wouldn't Canon also offer IS for their 24-70 2.8L zoom? Especially with the video benefit it would bring...

Are there technical limitation such that IS might work for a 17-55 focal lenght but when you get to 24-70 at f2.8, it would add to much weight/size?


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 16, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> @JR
> 
> positioning could very well be a huge factor and Canon may think 1.6 crop is only for families and trips to disneyland, but then why even bother making the 7D? kind of pointless without lenses to match in quality.



I do believe up until maybe 3 years ago Canon probably did believe that the 1.6 crop was a "lesser" camera system and wanted to nudge people up the food chain up to full frame... The EF-S system was catered to the 20D and beyond and were geared for that clientele. I think when the 7D was introduced they realized people who were invested in the EF-s system (and frankly those who weren't going to buy a $2500 camera period) needed something to upgrade to and so the 7D was born... Somehow I almost dont think Canon realized how big of a hit the 7D really was. While I would be supprised to see some L-s versions in the future or some other designation for top of the line ef-s series, that probably wouldn't be introduced until after the 7D2 comes out so there's enough of a saturation in the market of APS-C weathersealed 7d cameras out there to match up with the lenses. 



psycho5 said:


> @neuroanatomist
> 
> professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill.... with that, I dont get paid but still consider pro equipment a necessity and the 7D to me is the smallest "1D" Cannon makes. Furthermore, if apple engineers can make something like the ipad, is there really a need for the 1D to be as big as it is anymore???



Correct, being a professional photographer means you are a paid or commissioned photographer... I make all my living off of photography and my skill set, however I do not use 1d series cameras... That being said, if I was in the position or need for that type of camera for the style of photography I was shooting or shooting for a client whom this gear was needed, then by all means I would have it in my budget to get one. There are professional photographers can make money whether they are using a 1Ds/x or an iphone... It's all about knowing what equipment you need to get your job done and most importantly knowing how to get the most out of what gear you have to get the job done.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 16, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> @neuroanatomist
> professional only means paid my friend and has no bearing of skill....



I was using 'professional' as defined by Canon's marketing department, with no implication intended.

Canon on the 7D: "_Made to be the tool of choice for serious photographers and semi-professionals..._"

Canon on the 1D IV: "_...the EOS-1D Mark IV is the perfect choice for professional photographers..._"


----------



## wockawocka (Nov 16, 2011)

It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 16, 2011)

@EYEONE 

well done, case closed indeed. :-X you made great points and I was wrong on some things, maybe everything ... but i still hope Canon will put the 1Dx sensor in a body like the 7D, sustain 8fps, 100% VF, 7D AF, and price it less than 3k for body only.

im kind of pissed off at the rumored 36mp sensor and their stupid FF megapixel war with Nikon


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 16, 2011)

wockawocka said:


> It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.



Really? Which would give you a better result - a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on a T3, or a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III on a 5DII? There's a reason for the 'glass before body' maxim.


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 16, 2011)

EYEONE said:


> The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.
> 
> There are so many arguments against what you just said...
> 
> But anyway, I believe a qualification of an L-Series lens is that it has to work on every EOS camera. An L-Series EF-S lens would not mount on a EOS film camera. Case closed.



I wanted sooo much to bite my tongue on this comment however I cant... *AFTERALL*, Clearly, the 7d is an inferior camera... ummmm yep... sounds right to me... <Sarcasm> The 5d2 was always seen as a baby 1ds and the 7d has had a reputation of a baby 1d. This is the point the original poster was referring to... Does the 7D have the quantity of AF points of a 1D, no. Does the 7D have the built in grip and imposing size? no. Does it have audio recording or the 1.3 sensor? No. That being said, it's smaller and more versatile and may get into venues up probably couldn't get into with the 1d without a press credential. The 7D is weathersealed and tough... It has an overall AF system that leaves 5d2 only owner envious, or even nikon D300 owners... From a pro who's used both, both are fine cameras and both have their rightful place in the lineup and markets... To dismiss the 7d so flippantly hints at your ignorance. Once again professional photographers are able to make the most out of their gear to meet their clients needs.


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 16, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> wockawocka said:
> 
> 
> > It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.
> ...



Lest we forget the rule of thumb was always to spend 2x the ammount on glass than the body because that's really what will determine the quality of the image... nice comparison btw.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 16, 2011)

awinphoto said:


> EYEONE said:
> 
> 
> > The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.
> ...



Is the Camry a 'baby Lexus LS'? I'm with EYEONE on this - the 7D is an inferior camera, and it's aimed at a different market. The 1D series has substantially better build quality, durability, AF, IQ, etc. That's not to say that the 7D is not a great camera, nor that's it's not a better choice in many situations.


----------



## Cetalis (Nov 16, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> @cetalis
> 
> I love knowing my camera and lens has a very good chance in maintaining performance in katrina-like weather. As a soldier, longevity and durability are equally important as performance. sure the lenses you mentioned are nice, but not after the first dust storm or heavy rain.



Not all L lenses are weather sealed; is it weather sealed EF-S lenses that you want?


----------



## briansquibb (Nov 16, 2011)

awinphoto said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > wockawocka said:
> ...



I bought the 7D specifically to use with my 400 f/2.8 IS - and it works like a dream.


----------



## RC (Nov 16, 2011)

I dido the original comment/complaint. I too want L grade lens for my 7D. 

My post from a few days ago:


> Re: Realistic wish lens Â« on: November 09, 2011, 05:54:59 PM Â»
> 
> I don't think it is asking too much for an APS-C version of the 24-105 f/4L. There are plenty of serious crop shooters out here who want HQ lens. Yes, someday I'll get a 5D3 but I'm not getting rid of my 7D.
> 
> ...



Just last night I bit the bullet and ordered a 16-35 f/2.8L to replace my EF-S 15-85. I want/need weather sealing and a constant aperture. Now I need to save up to for another lens to fill the FL gap. Probably either the 24-105 4L or 24-70 2.8L


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 16, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > EYEONE said:
> ...



While I'm not too surprised to hear you take that stance, from a professional photographers POV, they are just tools... There are times when a 1d body is beneficial but there are professionals who have made great works of art or utilize Point and Shoots because of the fact that it's small and light and doesn't draw attention. To be honest I've never lost a shot because I didn't have a 1d body, nor have I failed to get a job done because I didn't have a 1d body... Yes there may be times when having 1 comes in handy, and that's why I have CPS, but to be honest, haven't come to that point. Heck, even national geographic staff photogs use 5d's... I would class them more professional than most...


----------



## EYEONE (Nov 16, 2011)

awinphoto said:


> EYEONE said:
> 
> 
> > The 7D is NOT a small 1D. It is a clearly inferior camera aimed at a very different market.
> ...



You got a lot of mis information about that one sentance. See my signature? I shoot with a 7D. I love the 7D, it's an amazing camera. It's my one and only body at the moment. I've used it for weddings, engagements, portraits and concerts. Where in my post did you see "the 7D sucks"?

What I said was (and it's a fact that I find hard to argue against) is that the 7D is not a 1D. It's just not. It is not as feature packed or capable as the 1D Mark IV. That's not to say that it doesn't take incredible pictures and video. I still hold that it's a better camera than the D7000 and the A77 after 2 years. As I said it is the camera I use right now. And I'll keep it as a secondary camera when the time to upgrade comes. _That_ should show you what I think of the 7D.

I do not see why you chose to attack my post and call me ignorant for something that I did not even say.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 16, 2011)

EYEONE said:


> ...the 7D is not a 1D. It's just not. It is not as feature packed or capable as the 1D Mark IV.



Exactly my point as well. No one is saying the 7D isn't good. I have one, too, and even after I get a 1D X, I'll still use the 7D when appropriate. But saying it's as good as a 1D just isn't true. Period. That's not the same as saying the pictures you get from the 7D can't equal or exceed those from a 1D IV. I do understand that it's the result that matters. But tools matter, too. There are certainly situations where the better AI Servo tracking, the extra 2 fps, or the ISO capabilities of the 1D IV will enable a shot that wouldn't come from a 7D.

I suspect we're saying all the same thing. An Estwing hammer is 'better' than a Stanley. Estwing is the preferred hammer among construction professionals, but sure, you'll see lots of Stanleys in their hands, too. Why is Estwing preferred? Because it's a better hammer, and the Stanley is inferior. But both of them can pound in a nail...or, in the hands of someone with less skill, they can both bend that nail.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 16, 2011)

There is a complicating factor here that needs to be acknowledged: with Canon abandoning the APS-H sensor, no one knows what direction they will go in the future to meet the demands of photographers who relied on the extra reach of the 1.3 crop factor of the 1D. 

For now, Canon seems to be playing some games with that customer base (promoting "up sampling" for example as a viable alternative to greater resolution). I think they will be watching that market very closely to see if some of these photographers migrate to the 7D, possibly as a second body. 

The 7D might not be as indestructible as the 1D series, but it is does have a robust build and could certainly hold its own under most conditions. My own sense is that there may not be enough room in the marketplace for a APS-C body significantly above the 7D. However, I am not privy to Canon's manufacturing costs, so I don't know if it would be cost effective to offer a bombproof, one-piece gripped 7D X version. At a minimum, a 7DII that inherits enough key features of the 1DX to make it attractive to professionals, while still affordable for enthusiasts is plausible.

If there is anything we've learned from Canon over the past two months, it is that past behavior is not an accurate predictor of future behavior. Canon has demonstrated that they are unafraid to take new and unpredictable paths.


----------



## awinphoto (Nov 16, 2011)

EYEONE said:


> I do not see why you chose to attack my post and call me ignorant for something that I did not even say.



If you feel I wrongly targeted you regarding your posts, then I do appologise, however within this forum I've had several heated discussions with those whom have the opinion that anything less than a 1d camera is not worthy, and they couldn't get good images with anything else BUT a 1d body... This was a similar impression I gathered from your dismissal of the 7d that it was inferior, case closed... 

I've always had/have the POV that if someone cannot get a certain image because you do not have a 1D series camera, then there's more to it than just the camera... That being said, Just me, personally, because I live and die by my cameras and equipment, I dont even spend time looking at the 1d cameras because it does me no good... I prefer to hone my skills more and make sure I can get the shots I need with what I have then obsessing about cameras I dont need to get my job done.


----------



## EYEONE (Nov 16, 2011)

awinphoto said:


> EYEONE said:
> 
> 
> > I do not see why you chose to attack my post and call me ignorant for something that I did not even say.
> ...



No worries.
I would agree with that. Incorrect composition is incorrect on a Rebel and on a 1Ds. A screw up on a Rebel is a screw up on a 1Ds.


----------



## Neeneko (Nov 16, 2011)

While I do not know if it is true or not, the criteria I was once told had to do with the weather sealing, similar to the level of sealing on the 1Ds thus making a matched pair.


----------



## Caps18 (Nov 16, 2011)

RC said:


> Just last night I bit the bullet and ordered a 16-35 f/2.8L to replace my EF-S 15-85. I want/need weather sealing and a constant aperture. Now I need to save up to for another lens to fill the FL gap. Probably either the 24-105 4L or 24-70 2.8L



Play around with the 16-35mm for a while. It is a good lens. I went with the 85mm f1.8 prime, and you might want to think about something like that if you are going to be changing lenses anyway. I would like to try the 50mm in a head to head contest with it though (on my FF camera) to see if it would have worked better.


I think the reason they don't make EF-S L lenses is because the EF L lenses will work on a 50D or a 5D.


----------



## wockawocka (Nov 17, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> wockawocka said:
> 
> 
> > It wouldn't make much sense to stick a 2k piece of glass on a $300 body.
> ...



Anyone who can buy an L lens should be able to afford a decent semi pro body, even if that's a used 5DC. The EF-S lenses are aimed at the Canon amateur range and are cheaper to reflect this. Canon doesn't need to make L series EF-S lenses as they fit all their cameras regardless. Sure, perhaps a L series 10-22mm would make sense but then they'll be merging the distinct categories between amateur and pro kit.

There's also something to be said about the ability of a camera to make use of the light an L lens shines on the sensor. I don't think the T3 would be as good as a 5D2...


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 17, 2011)

Cetalis said:


> psycho5 said:
> 
> 
> > @cetalis
> ...



yes, weather sealing and better build construction that are just as rugged as the L series is definately something Canon should be thinking about. As of this moment I would NEVER buy an efs lens because all of them are plastic fantastics that wont last a single day out in the field.

Another issue I would like to bring up is the fact that there is no excuse for any DSLR manufacturer to make cheap products anymore... leave the china-made s*** to the 4/3s market and finally focus on quality engineering for ALL DSLRs and their corresponding lenses (EF, EFS)


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 17, 2011)

RC said:


> I dido the original comment/complaint. I too want L grade lens for my 7D.
> 
> My post from a few days ago:
> 
> ...



You will love the 16-35 (my favorite lens on 7D) and the 24-70 is an amazing beast of a lens, I LOVE THEM! ;D the 70-200 is2 however sits at home more often than not


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 17, 2011)

Why would anyone want the 7D to be a 1dmk4?

That's like trying to make your youngest son act like the oldest! Just not cool!


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 17, 2011)

unfocused said:


> There is a complicating factor here that needs to be acknowledged: with Canon abandoning the APS-H sensor, no one knows what direction they will go in the future to meet the demands of photographers who relied on the extra reach of the 1.3 crop factor of the 1D.
> 
> For now, Canon seems to be playing some games with that customer base (promoting "up sampling" for example as a viable alternative to greater resolution). I think they will be watching that market very closely to see if some of these photographers migrate to the 7D, possibly as a second body.
> 
> ...




THANK YOU, at least someone understands my point with the 7D! yes, its not labeled a 1D camera, but one doesnt have to look too far in the past to see how it outperforms the 1D series. The thing is a beast. it can definately hold its own.

Maybe the roadmap for the 7Dii contains the 1Dx sensor and the 60D becomes the successor to the 7D and the rebel becomes the new 70D... why not push everything up a notch and leave the sub-$1000 market to the 4/3 and point and shoot market? besides, the iphone is the number 1 most used camera reported on flickr... how many people are going to buy a cheap dslr over a free, highly capable point and shoot that comes with their iphone?

besides, I think several days ago CR posted a slide of Canon's roadmap and I didnt see any DSLR on the "consumer" side

what is "up sampling" anyways?


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 17, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > There is a complicating factor here that needs to be acknowledged: with Canon abandoning the APS-H sensor, no one knows what direction they will go in the future to meet the demands of photographers who relied on the extra reach of the 1.3 crop factor of the 1D.
> ...




They had better not switch the 7D sensor!!! I'll... I'll switch to Pentax!!! ;D

Hear me, Oh hear me, o ye Canon engineers: leave that ASP-C alone! Do not bloat it! I would be heartily enraged to have my glass shortened and my corners worsened...


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 17, 2011)

AprilForever said:


> They had better not switch the 7D sensor!!! I'll... I'll switch to Pentax!!! ;D
> 
> Hear me, Oh hear me, o ye Canon engineers: leave that ASP-C alone! Do not bloat it! I would be heartily enraged to have my glass shortened and my corners worsened...



your 7D would not be going anywhere, it would just have a 70D name on it and the 7D mkii would be the perfect camera for everyone who doesnt give a s*** about a 36mp 5diii studio camera with inferior low light performance to the 1Dx sensor.

Hear me Canon... merge the 1Dx sensor with the 7D!

xD series - Full Frame pro
xxD series - 1.6 professional crop
xxxd series - 4/3, P&S, and consumer


----------



## Cetalis (Nov 17, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> Another issue I would like to bring up is the fact that there is no excuse for any DSLR manufacturer to make cheap products anymore... leave the china-made s*** to the 4/3s market and finally focus on quality engineering for ALL DSLRs and their corresponding lenses (EF, EFS)



But that'd be unprofitable. Every manufacturer, save Leica and some of the medium format people, does this. Every company except pentax sells unsealed kit plastic lenses, and the majority of people are fine with it. Also, Japan is somewhat prone to natural disasters, though the rest of Southeast Asia where they're outsourcing production isn't exactly safe either. I do agree there is a hole in the lineup though; the 7D's sealing begs for an equally sealed EF-S.



psycho5 said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > There is a complicating factor here that needs to be acknowledged: with Canon abandoning the APS-H sensor, no one knows what direction they will go in the future to meet the demands of photographers who relied on the extra reach of the 1.3 crop factor of the 1D.
> ...



The 7D is a 7D because it is has a crop sensor; otherwise itd be between the 1D/1Dx and the 5D.
The whole point of a DSLR is that it's not a point and shoot, or at least to most people. To them it's the giant brick like camera that must do better than everything else cause the mirror makes a cool sound. Okay maybe its not that bad but still. Canon was the first to push DSLRs into the sub$1000 market, and they make an enormous profit from it: enough to justify producing at least 4 rebels (not sure if the XS is still being made) and the 60D.
Upsampling is making the picture larger, like magnifying it past 100%.


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 17, 2011)

@Cetalis

it is almost worth the effort to perform a market study to see how much the iphone has impacted the rebel series and to find out if the 4/3 could replace the rebel altogether. same how Apple has quite arguably the best products in the notebook/tablet market while acer, dell, and the rest still make plastic fantastics. 

its just an idea, of course canon will not go this route... shipping junk is surely profitable when people buy cameras because the shutter makes a loud "film advance" sound.... how funny btw.


----------



## RC (Nov 17, 2011)

> Play around with the 16-35mm for a while. It is a good lens. I went with the 85mm f1.8 prime, and you might want to think about something like that if you are going to be changing lenses anyway. I would like to try the 50mm in a head to head contest with it though (on my FF camera) to see if it would have worked better.



Since I've now exhausted my camera money, I've got a good while to play with and learn what I have. Still need/want (is there a difference?) a normal or close to normal prime. The 35 1.4 and 50 1.4 are two that's been on my list. Everything I read about the 85 1.8 is extremely positive. However, this is probably a lower priority lens at this time since I have the 100 2.8 Macro and I'm shooting on a crop camera.

Good grief, I think I've got G.A.S. http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2114.0.html

I don't want to be that guy. Time to enjoy and work with I already have.


----------



## RC (Nov 17, 2011)

> You will love the 16-35 (my favorite lens on 7D) and the 24-70 is an amazing beast of a lens, I LOVE THEM! ;D the 70-200 is2 however sits at home more often than not



That gets me even more excited hearing that! Lens is expected to arrive early next week giving me a long holiday weekend to enjoy. ;D


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 17, 2011)

I would like to see the 7d2 get the sensor from the 1D mk4 as a step up and keep the aps-h line alive
this would address the high iso noise nicely it wont touch canon sales of 1dx it will still be massive benfit to birders and wildlife shooters maybe they could even take the now old 45 point AF and stick it in there since the new top shelf model has a better one (Nikon have had 51 point sensors in their mid level cameras for a while now) The key would be it maintaining the more compact form factor as that is the thing that appeals to me the most for the 7D and the weather sealling of course. Price point? maybe a bit under 2k for that and it would sell like hot cakes. keep the battery the same to maintain compatability with the 5D2 and existing 7D. (I think you will see alot of 1D-X buyers will get one of these too)


----------



## unfocused (Nov 17, 2011)

> They had better not switch the 7D sensor!!! I'll... I'll switch to Pentax!!! ;D
> 
> Hear me, Oh hear me, o ye Canon engineers: leave that ASP-C alone! Do not bloat it! I would be heartily enraged to have my glass shortened and my corners worsened...



Although I thought I was pretty clear, perhaps not. 

I'm certainly not suggesting that Canon would ever switch sensor size on the 7D. I was simply pointing out that for those who need longer reach, the death of the 1.3 crop leaves them with only two choices: tele-extenders or the 7D. Given that choice, an APS-C sensor is preferable for most applications. 

My point was simply that Canon may choose to fill that need with a future 7D or with some variation of the same. I suggested two plausible paths: 1) enhance the 7D II by including some of the features of the 1DX into the new body (processor, autofocus, etc.) or 2) offer a souped-up version of the 7D II (7D X?) that is geared to professionals (bombproof and built with a one-piece gripped body, instead of a separate grip.

Finally, the central point was simply that Canon, in the past two months, has proven to be much more innovative than many people assumed. So, while it's fund to speculate, it's become much more difficult to do so with any degree of confidence.


----------



## psycho5 (Nov 17, 2011)

RC said:


> > You will love the 16-35 (my favorite lens on 7D) and the 24-70 is an amazing beast of a lens, I LOVE THEM! ;D the 70-200 is2 however sits at home more often than not
> 
> 
> 
> That gets me even more excited hearing that! Lens is expected to arrive early next week giving me a long holiday weekend to enjoy. ;D




yeah, if I was in a situation where I could only take one lens with me, the 16-35 wins out everytime!


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 17, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> RC said:
> 
> 
> > > You will love the 16-35 (my favorite lens on 7D) and the 24-70 is an amazing beast of a lens, I LOVE THEM! ;D the 70-200 is2 however sits at home more often than not
> ...



i would imagine it would be razor sharp on a 7D corner to corner and be a good walk around (26mm to 56mm)
even on the APS-H it gives a nice 21mm to 46mm which is not bad for a walk around i also like how it all move internally not like the 24-105 or 24-70 and its quite light and balanced
I just got a light craft workshop ND fader in 82mm for it, havent tried it out yet but cant wait, i've use it with a hoya slim CPL before and its great


----------



## Hillsilly (Nov 17, 2011)

There is no legitimate reason for the lack of EF-S L lenses. It is purely a marketing decision.

In the old days of film, people had no hesitation putting L lenses on their lower end $300-$500 camera bodies. Canon encouraged this. Look through some old photo magazines. Canon generally promoted their wide range of lenses more than individual bodies. In the old days, when people changed cameras less frequently, the money was in lens sales.

It's a bit different today. A recent stat published on CR suggested that most people stick with their kit lens and don't invest in a second lens. However, people are clearly updating cameras a lot more frequently. Canon's advertising is predominantly aimed at selling new bodies.

How do they make more money? By selling more expensive, higher margin bodies.

And how do they do that? By convincing people that only the plebs would use a crop body. After all, if you were serious about image quality, you would be using full frame. Plus, you can't be considered a serious pro unless you're using a full frame camera. If you use a full frame camera, your pictures will exude pure awesomeness. And if you use a full frame camera, you can use the L lenses at their designed-for field of view.

Of course, it is not just Canon promoting this view, but also "the internet' in general.

Now, maybe Canon is right and they are doing us a favour encouraging us to move to full frame. Full frame cameras probably are (for most applications) "better". I know that I'm keen to see what the 5Diii will look like. Not only am I interested in technically better image results, but I want to go back to using my lenses for the purposes they were designed. I like using well built lenses. My 10-22 works as well as my 17-40, but the 17-40 is a joy to use, works very smoothly and doesn't have a focus ring that wobbles. I used my 70-200 a lot more when 70mm meant 70mm.

Anyway, back on topic. Canon should produce EF-S L lenses. There is no reason for them not to. In fact, if I was them, I'd take advantage of the crop sensor and produce a range of fast, small, L primes. In particular, a 12, 24, 50, 85mm. 

The other argument that people use against EF-S L lenses is that L lenses should be compatible with the higher end professional full frame bodies. What nonsense! Although I don't have access to Canon's sales statistics, I'd be willing to bet that there are more amateurs out there with L lenses on crop bodies than pros with 1 series bodies. Plus, I find it hard to believe that a 1Ds user would mistakenly buy an EF-S lens purely because it had an L designation. And if they did, well.....

(Sorry for my "rant for the day" but I get upset when people infer that I'm not worthy of using a particular product, simply because I don't use the right camera body.)


----------



## ZeuZ (Nov 17, 2011)

Question Neuro

Are the EF-S lens openings not adapted to their format? So that f2.8 is actually f1,75 in the case of the 17-55mm? How do you know?

Thx for the info



neuroanatomist said:


> L series lenses are 'professional' lenses. 1-series bodies are 'professional' bodies. So, an EF-S 'professional' lens, which wouldn't work on a 'professional' body, is a non-starter.
> 
> I suppose Canon could slap a blue ring, magenta ring, whatever, on a new series of lenses that are 'semi-pro' EF-S lenses with better build and sealing. But consider - among APS-C cameras, currently only the 7D has a reasonable level of weather sealing and high-end build quality. Comparing that to the the sheer number of other APS-C models with lesser build/sealing, it may not make a lot of (financial) sense for Canon to develop sealed lenses for a small image circle camera since the market just wouldn't be there.
> 
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 17, 2011)

psycho5 said:


> As of this moment I would NEVER buy an efs lens because all of them are plastic fantastics that wont last a single day out in the field.



Many of the L-series lenses are plastic, too. The EF-S 10-22mm, while very light, is actually quite well-built. But I do see your point...



psycho5 said:


> Another issue I would like to bring up is the fact that there is no excuse for any DSLR manufacturer to make cheap products anymore... leave the china-made s*** to the 4/3s market and finally focus on quality engineering for ALL DSLRs and their corresponding lenses (EF, EFS)



What, and leave all those profits on the table? There's a reason Canon released MkII versions of the 18-55mm IS and 55-250mm - updates which didn't change the optics, but rather reduced production costs by a small per-unit amount. Those lenses are their most popular sellers, and it's the profits from those cheap Taiwan and Malaysia-made lenses that enables the development of those L-series lenses you like so much. Without all that plastic-fantastic, no more L lenses.


----------

