# Is the EF-S 35mm f/1.8 coming?



## Aputure (Sep 9, 2010)

I sure hope so, but it doesn't look like it...


----------



## davidonformosa (Sep 10, 2010)

I have also been waiting to see if Canon releases this lens or something similar. If nothing is announced at Photokina then I will probably buy the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8.


----------



## Artisttt (Sep 14, 2010)

What is the point to make new EF-S lens??? Would be much better to renew EF 35mm f/2


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 14, 2010)

Personally, I'm hoping for a 35mm f/1.4L II...


----------



## missitnoonan (Sep 14, 2010)

I'd love to see a refresh of some of $300-$500 prime lenses. Currently own the 35/f2 and a MkI 50/f1.8, but would absolutely jump at refreshed 35mm and 50mm lenses with USM motors and circular aperature blades (I'm scared by the reports of faulty motors on the 50/f1.4). Unfortunately Canon doesn't seem too keen on releasing any mid-priced lenses at the moment.

I don't see any reason to go EF-S though, the EF primes are plenty small and mount on any body. Only reason I can see is to keep FF users from having a cheaper prime option.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 15, 2010)

neuroanatomist said:


> Personally, I'm hoping for a 35mm f/1.4L II...



Nikon just announced their AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.4G. Time for Canon to follow suit with an update to their 35mm f/1.4!


----------



## kubelik (Sep 15, 2010)

if canon drops a budget 35mm prime ... it better be EF and not EF-S. it seems silly to deny full-framers some cheap primes, no? they would certainly sell lots of them


----------



## baronfizzy (Sep 18, 2010)

I certainly agree with the above poster, and with this thread in general. A decent 35mm in the "gold ring" class would be fantastic, especially if it had a nice, fast autofocus like the 50mm, 85mm or 100mm in the existing lineup. Even an f/1.8 would be nice.


----------



## ablearcher (Sep 23, 2010)

neuroanatomist said:


> Personally, I'm hoping for a 35mm f/1.4L II...


 Same here. I would sell my Canon 28 1.8 and by the new 35L. 35mm will work better for me and i'm ready to upgrade.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 23, 2010)

ablearcher said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Personally, I'm hoping for a 35mm f/1.4L II...
> ...



Even the current 35L is a significant upgrade to the 28/1.8. 

Optically, the current 35L is an excellent lens. I do think that Canon will replace it at some point in the relatively near future, primarily based on the fact that every other L-series prime lens at 100mm and shorter has either been updated or newly released in the last 4 years (14/2.8L II, 17L TSE, 24L TSE II, 24/1.4L II, 50/1.2L, 85/1.2L II, 100/2.8L Macro), but the 12 year old 35L has not been revised.

Arguably, the other lenses had 'issues' that Canon corrected with the revisions, where's it's harder to find problems with the 35L. Still, it seems due for an upgrade...


----------



## ablearcher (Sep 23, 2010)

I agree - the current 35L is a great lens. I would've upgraded already but I'm hoping the new one might show up soon. I am not in a big rush at this point...


----------



## ageha (Sep 30, 2010)

How is the AF of the EF 35mm f/2.0? Is it as slow as the 50mm f/1.8 mkII? What about the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, is it considered to be a fast and sharp lens?


----------



## kubelik (Sep 30, 2010)

ageha -- I haven't used those lenses personally, but judging from Bryan's reviews over at The Digital Picture, neither of the lenses are great performers. he certainly doesn't seem satisfied with the image quality from the 28 f/1.8, and the 35 f/2 can only be described as decent for its price range.

also unfortunately, none of the sigma primes in this range are very strong performers, so the fact that they exist doesn't help the selection process much for those in need of a cheap fast wide-angle prime.

I know there's a lot of people on the forum, myself included, that would love to see Canon refresh its lineup of non-L EF wide primes


----------



## missitnoonan (Sep 30, 2010)

ageha said:


> How is the AF of the EF 35mm f/2.0? Is it as slow as the 50mm f/1.8 mkII? What about the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM, is it considered to be a fast and sharp lens?



I've got the 35mm f/2 and can say that the reviews online are pretty accurate. The motor is slow and buzzy (but accurate). It can occasionally hunt a bit in low light, but will almost always lock on.

That being said it seems to be about the best option in the price range (overpriced as it may be) and I do like the pictures I get out of on my T1i. Works well as a small, indoor lens.


----------



## franky03 (Oct 19, 2010)

Dear Canon, I am a proud owner of a T2i and although I have a variety of zoom lenses (and a couple of primes) I would still like to buy a prime lens that would give me the perspective of a standard lens (50mm) on a crop sensor.

Yes you have the "old" 35mm f2 for sale but it just doesnt cut it, especially concerning bokeh. Look at Nikon look at Sony! they have nice, fast and cheap 35mm! Why not you!

I took my first pictures on my fathers AE-1 programm with a 50mm f1.4... please give that possibility back to me.

Thanks,

(first post so dont be too rude!)


----------



## epsiloneri (Oct 20, 2010)

Artisttt said:


> What is the point to make new EF-S lens??? Would be much better to renew EF 35mm f/2



The point is that EF lenses are wasteful for crop cameras. EF-S can be made much smaller and cheaper. Just think of the G12 with its 28-140/2.8-4.5 lens and think how big it would be if the lens had to be EF compatible. More extreme, but same thing.

Currently, the only EF-S prime is the EF-S 60/2.8 macro. I'm sure high-quality EF-S primes in a small form factor would find its audience. Most dSLRs are not FF anyway.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 20, 2010)

epsiloneri said:


> Currently, the only EF-S prime is the EF-S 60/2.8 macro. I'm sure high-quality EF-S primes in a small form factor would find its audience. Most dSLRs are not FF anyway.



I would guess that Canon sells more of any single current Rebel model than all of the current non-Rebel bodies combined. So, as Canon develops new lenses, they have two distinct groups of customers they are designing for - 'Rebel owners' and 'everyone else'. I think that in general, prime lenses do not appeal to the 'typical' Rebel owner, unless it's billed for a specific purpose like the 60mm macro lens. Therefore, I don't expect to see new EF-S primes coming out - they'll release consumer-level zooms for the Rebel owners, and EF (mostly L) lenses for the 'everyone else' group. The other factor is that I'd venture to say that many in that 'everyone else' group with an xxD or 7D body dream/hope/plan to get a FF body at some point, further reducing the interest for EF-S lenses in that customer group.


----------



## TBenson (Oct 20, 2010)

I'm saving my pennies for a 35mm prime and have been looking online for deals. (A 100-400L in July ate my entire yearly hobby budget.) Over the last month or so, the EF 35 f/2 lens seems to have gone out of stock at two retailers. One can hope that the current supply is dropping because a new lens is in the works. With newer camera models able to record video, but not able to autofocus well while recording, one can also hope that all future lenses will have decent manual focus rings and distance scales.

The two specialty EF-S lenses that I own (60mm macro and 10-22mm) work VERY well and are smaller/cheaper/lighter than comparable EF lenses would have been. But the existing 35mm f2 is already small/cheap/light so I don't see why a new lens at that focal length would be EF-S.


----------



## franky03 (Oct 20, 2010)

TBenson said:


> But the existing 35mm f2 is already small/cheap/light so I don't see why a new lens at that focal length would be EF-S.



It is small but not that cheap (350$) the Nikon sells for 200$ !!!
The Nikon is also slightly faster (f1.8 ) and has rounded blades (the Canon has only 5 blades ... so you get pentagons instead of nice round bokehs)

my 2 cents


----------



## traveller (Oct 20, 2010)

I don't buy the "no market" statement for an EF-S normal prime. Whilst this is obviously Canon's belief, or they would have already produced one (crop frame sensors have been out for a decade), the fact that virtually every other manufacturer makes one should be a give away (unless there is something different about Canon shooters). By many accounts the Nikkor 35mm AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8 G sold very well when it was first released and I think it is still a very attractive lens. 

Think of it in another way, how many rebel owners buy the EF 50mm f/1.8? Whilst this has a function as a portrait lens, many users complain that it is too long for indoor use. Surely an equivalent in the 28-35mm range would therefore sell equally as well? How is it that Nikon can produce such a lens (complete with an ultrasonic motor) for not much more than the kit lens and less than the inferior Canon EF 35mm f/2? 

The availability of this lens and the even better Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G (sharper and without the fragility of the equivalent EF 50mm f/1.4) is what tempts me to switch brands far more than any body does. I'm sure that the 35L and 50L are excellent, but they cost more than a brand switch and are both relatively big and heavy. 

Canon are ignoring the middle of the market at their peril. The "average rebel buyer" that Neuroanatomist describes is also the kind of buyer who is happy with just the kit lens (or maybe just adds the EF-S 55-250mm). The rapid growth that has characterised the lower end of the market is starting to slow with both market saturation and the emergence of the mirrorless alternatives. Future growth is most likely to come from the middle, the very people that Canon seems to have stopped making lenses for! How many mid-market lenses have they released in the last three years? I can think of only one, the EF-S 15-85mm (two if you count the better-late-than-never and under-specced 18-200mm).


----------



## epsiloneri (Oct 20, 2010)

neuroanatomist said:


> Therefore, I don't expect to see new EF-S primes coming out - they'll release consumer-level zooms for the Rebel owners, and EF (mostly L) lenses for the 'everyone else' group.



Sadly, I think you're right. I hope you're wrong, though.


----------



## franky03 (Oct 20, 2010)

Thank you Traveller!!!
You summed it up very nicely!!!

Please everyone! Email Canon about this if you care... that's what I did.
Although I doubt that my single letter will change anything, if they receive a couple thousands maybe it will!
Here was their answer:

*Thank you for your E-mail inquiry regarding your Canon EOS Rebel T2i Digital Camera.

It is only through our customers comments and suggestions that we are able to manufacture quality products that our customers will be able to use on a consistent basis. The fact that you took the time to write to us is indeed appreciated. Please be assured that your comments have been forwarded to the appropriate Department for their information and review.

In addition to the EF 35mm F2 lens, we also manufacturer an EF 35mm F1.4L USM lens for your consideration. I have included a link below for you to review, which outlines this product. 

http://www.canon.ca/inetCA/products?m=gp&pid=2274

Should you require further assistance, please feel free to email us or visit our customer support website at http://www.canon.ca 



Sincerely,

Mike B.
Technical Support Representative
Customer Information Centre
Canon Canada Inc."

*


----------



## match14 (Oct 21, 2010)

If an EF-S prime is coming then it should be a 30mm f/1.4  not a 35mm f1.8


----------



## franky03 (Oct 21, 2010)

match14 said:


> If an EF-S prime is coming then it should be a 30mm f/1.4  not a 35mm f1.8



That would be nice but would the price be right?
The 35mm f1.4 sells for over 1500$ ... that's almost twice of my T2i body!!!


----------



## bvukich (Oct 21, 2010)

franky03 said:


> match14 said:
> 
> 
> > If an EF-S prime is coming then it should be a 30mm f/1.4  not a 35mm f1.8
> ...



I don't think they could realistically charge more than $500 for a non L wide prime, especially if it was EF-S. If EF, there is no way it would be faster than f/1.8, it would make no sense on Canons part. But if EF-S, there could at least be a shred of hope, as being EF-S would prevent a majority of cannibalization of 35/1.4L sales.


----------



## traveller (Oct 21, 2010)

match14 said:


> If an EF-S prime is coming then it should be a 30mm f/1.4  not a 35mm f1.8



An f/1.4 lens would be quite a bit more expensive than an f/1.8 lens: compare the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 to the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 (O.K. the Sigma has better build quality as well). 

Canon should be aiming for the $185 price point of the Nikkor rather than the $440 price point of the Sigma. A Canon EF-S 35mm should be a 'no brainer', i.e. if you want a normal prime, you'll buy it on the spot. At $185 most would be willing to give it a punt, but $440 will always beg the question "but do I really need it?"


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 22, 2010)

bvukich said:


> I don't think they could realistically charge more than $500 for a non L wide prime, especially if it was EF-S.


Unless said prime was the MP-E 65mm...this seems like nitpicking, to be sure.


----------



## Son of Daguerre (Oct 22, 2010)

franky03 said:


> Thank you Traveller!!!
> You summed it up very nicely!!!
> 
> Please everyone! Email Canon about this if you care... that's what I did.
> Although I doubt that my single letter will change anything, if they receive a couple thousands maybe it will!



If you want to make a difference you should use Google Translate and send off a letter to Canon Inc. in Japan...


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 22, 2010)

Son of Daguerre said:


> franky03 said:
> 
> 
> > Thank you Traveller!!!
> ...


It might end up as an April Fools' announcement, but hey...worth a shot I guess. My Japanese isn't near good enough to write any letters, alas! (Not that I'm putting an emphasis on it right now; I'm pretty sure they look at letters as just one person's viewpoint, where they might be more interested if tons of people are sending those letters.)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 22, 2010)

Edwin Herdman said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think they could realistically charge more than $500 for a non L wide prime, especially if it was EF-S.
> ...



I'm not sure what the next level beyond nitpicking is, but I don't think you can call the MP-E 65mm a _wide_ prime, can you?

However, I will pick another nit with bvukich and point out that the EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye *is* a non-L wide prime (the widest, in fact), and Canon does charge more than $500 for that lens.


----------



## bvukich (Oct 22, 2010)

Edwin Herdman said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think they could realistically charge more than $500 for a non L wide prime, especially if it was EF-S.
> ...



Ahh, but that's not a wide lens, so my statement stands. 8)



neuroanatomist said:


> Edwin Herdman said:
> 
> 
> > bvukich said:
> ...



Crap, I forgot about that one. Statement retracted. :-[


----------



## Ed_5D (Oct 25, 2010)

missitnoonan said:


> I'd love to see a refresh of some of $300-$500 prime lenses. Currently own the 35/f2 and a MkI 50/f1.8, but would absolutely jump at refreshed 35mm and 50mm lenses with USM motors and circular aperature blades (I'm scared by the reports of faulty motors on the 50/f1.4). Unfortunately Canon doesn't seem too keen on releasing any mid-priced lenses at the moment.
> 
> I don't see any reason to go EF-S though, the EF primes are plenty small and mount on any body. Only reason I can see is to keep FF users from having a cheaper prime option.



Don't be scared of faulty motors... the EF 50mm f/1.4 is a great lens!! be scared of dropping it though ;D


----------



## match14 (Oct 25, 2010)

traveller said:


> match14 said:
> 
> 
> > If an EF-S prime is coming then it should be a 30mm f/1.4  not a 35mm f1.8
> ...



I see your point about f/1.8 v f/1.4, but is 30mm not closer to standard than 35mm? 30x1.6=48, 35x1.6=56.


----------



## epsiloneri (Oct 25, 2010)

match14 said:


> I see your point about f/1.8 v f/1.4, but is 30mm not closer to standard than 35mm? 30x1.6=48, 35x1.6=56.



If you go by the definition that the focal length for a normal lens should equal the diagonal, then the APS-C would have a normal lens at 27.3 mm (and the FF at 43.3 mm; 50 mm was chosen as a "standard" out of manufacturing convenience in the early 20th century)). But yes, 50mm on FF is obviously more similar to 30mm @ APS-C, but anything 25-36mm can be considered normal on the APS-C... the practice is rather arbitrary.


----------



## franky03 (Oct 25, 2010)

match14 said:


> ... but *anything* 25-36mm can be considered normal on the APS-C... the practice is rather arbitrary.



Yes *anything* 25-36mm would be nice ... I don't care just make it so Canon plz!!!
Although wouldn't there be less distortion if they would choose 36mm instead of 25mm?


----------

