# Another Mention of a New EF 70-200mm Lens [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 15, 2016)

```
We’re told again that Canon is developing a follow-up to the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. The new lens design is said to be a little bit lighter, a new IS system and optical upgrades as well.</p>
<p>While we weren’t given a timeframe on when we could expect an announcement, the source did say that the new lens appeared on an “internal roadmap”, which usually means the product is coming within 12 months. As with all things lenses, there can sometimes be significant delays (i.e. EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x).</p>
<p>The latest EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II was announced in March of 2010, which would make a 2017 announcement 18-24 months quicker than the previous update, as the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS was announced in September of 2001.</p>
<p>I will note that this is the first time we’ve seen the aperture mentioned, we’ve been wondering if it was going to be a new f/4 or a new f/2.8.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## BigShooter (Nov 15, 2016)

I'll stick with the 200mm f/2 IS USM thank you.


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Nov 15, 2016)

sports/action and wildlife shooters will be happy 
just need too know when this will be announced/released


----------



## mitchel2002 (Nov 15, 2016)

just pray it does not cost 3000


----------



## tron (Nov 15, 2016)

Just like the 300 2.8 it is not a lens in urgent need of update. More probably a CR0 rumor 8)


----------



## StudentOfLight (Nov 15, 2016)

They should add focus preset buttons like on the great whites


----------



## willchao (Nov 15, 2016)

the current version is still class leading in terms of performance, it doesn't need an upgrade as much as the 50 F1.2L and 85 F1.2L II, those two really suck optically especially the 50


----------



## ScottyP (Nov 16, 2016)

This cannot be the lens they think most needs updating. It is a great lens no one criticises. Not like their 50mm offerings.


----------



## steliosk (Nov 16, 2016)

whats wrong with the older one?

any word mentioning about a new 50L and 85L?


----------



## Hellish (Nov 16, 2016)

This lens doesn't need an update how about the 50mm f/1.2L!!


----------



## JMZawodny (Nov 16, 2016)

Given my history with this lens, this is probably a CR3. I bought the original 70-200 f/2.8 about 6 months before the II version came out. I finally broke down and got that one a bit over a year ago, so this newest one is sure to be released very soon.

I find it difficult to imagine there is much room for improvement, but if it is better I certainly won't wait that long again to buy one.


----------



## tron (Nov 16, 2016)

JMZawodny said:


> Given my history with this lens, this is probably a CR3. I bought the original 70-200 f/2.8 about 6 months before the II version came out. I finally broke down and got that one a bit over a year ago, so this newest one is sure to be released very soon.
> 
> I find it difficult to imagine there is much room for improvement, but if it is better I certainly won't wait that long again to buy one.


I get it! The same happened with me and the 16-35 2.8L (first version)...


----------



## AUGS (Nov 16, 2016)

I agree, the current lens is an outstanding performer and probably doesn't "need" an update just yet from a photographers perspective.

But it also sells in strong numbers. It could be that the manufacturing tools are now requiring replacement or ongoing maintenance to keep going, so a replacement lens could be just as cost effective as maintaining the current design with some newer technology in the areas of IS and some optical improvement opportunities. It isn't necessarily about optical performance.

I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out.


----------



## timmy_650 (Nov 16, 2016)

I sure hope this is sure. I have been wanting to upgrade my 70-200 f4 and if there is a new 70-200 I can get the old one for a few $100 less.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

As I'm sitting on my 5D3 this cycle, I see very little reason to replace my 70-200 F/2.8L IS II. I'm not sure I can fare much better on a 22 MP canvas. The Mk II version is nearly without fault. 

Any guess on what might be improved with this new version? A small bump in resolution? A new hood with a CPL window like with the 100-400L II? Lighter would also be nice. 

- A


----------



## unfocused (Nov 16, 2016)

I'd be surprised to see this in 2017, maybe 2018 or 2019. I'm also guessing that the biggest changes will be in weight and IS (including adding a third IS mode) and possibly focusing speed, although it's already really fast. It will be hard to improve on the optical performance. One thing that would be interesting would be if Canon followed Sigma's lead and allowed users to select custom modes that prioritize either speed or accuracy. 

Since the II version used to sell for around $2,500, I expect it will be several years after introduction before I even look at the III version.


----------



## MaxFoto (Nov 16, 2016)

When are they updating the 35L II and 100-400L II?? ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

Just looking at DXO [throw up in mouth noise] as they are one of the very few places that tests lenses on the 22, 30 and 50 MP format, and strictly from a resolution perspective, they peg the 70-200 F/2.8L IS II as:

5D3: 21 P-Mpix (out of a max possible 22)
5D4: 26 out of 30
5DS R: 33 out of 50

So, in that light, there is room to improve. On my 5D3, as I said before, I'm hard pressed to want more sharpness. Perhaps if I made the jump to 50 MP I'd see more room for improvement, but that is quite literally splitting pixels at that point. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

MaxFoto said:


> When are they updating the 35L II and 100-400L II?? ;D



Everyone's a comedian. 

We presently have a staple tool of a 50mm f/1.4 that dates back to the earliest parts _of the Clinton administration_ and here goes Canon, updating its f/2.8 zooms every 8-10 years with the regularity of Old Faithful. 

Give me a damn sharp 50 prime with modern USM that is smaller than a pickle jar. Take my money. 

- A


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Just looking at DXO [throw up in mouth noise] as they are one of the very few places that tests lenses on the 22, 30 and 50 MP format, and strictly from a resolution perspective, they peg the 70-200 F/2.8L IS II as:
> 
> 5D3: 21 P-Mpix (out of a max possible 22)
> 5D4: 26 out of 30
> ...



While the current model is excellent, there is some room for improvement. Sun stars are really not nice with this lens and flare control isn't in the same league as the 70-300 LIS. It's also heavier than earlier models...and the coatings are quite old. It was launched just before the newer Flourine and SWC coatings became available. 
The 100-400 LIS II set a new standard for IS smoothness and it's the only lens I've used where the viewfinder is completely wobble free when shaking the lens...it's really quite something. So I'm guessing the IS system could do with an upgrade.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

GMCPhotographics said:


> While the current model is excellent, there is some room for improvement. Sun stars are really not nice with this lens and flare control isn't in the same league as the 70-300 LIS. It's also heavier than earlier models...and the coatings are quite old. It was launched just before the newer Flourine and SWC coatings became available.
> The 100-400 LIS II set a new standard for IS smoothness and it's the only lens I've used where the viewfinder is completely wobble free when shaking the lens...it's really quite something. So I'm guessing the IS system could do with an upgrade.



And GMC is fond of his sunstars, I can attest. This is no less than the fourth time I recall you bring that up. 

And you bring up a great point -- I keep forgetting what a wonderful landscape tool these 70-200s are. 

- A


----------



## tron (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> ...
> Everyone's a comedian.


 Like this rumor (as well as the new 300 f/2.8 one...)



ahsanford said:


> We presently have a staple tool of a 50mm f/1.4 that dates back to the earliest parts _of the Clinton administration_ and here goes Canon, updating its f/2.8 zooms every 8-10 years with the regularity of Old
> Give me a damn sharp 50 prime with modern USM that is smaller than a pickle jar. Take my money.
> 
> - A
> Faithful.


On that you are correct...


----------



## Jopa (Nov 16, 2016)

Slightly off topic... Does anyone have an AF consistency problem with the 70-200 II on the 5dsr? Mine is very inconsistent on the 5dsr (the only inconsistent lens), but dead accurate on the 1dx2. Not sure what to do...


----------



## pokerz (Nov 16, 2016)

DPAF is Canon's Future, please make it 70200 STM


----------



## Boyer U. Klum-Cey (Nov 16, 2016)

Since everyone's a comedian: "Take my 24-70 F4L(IS) PLEASE!".(rimshot)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 16, 2016)

pokerz said:


> DPAF is Canon's Future, please make it 70200 STM



There is nothing wrong with the AF system in the L lenses, STM is for cheaper entry level lenses and saves money over putting a fast AF system in a lens.

It would make little sense to make a lens with a slower AF system in a "L" lens and raise the price too.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

pokerz said:


> DPAF is Canon's Future, please make it 70200 STM



Just like every sports and event photographer wants slower AF to make things more challenging. 

- A


----------



## pwp (Nov 16, 2016)

I'm gobsmacked on an almost daily basis with the quality of the output from the 70-200 f/2.8isII whether it's on 1D MkIV, 5DIII or 7DII. This lens is hardly in need of an upgrade. The only thing I could hope for would be a weight-loss program with zero performance loss. I wouldn't expect a 70-200 f/2.8is III for years....

-pw


----------



## Sabaki (Nov 16, 2016)

Let's play devil's advocate here quickly and be hyper critical of the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS mkii

* Sunstars not as good as say, the 16-35 f/2.8mkii
* Bokeh on the original is said to be more pleasing to the eye
* Weight for those shooting 8 hour events
* That 'pop' of the 24-70 f/2.8 L mkii & 35mm L mkii
* Is the f/4.0 L IS version a tad sharper?

I'm being a bit silly with the above but let's say the above is perfected on the new version, how good wouldn't it be?


----------



## TeT (Nov 16, 2016)

MII really needed to be larger than 77mm. I forget the post but somebody did the math and figured it needed 82mm to take full advantage of its awesomeness.

So there is room for some improvement in there... Should be interesting.


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 16, 2016)

Interesting news!

Regarding the image and built quality of both 70-200 IS lenses I wasn't expecting any of those two to be replaced before - say - 2020.
And even with the latest releases from Nikon and Sony I wouldn't call those a thread to the f/2.8 lens but just a step to catch up. 

Of course, If you want to stay ahead and if you want to deliver the very latest technology to the pros with one of their main workhorses I can understand that move from Canon. 
But let's see if there will be a 2017 or 2018 announcement of either of those.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

Sorry to be a broken record, but rev'ing the design of the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II -- an absolute supercar of a lens, even in 2016 -- instead of other lenses is maddening.

Consider just a few nontrivial unmet needs at present:


The sharpest 50mm prime Canon sells is a $125 focus-by-wire / external focusing / STM lens intended for beginners. (Hint: that was not a compliment.)


The only way you can shoot longer than 400mm with Canon is to use a teleconverter or pay $9,000+ for a superwhite. Canon folks would give their left nut for a first-party zoom that goes to 600mm.


Canon does not presently sell a lens for the astro crowd that is simultaneously ultrawide + fast + coma free. (You usually only get two out of three of those things.)

And those are just the ones I thought of in this moment. I'm sure there are other areas more in need of attention.

I love Canon, I recognize we are spoiled rotten with the lenses we already have, etc. I just wish Canon took a pause from refreshing the staple pro tools every 8-10 years and threw us a bone. 

...shaped like a 50mm prime. 

...with USM.

...and not too big.

- A


----------



## Ryananthony (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Sorry to be a broken record, but rev'ing the design of the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II -- an absolute supercar of a lens, even in 2016 -- instead of other lenses is maddening.
> 
> Consider just a few nontrivial unmet needs at present:
> 
> ...



You are not the only person who thinks like that.


----------



## Joakim (Nov 16, 2016)

pwp said:


> I'm gobsmacked on an almost daily basis with the quality of the output from the 70-200 f/2.8isII whether it's on 1D MkIV, 5DIII or 7DII. This lens is hardly in need of an upgrade. The only thing I could hope for would be a weight-loss program with zero performance loss. I wouldn't expect a 70-200 f/2.8is III for years....
> 
> -pw



Agreed.

The 70-200 F2.8 IS II is an incredible lens. Mine consistently delivers better results than my 300 F2.8 IS II, even with an 1,4x extender on, to the point where i rarely take my 300 out any more.

(I have had the 300 for a year now and have not gotten a single satisfactory photo from it. In the beginning i chalked it up to inexperience with such focal lengths but i am starting to believe there is something wrong with the lens)


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Sorry to be a broken record, but ... is maddening.
> ...


It is not maddening because it is a cash cow and a tech lighthouse product for Canon. 

But you are right. They could find more interesting topics for the masses, not able nor willing to spend more than 1k on a piece of glass, let alone 2 or 3k.


----------



## Maiaibing (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Just looking at DXO [throw up in mouth noise] as they are one of the very few places that tests lenses on the 22, 30 and 50 MP format, and strictly from a resolution perspective, they peg the 70-200 F/2.8L IS II as:
> 
> 5D3: 21 P-Mpix (out of a max possible 22)
> 5D4: 26 out of 30
> ...


Using a 5DS/R I can attest there is actually room for improvement. 

However, I can also safely say there are quite a lot of other lenses that need it even more.

I believe that this lens is a high earner for Canon and it makes sense to upgrade to revive the 2.500$ price level for a while and sell the new version to people like me who will find it hard to resist simply because we use this lens a lot.


----------



## midluk (Nov 16, 2016)

I guess something is preventing them from a continued production of the mk2 version (part availability, wear of the tooling, etc) and instead of a substantial new invenstment into the old lens they designed a completely new version.


----------



## jolyonralph (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> The sharpest 50mm prime Canon sells is a $125 focus-by-wire / external focusing / STM lens intended for beginners. (Hint: that was not a compliment.)



Actually, the sharpest 50mm prime Canon sells is the 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, a design that dates back to 1987. This isn't a compliment either (although it still remains a good lens albeit with ancient autofocus technology.)[/list]


----------



## MintChocs (Nov 16, 2016)

When I first saw this article "bummer" as I just bought a new 70-200 mkii. Then sanity came back in as any new version would make my eyes bulge when seeing the price tag.


----------



## SteveM (Nov 16, 2016)

The current mkll version is so good (I shoot it wide open for weddings and it is so sharp) why would I want to spend probably £2500 replacing it?


----------



## LordofTackle (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> [*]Canon does not presently sell a lens for the astro crowd that is simultaneously ultrawide + fast + coma free. (You usually only get two out of three of those things.)




I think the new 16-35/III ticks all your point if I understand Dustin correctly....but it also has that horrible vignette, don't know how much that will affect the astro folk

Or do you want fast fast? (i.e. 1.4)


----------



## dufflover (Nov 16, 2016)

Like others I don't see anything wrong with the current mkII, it still shines above most lenses. And unlike say a super tele or some brand name ones it doesn't charge a perfectionist price. So I agree they'd only re-do it if:
- it costs them not much to do in the first place, like a few minor tweaks, no significant changes to production costs or extra R&D costs
- as part of their manufacturing processing overall, they change the design to suit some other manufacturing change overall and it would've cost more to keep it the way it is

(there are others but these would be my top two thoughts)


----------



## docsmith (Nov 16, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Just looking at DXO [throw up in mouth noise] as they are one of the very few places that tests lenses on the 22, 30 and 50 MP format, and strictly from a resolution perspective, they peg the 70-200 F/2.8L IS II as:
> ...


I think this is likely what is going on. There will be a core set of lenses that Canon will want to be able to take advantage of their high MP cameras. If Canon is to go greater than 50 MP with the s/r line, they will need the core set of lenses to match. This might be the start of a reboot of core lenses.


----------



## Sharlin (Nov 16, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Canon does not presently sell a lens for the astro crowd that is simultaneously ultrawide + fast + coma free. (You usually only get two out of three of those things.)
> ...



Wide open vignetting isn't a big deal to your standard daylight ISO 100 f/11 landscape photographer, but with astro where you're working at f/2.8 AND a high ISO, pushing the corners four stops is going to be a nonstarter unfortunately :/ The DR simply isn't there.


----------



## tron (Nov 16, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > [*]Canon does not presently sell a lens for the astro crowd that is simultaneously ultrawide + fast + coma free. (You usually only get two out of three of those things.)
> ...


So much vignetting will affect my landscape astrophotography. Correcting in post increases noise a lot in an already noisy picture! My 14 2.8L II is more balanced. It has some coma but not a disgusting one (like Canon 24 1.4 II) and it has vignetting but not a terrible one (like 16-35 2.8 III).
So a 14 2.8 III with improved coma would be THE landscape astrophotography solution for me...


----------



## Etienne (Nov 16, 2016)

It's not high on my priority, but it is one of the most popular pro lenses that Canon makes, so it'll sell well.

Improvements? They'll use nano USM, which will work better with DPAF video. And a new IS system will synchronize with digital and/or sensor based IS to give incredible 5 axis IS. And of course they'll improve the resolution to handle the 50MP+ sensors, and give it new coatings. You can count on this lens being noticeably better than the mark II.

Having said that, what I really want is a really good 50mm f/1.4 IS that's no bigger than the 35mm f/2 IS


----------



## Etienne (Nov 16, 2016)

..... AND some EF-M primes with IS !!!


----------



## LordofTackle (Nov 16, 2016)

tron said:


> LordofTackle said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Ok, then it's a real bummer. Pity, since besides that it seems to be an awesome lens.
BTW, could you point me to some of your landscape astrophotographs?

And to go back on topic: the current 70-200 is a heck of a lens. I don't see why it would need an update (except maybe the weight, but that's of no concern for me personally).


----------



## LordofTackle (Nov 16, 2016)

Etienne said:


> Improvements? They'll use nano USM, which will work better with DPAF video. And a new IS system will synchronize with digital and/or sensor based IS to give incredible 5 axis IS. And of course they'll improve the resolution to handle the 50MP+ sensors, and give it new coatings. *You can count on this lens being noticeably better than the mark II.*



Can you? I bet a lot of buyers of the new 24-105 might disagree... 

I thought the nano USM, is the USM for cheap lenses? And maybe not as fast and precise as the true ring USM. Therefore I don't think they would put it in such a high-class lens.


----------



## Maiaibing (Nov 16, 2016)

Joakim said:


> The 70-200 F2.8 IS II is an incredible lens. Mine consistently delivers better results than my 300 F2.8 IS II, even with an 1,4x extender on, to the point where i rarely take my 300 out any more.
> 
> (I have had the 300 for a year now and have not gotten a single satisfactory photo from it. In the beginning i chalked it up to inexperience with such focal lengths but i am starting to believe there is something wrong with the lens)



There is something wrong here. 300mm IS L II is a far better lens. If you shoot FF you should be able to see it from your shots. Suggest you test or hand in your lens. You made a huge investment - it should deliver for the money.

For me its the other way around - and I have a great 70-200mm IS L II. But it just does not compare.

300mm IS L II is the sharpest Canon lens out there.


----------



## Etienne (Nov 16, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Improvements? They'll use nano USM, which will work better with DPAF video. And a new IS system will synchronize with digital and/or sensor based IS to give incredible 5 axis IS. And of course they'll improve the resolution to handle the 50MP+ sensors, and give it new coatings. *You can count on this lens being noticeably better than the mark II.*
> ...



Nano USM is brand new, and much faster than STM, and works spectacularly in combination with DPAF. It's introduction in a non-L lens is for testing purposes I suspect. Ring USM is old technology. The new nano-USM will find it's way into L lenses sooner than later I suspect, especially since future Canon sensors will all have DPAF.


----------



## BeenThere (Nov 16, 2016)

tron said:


> LordofTackle said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...


As long as we're wishing, I would wish for a 14 f/2 with good coma an say only -2 EV vignette. Might as well wish for the stars! Anxious to see the performance of the announced Samyang 14 f/2.4


----------



## tron (Nov 16, 2016)

BeenThere said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > LordofTackle said:
> ...


Of course I would prefer that! But I believe I am a little more realistic wishing for an updated 14mm 2.8L III...


----------



## BeenThere (Nov 16, 2016)

As others have mentioned, there could be a sourcing problem on the current 70-200 ii. For instance, it has a fluorite lens element that may be getting expensive, or impossible to source.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Nov 16, 2016)

Interesting. Let's just hope that it is a better update than what the 24-105L II seems to be shaping up to be.

I think a lot of people would be most happy about the II prices dropping a bit!

One random thought: I've heard some "murmurs in the breeze" about a G2 version of Tamron's 70-200 VC. That lens is the one lens that is a threat in terms of image quality - many find that it is a bit sharper (save perhaps at 200mm) and with nicer bokeh. https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Tamron-SP-70-200mm-F28-Di-VC-USD-Canon-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Canon-EF70-200mm-f28L-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R__1027_1009_408_1009

Right now the AF is better in the Canon (and probably will always be), but the newest Tamron lenses are much stronger in their focus speed and accuracy, not to mention their build and moisture resistance. I don't know how much of a threat in terms of overall sales they really are, but considering how important this lens is to Canon it's probably wise of them to start thinking about the update. Third party lenses are getting much better, and I think people are starting to become more open to choosing them, too.


----------



## Talley (Nov 16, 2016)

BigShooter said:


> I'll stick with the 200mm f/2 IS USM thank you.


Same here. 70-200s bore me now that I bought the 200/2


----------



## TeT (Nov 16, 2016)

Maybe, just maybe what is in need of upgrading is sales volume. They are in the business to make money. An updated 70 200 will do just that.


----------



## kphoto99 (Nov 16, 2016)

Maybe they could put the large front element to good use and deliver larger aperture on the wide end. 

No need to artificially limit it to 2.8 at 70mm when it could do 1.4 at 70, 2 at 135 and 2.8 at 200. 

For those that like constant aperture you still have 2.8 everywhere, but for those that like more versility you get faster lens at the wider end.


----------



## Maiaibing (Nov 16, 2016)

kphoto99 said:


> Maybe they could put the large front element to good use and deliver larger aperture on the wide end.
> 
> No need to artificially limit it to 2.8 at 70mm when it could do 1.4 at 70, 2 at 135 and 2.8 at 200.
> 
> For those that like constant aperture you still have 2.8 everywhere, but for those that like more versility you get faster lens at the wider end.


You need to go into optical engineering. Canon has a job waiting for you!


----------



## haggie (Nov 16, 2016)

ahsanford wrote:


> •The only way you can shoot longer than 400mm with Canon is to use a teleconverter or pay $9,000+ for a superwhite. Canon folks would give their left nut for a first-party zoom that goes to 600mm.



I'm not sure about the left nut part, ???
but I know that I for one would prefer a tele-zoom lens by Canon that reaches to 600 mm.
Unless there is some credible news about one coming before that time, I will probably get one-of-the-others in that range by the end of next year. One cannot keep waiting forever......


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 16, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe they could put the large front element to good use and deliver larger aperture on the wide end.
> ...



+1

#armchairexpert


----------



## e_honda (Nov 16, 2016)

Sabaki said:


> * Is the f/4.0 L IS version a tad sharper?



At 70mm, yes the F4 is slightly sharper. Starting zooming in and the F2.8 II becomes sharper.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Nov 16, 2016)

Talley said:


> BigShooter said:
> 
> 
> > I'll stick with the 200mm f/2 IS USM thank you.
> ...



I have them both, I'd never want to be without the 70-200. As amazing as the 200/2 is it has its drawbacks and the MFD is one of them, try shooting with the 200/2 in a small ish room, or even out side when working area is limited, frame a whole person at close focus distance and your 10+ feet away. The 70-200ii is one of the greats imo, the 200/2 is king and even gets away with massive vignette but it can be a hard lens to live with day to day, oh and its size!


----------



## wtlloyd (Nov 16, 2016)

Obviously, it'll have a green ring.


----------



## kphoto99 (Nov 16, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > kphoto99 said:
> ...



Maybe the great Neuro could explain why when Canon is designing a new lens with an entrance pupil of 71mm it can not be a 1.4 aperture at 70mm (70/71=1 and 200/71=2.8)? 

It is not like Canon does not know how to do variable aperture lenses.


----------



## H. Jones (Nov 16, 2016)

The problem with this is, Canon definitely knows they'll sell a metric crap ton of these things if they release them! Even if it doesn't really need an update.

I've owned and abused my 70-200 f/f/2.8L IS II for years and I would probably swap it for the replacement as soon as it comes out! This is my most-used lens and I doubt I could help myself if they replace it.

That is, of course, if it's not $3000 like the Nikon. Then we might have some issues.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > [*]Canon does not presently sell a lens for the astro crowd that is simultaneously ultrawide + fast + coma free. (You usually only get two out of three of those things.)
> ...



Sure, but the astro folks on this forums went pale when they sized up a 4.6 stop corner push. 

I guess I should add 'with reasonably controllable vignetting' to the list in light of the 16-35 f/2.8L III surprise.

One might argue Canon won't deliver the knockout blow astro lens until a 24 f/1.4L III arrives with the BR gunk -- the 35L II is great but not terribly wide.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Improvements? They'll use nano USM, which will work better with DPAF video. And a new IS system will synchronize with digital and/or sensor based IS to give incredible 5 axis IS. And of course they'll improve the resolution to handle the 50MP+ sensors, and give it new coatings. *You can count on this lens being noticeably better than the mark II.*
> ...



+1. Someday Canon may switch many of it's lenses to nano-USM for 'this porridge is just right' reasons, but *this* lens, the big superwhites, etc. demand bleeding-edge stills performance -- so I see a 70-200 f/2.8L IS III with USM all the way.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 16, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > kphoto99 said:
> ...



I await this 70-200 f/1.4-2.8L IS lens. I imagine we'll see it around the same time AvTvM gets their EF-M 80mm f/2 IS STM pancake. 

- A


----------



## Alex_M (Nov 16, 2016)

May be because photogs hate when their exposure is all over the shop when zooming in or out and your aperture forcibly changed due to its variability (M mode)? Focus breathing as a side effect would be another factor to consider, Bokeh shape and characteristics variation at various appertures, CA levels and spherical abberations, vignetting? I am sure that there are more issues to consider.



kphoto99 said:


> Maybe the great Neuro could explain why when Canon is designing a new lens with an entrance pupil of 71mm it can not be a 1.4 aperture at 70mm (70/71=1 and 200/71=2.8)?
> 
> It is not like Canon does not know how to do variable aperture lenses.


----------



## kphoto99 (Nov 16, 2016)

All of those issues go away if you keep the aperture at 2.8, same as it is now. The difference being you get to decide.



Alex_M said:


> May be because photogs hate when their exposure is all over the shop when zooming in or out and your aperture forcibly changed due to its variability (M mode)? Focus breathing as a side effect would be another factor to consider, Bokeh shape and characteristics variation at various appertures? I am sure that there are more issues to consider.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Alex_M (Nov 16, 2016)

Sure, but makes the design of such a lens (Pro level performing) more challenging likely? My point is: there is undoubtly some merit to your point that might be outweight by associated challenges in designing such a lens.




kphoto99 said:


> All of those issues go away if you keep the aperture at 2.8, same as it is now. The difference being you get to decide.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## midluk (Nov 16, 2016)

The f-stop also affects the needed size and/or distance from the sensor of the back lens element.
I seriously doubt that a f/1.4 lens which can take canon extenders is possible.


----------



## BLFPhoto (Nov 16, 2016)

I will eagerly anticipate the next 70-200 f/2.8 IS L as I expect it to have the latest superior coatings like the 24-70 f/2.8 L II and the new 35mm L. I can find no fault with my current 70-200 Mk II, but it was designed just prior to the newer coatings that seem to impart a pop to the images I get out of those newer lenses. For one thing, when shooting events with both lenses, the images often require slightly different basic work between the images from the different lenses. Not bad. Just different. And slightly time consuming. Its an issue I didn't have when I was shooting the older 24-70 and 35mm lenses with the current 70-200. 

I expect it to rival the new Nikon in price, as well. Situation normal, there. Can't speak whether many or most will find it necessary to upgrade. I will do so immediately, whether it's this year or 5 years hence when it finally appears. 70-200 is one of the two "can't do without" lenses in my bag.


----------



## PHOTOPROROCKIES (Nov 16, 2016)

MaxFoto said:


> When are they updating the 35L II and 100-400L II?? ;D



Definitely don't need a version 3 of the 100-400 just yet, that is an exceptional lens. I also don't think canon needs to make a new 70-200 just because Nikon did. 
I would however like a 35mm f1.4 version 3 that is optimized to work with the 5DSR.


----------



## PHOTOPROROCKIES (Nov 16, 2016)

unfocused said:


> I'd be surprised to see this in 2017, maybe 2018 or 2019. I'm also guessing that the biggest changes will be in weight and IS (including adding a third IS mode) and possibly focusing speed, although it's already really fast. It will be hard to improve on the optical performance. One thing that would be interesting would be if Canon followed Sigma's lead and allowed users to select custom modes that prioritize either speed or accuracy.
> 
> Since the II version used to sell for around $2,500, I expect it will be several years after introduction before I even look at the III version.



The 70-200 version 2 still sells for $2,500 in Canada.


----------



## scrup (Nov 16, 2016)

Lighter so it balances well with the full frame mirrorless.


----------



## RGF (Nov 16, 2016)

I have the 70-200 F2.8 IS II and it is a great lens. Hard press to upgrade it unless there is something really special.

Plus the 70-200 gets used less and less - it is being replaced with100-400 II,


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 16, 2016)

kphoto99 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Maiaibing said:
> ...



Sure, Canon knows how to do variable aperture lenses. The 100-400 needs the same 71mm entrance pupil as a 200/2.8, and 100/71 = 1.4. Why the heck did those dumb optical engineers at Canon make it a pathetic f/4.5 at the wide end, when clearly it can be f/2 or even f/1.8? Same with the 70-300L, limiting its variable aperture to a pathetic f/4 at the wide end when clearly since 70/53.5 = 1.3 it should be f/1.4 or at worst f/1.8? 

What could Canon know that you don't? Oh yeah, they know how to design lenses. :


----------



## hendrik-sg (Nov 16, 2016)

what they could improve? 

- Maybe add some urgently needed vignetting, 4.6 stops is state of the art now.
- To improve build quality, it could get a body of stylish engineering plastic instead of old fashioned magnesium
- To reduce flare, maybe the number of elements could be reduced

Maybe they could release a more worthfull looking new white, or maybe a golden shine with a platin ring would be even more prestigous than white with red ring

But to be serious, this high quality zooms are really complicated compared to the simplicity of the gauss 50 1.2. To produce it cheaper may be a big reason to update the lens, together with restauration of the original price. Or maybe it will be a DO version which would be less heavy and maybe cheaper (with less glass) to produce as well.


----------



## j-nord (Nov 16, 2016)

Nikons got a new 70-200 for $2,800. In typical Canon fashion they are going produce a new lens that outperforms and under cuts Nikons latest and greatest lens.


----------



## rrcphoto (Nov 16, 2016)

the last time there was any mention at all over how long it takes to develop a pro lens - it was suggested that it takes from start to finish around 7 years.

Advances in tech may cut that down but probably not significantly.

So people should step back off the ledge, just because we hear about it doesn't mean it's coming out tomorrow.


----------



## riker (Nov 16, 2016)

/4 PLEEEEEASE


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 17, 2016)

Hmm.... will Canon start propagating its newest DO technology into the regular L line?


----------



## David - Sydney (Nov 17, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> kphoto99 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


From an amateur observer.... could Canon up the aperture to say f/2.5 with a 82mm filter size with the other "small" mods (IS/coatings etc) and then significantly lead the market and justify an increased price?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 17, 2016)

David - Sydney said:


> From an amateur observer.... could Canon up the aperture to say f/2.5 with a 82mm filter size with the other "small" mods (IS/coatings etc) and then significantly lead the market and justify an increased price?



Possibly. But I actually think they should have gone to an 82mm filter for the current 70-200/2.8 IS II, as they did for the 16-35/2.8 II and the 24-70/2.8 II. If you put a standard UV filter (e.g. B+W F-Pro mount) on the 70-200 II, you actually get increased vignetting – pretty rare for a telezoom lens.


----------



## AJ (Nov 17, 2016)

j-nord said:


> Nikons got a new 70-200 for $2,800. In typical Canon fashion they are going produce a new lens that outperforms and under cuts Nikons latest and greatest lens.


Or, in typical Canon fashion, they will jack up the price to $2800


----------



## ntt2007 (Nov 17, 2016)

I am very surprise if they would update this lens while other ancient primes need more urgent update. However, I will very please with a new mark 3, so I can get a mark 2 for better price.


----------



## serenaur (Nov 17, 2016)

I'm another one in the "literally just bought a 70-200 f2.8L II" camp and thought it would be another few years before it was updated because of other lenses that could have been updated & product cycle timing. Many salient points in this thread have made me realise I was perhaps a bit naiive there though! Either way, I took advantage of a Canon cashback offer and the post Brexit UK sterling currency fall to get a good deal on it and it's blown me away (as I expected it would do!). Even if the updated lens is released next year, my new 70-200 will easily earn it's money back before I could even pre-order the new one .


----------



## arthurbikemad (Nov 17, 2016)

I'd not panic over a Mk3 of the 70-200, as said by all the Mk2 is SOO good you'd be hard pushed to tell any difference IF they did make it sharper, again as said makes you wonder if Canon have "revised" the materials used and have aimed for a more cost effective lens, maybe they are rethinking the manufacturing process and trying to cut costs in order to maximize profit, not saying that's the case as I like to think Canon give the BEST they can and the best comes at a cost no matter how high that maybe, the consumer has a choice after all. If the lens is lighter, smaller, has LCD screen, perhaps sharper etc etc etc then someone who is already happy would upgrade, others with GAS may just upgrade anyway... one thing is for sure it's NOT going to be the same price as the Mk2! Just look at the 24-105!!!


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 17, 2016)

AJ said:


> j-nord said:
> 
> 
> > Nikons got a new 70-200 for $2,800. In typical Canon fashion they are going produce a new lens that outperforms and under cuts Nikons latest and greatest lens.
> ...



Nikon already beat them to it...

Speaking of non-Canon lenses with Fluorite, now that Sigma appears to be using it in their Supertelephoto lenses, I have to wonder if they won't include Fluorite in the new 70-200A (or is that "S"?).


----------



## ewg963 (Nov 17, 2016)

ScottyP said:


> This cannot be the lens they think most needs updating. It is a great lens no one criticises. Not like their 50mm offerings.


    +1000000000000000000000


----------



## ewg963 (Nov 17, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> MaxFoto said:
> 
> 
> > When are they updating the 35L II and 100-400L II?? ;D
> ...


----------



## photojoern.de (Nov 17, 2016)

> But it also sells in strong numbers. It could be that the manufacturing tools are now requiring replacement or ongoing maintenance to keep going, so a replacement lens could be just as cost effective as maintaining the current design with some newer technology in the areas of IS and some optical improvement opportunities. It isn't necessarily about optical performance.


This is pretty much what I thought as well when reading the rumor. There is no need for an update with this lens (70-200 L f2.8 IS II). When you use this lens and something is wrong with your photo: it was you!


----------



## Maiaibing (Nov 17, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> LCD screen,



Totally missing LCD screens on my lenses...


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 17, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > LCD screen,
> ...


Does it have to be a swivel screen?  ;D


----------



## Antono Refa (Nov 17, 2016)

Maximilian said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > arthurbikemad said:
> ...



No, but it should support wi-fi so users could see the data on their smartphones.


----------



## tron (Nov 17, 2016)

Antono Refa said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > Maiaibing said:
> ...


And GPS in case camera does not have one ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


----------



## arthurbikemad (Nov 17, 2016)

tron said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Maximilian said:
> ...



Am I missing something, is the LCD display on lenses not something that's happening? i.e EF 70-300??? It can have a friken milkshake machine on it for all I care..


----------



## tron (Nov 17, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Antono Refa said:
> ...


It could but it would increase size and weight. Plus you would be inclined to have a milkshake instead of taking a nice photo ;D ;D ;D


----------



## arthurbikemad (Nov 17, 2016)

tron said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



Ha 8) well in true CR style do we think it would weigh more, is the rather dated analogue readout not well, err, dated..


----------



## unfocused (Nov 17, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Antono Refa said:
> ...



The only thing you are missing is that there are a great many people on this forum who are quick to type snarky comments before they engage their brains. You are absolutely correct that the new 70-300 does have an LCD display.

Keep in mind, though, that some of these forum participants are also returning perfectly good 5D IVs because of an imaginary sensor "defect."


----------



## slclick (Nov 17, 2016)

What is the weight loss in grams with Engineering plastic over magnesium?


----------



## JMZawodny (Nov 18, 2016)

Looking at the MTF charts for the current vII lens, there is a lot of margin in performance to be had. I hope the vIII lens includes MTF charts when used with the 1.4x and 2x telextenders ... then "they can take my money" (ahsanford™). ;D


----------



## tron (Nov 18, 2016)

unfocused said:


> arthurbikemad said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...


It is my understanding - although English is not my native language - that this specific thread entry is more or less sarcastic. Yes the new non-L zoom has an LCD. So what ? everyone seemed to make fun of this as if this is a big "upgrade" for the new ... 70-200


----------



## arthurbikemad (Nov 18, 2016)

Hi Tron, no sarcasm on my part, it would not surprise me is not in the end all lenses have the LCD, me I am not a fan at all, it strikes me as hard to read, slow to update and so on, however I think Canon sees the LCD as a step forward in tech and will apply it to new lenses, I may well be wrong but ai thought I'd add my views into the chat. Your English is great Tron!


----------



## tron (Nov 18, 2016)

arthurbikemad said:


> Hi Tron, no sarcasm on my part, it would not surprise me is not in the end all lenses have the LCD, me I am not a fan at all, it strikes me as hard to read, slow to update and so on, however I think Canon sees the LCD as a step forward in tech and will apply it to new lenses, I may well be wrong but ai thought I'd add my views into the chat. Your English is great Tron!


I am not a fan of LCD either hence the addition of a previous hilarious entry! Target was Canon NOT you! My opinion is that if a company puts resources to improve a lens they should increase IQ (sharpness, CA, edges, vignetting, etc) instead of adding gimmicks (and adding at the same time another point of failure).


----------



## AJ (Nov 19, 2016)

Maybe the lens will have a "print" button


----------



## Maiaibing (Nov 19, 2016)

AJ said:


> Maybe the lens will have a "print" button


Someone should make stats on how often that button has ever been pressed...


----------



## Mr. Shakes (Nov 19, 2016)

I'm for all lens updates because they help drive good used lens prices to where I can afford them!


----------



## Jopa (Nov 19, 2016)

Mr. Shakes said:


> I'm for all lens updates because they help drive good used lens prices to where I can afford them!


Yes, it's also a good reason for the manufacturers to come up with prices around $3k for a slightly updated lens


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Nov 22, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> AJ said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe the lens will have a "print" button
> ...



It'll be right next to the new "make newbie photos look professional" button.


----------



## midluk (Nov 22, 2016)

Roger tested the new Nikon 70-200mm and it seems there definitely is room for improvement in the Canon MkII.


----------



## Maiaibing (Nov 22, 2016)

midluk said:


> Roger tested the new Nikon 70-200mm and it seems there definitely is room for improvement in the Canon MkII.


Nikon also "improved" the price .


----------



## LordofTackle (Nov 22, 2016)

midluk said:


> Roger tested the new Nikon 70-200mm and it seems there definitely is room for improvement in the Canon MkII.



Obviously, from the bench testing, there is some room for optical improvement of the canon 70-200 (mostly at 135mm). But not THAT much. And I doubt many people could actually see the difference in pictures between the Canon and the new Nikon, including me.

My guess is that they will take the same route as for the 24-105 (So a lot of people might take it as a lackluster upgrade):

- improve optics slightly ( in this case the mark II is already pretty excellent, so not much room for improvement)
- improve AF
- improve IS (probably the area with most room for improvement)
- maybe some new gimmicks (i.e. blue goo etc)


----------



## Jopa (Nov 23, 2016)

Interesting test. So now in the 70-200 world we have Nikon > Canon > Sony (GM). No one still can't beat the Canon for the price though. I guess the situation will change with the 70-200 III, bet $1 it will be $3k.


----------



## chik0240 (Dec 31, 2016)

Jopa said:


> Interesting test. So now in the 70-200 world we have Nikon > Canon > Sony (GM). No one still can't beat the Canon for the price though. I guess the situation will change with the 70-200 III, bet $1 it will be $3k.



I am actually tempted to upgrade my 10 years old 70-200 F4L IS to a 2.8 version if it releases a III, but then if it's 3k then possibily I will keep the F4 IS before it breaks.

To be honest the recent releases of the canon L are amazing, I have been upgraded to the 24-70 II from my 24-105 and see a very great improvement of IQ, but if it's a 3K call for this one then I bet it's not worth the extra money which cost a kidney and liver to afford, after all the improvements for some already great old models are subtle when viewing the full picture rather than pixel peeping, the pixel peep on corners which is very likely blurred away in such focal length anyway


----------



## RGF (Jan 9, 2017)

chik0240 said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting test. So now in the 70-200 world we have Nikon > Canon > Sony (GM). No one still can't beat the Canon for the price though. I guess the situation will change with the 70-200 III, bet $1 it will be $3k.
> ...



The value of IQ is very subjective. Some will pay a king's ransom for the best while others will settle lenses that are merely very good. I am not sure how much has to do with actually IQ we observe on a print but rather the emotional benefit of having the best possible IQ ;D


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 10, 2017)

I once asked a retired pro photographer about this or that new lens.

He told me software engineers buy the latest & greatest lenses, photographers who earn a living from their equipment buy the cheapest equipment that would do, and told me to look what those pros actually use.

Which I did. Sure enough, some use the latest & greatest. Often enough, they don't. I've seen a wedding photographer use an EF 28–80mm f/2.8–4L, which is so old its discontinued. Its small, fast, and sharp enough to print A4 - as big as newly weds ask for.


My spider senses alert me of someone going to say "but one day they'll want to see it on 8K displays!".

I'm going through my grandparents' photo albums. I've often said to my self "wow, that photo of my dad's uncle is amazing!" or "My dad's cousin was smashing when she was 23yo!", but never "oh, if only they printed this photo at A3 size..."


----------



## scyrene (Jan 10, 2017)

Antono Refa said:


> My spider senses alert me of someone going to say "but one day they'll want to see it on 8K displays!".
> 
> I'm going through my grandparents' photo albums. I've often said to my self "wow, that photo of my dad's uncle is amazing!" or "My dad's cousin was smashing when she was 23yo!", but never "oh, if only they printed this photo at A3 size..."



THIS.


----------



## cani (Jan 21, 2017)

At what event would Canon announce this?


----------

