# Canon Officially Discontinues Three Lenses



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 15, 2017)

```
<p><a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=20563">According to TDP</a>, Canon Japan has officially discontinued three lenses in the EF lineup.</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://bhpho.to/2r8S6tO">Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS</a> (Replaced by the <a href="https://bhpho.to/2omsLrx">EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II</a>)</li>
<li><a href="https://bhpho.to/2r8SA3a">Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM</a> (Replaced by the <a href="https://bhpho.to/2pNHjkS">EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM</a>)</li>
<li><a href="https://bhpho.to/2pNMl0T">Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS DO USM</a> (No direct replacement)</li>
</ul>
<p>We haven’t heard anything about a new DO zoom lens coming down the pipeline. While I always liked the compact size of the little DO zoom, I never saw much point in using it over the Canon EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS, especially once you consider the L costs less and fits vertically in most camera backpacks to save space.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Rockskipper (May 15, 2017)

Does this mean they will also discontinue support for those lenses if you need repair/etc.?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 15, 2017)

Rockskipper said:


> Does this mean they will also discontinue support for those lenses if you need repair/etc.?



When they discontinue a lens, they have a stock of spare parts manufactured which will last for several years, usually 7-10 years for "L" lenses, less for non L. When the parts are depleted to the point where they decide they can no longer repair a lens, they stop and sell the remaining inventory of parts to their independent repair shops who then continue to repair the lenses as long as they have a part. They may obtain refurbished or used parts as well, so repairs are often possible for long discontinued lenses.


----------



## aceflibble (May 15, 2017)

I mentioned that they were winding down production on the 24-105, in preparation for the mkII, _on this forum two years ago_:



aceflibble said:


> Don't know if it's been mentioned before, but Canon are discontinuing the 24-105 f/4L


I then went on to mention the mkII, the 5D4, etc.

Whoever is writing the front page posts, do you not pay attention to your own forums? You had this 'news' *_two_* *_years_* *_ago_*.


----------



## unfocused (May 15, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> I mentioned that they were winding down production on the 24-105, in preparation for the mkII, _on this forum two years ago_:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Canon Rumors does not simply take as gospel anything posted on this forum. Looking back at your old post, it appears your "source" was apparently a camera shop. Camera shops are notoriously unreliable. 

Your prediction was pretty safe. I can confidently predict today that Canon is planning to cease production of the 5D IV and come out with a 5D V. I can also reliably predict that there will be a 70-200mm f2.8 replacement in the future...that Canon is working on a 7DIII...that the 100-400 zoom will ultimately be replaced...etc. etc.


----------



## AvTvM (May 15, 2017)

There are a good number more Canon lenses that could and should be "officially discontinued". 
First and foremost 75-300 III and 75-300 III USM come to mind, pieces of junk. 

Are any of the following officially discontinued ? 
* 50/1.8 II (replaced by STM)
* 135/2.8 SF (no replacement)
* 28/1.8 USM (replaced by 28/2.8 IS)
* 28-135 (replaced by 24-105 IS STM "non L")
* 17-40/4 L (replaced by 16-35/4 L)
* 16-35 / 2.8 L II (replaced by Mk. III)
* 200/2.8 L II (replaced by 70-200/2.8 II IS)
* 28-300 L (no replacement)
* 24-70 / 2.8 L (replaced by Mk. II)
* 100-400 L (replaced by Mk. II)
* 70-200 / 4 L (replaced by IS)


----------



## Sporgon (May 15, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> There are a good number more Canon lenses that could and should be "officially discontinued".
> First and foremost 75-300 III and 75-300 III USM come to mind, pieces of junk.
> 
> Are any of the following officially discontinued ?
> ...



How exactly does a £2,000 lens replace a £680 one ? Have a thought for those that can't afford £2000, or want smaller and lighter. A reasonably priced 2.8/200 prime has a place. 

The 70-300 DO, that was always a strange one. Very expensive for its optical quality, but it did actually clean up very well in post.


----------



## Chaitanya (May 15, 2017)

I guess 50mm Macro and corresponding life size adaptor should also be part of list.


----------



## RandomRazr (May 15, 2017)

can someone tell me if the 6d II comes out, would it have leser features then the 5D IV?


----------



## Antono Refa (May 15, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> There are a good number more Canon lenses that could and should be "officially discontinued".
> First and foremost 75-300 III and 75-300 III USM come to mind, pieces of junk.



There's a reason Canon does not discontinue those lenses, my guess is profit. E.g. people buy the 75-300 III USM as a cheap tele for APS-C cameras.



AvTvM said:


> Are any of the following officially discontinued ?
> 
> <snip>
> 
> * 28/1.8 USM (replaced by 28/2.8 IS)



If anything, the 28/2.8 IS replaces the 28/2.8.



AvTvM said:


> * 17-40/4 L (replaced by 16-35/4 L)



Canon has four 70-200mm lenses - f/4, f/2.8, w/ IS, w/o IS.

Possibly, Canon is doing the same here - the 16-35/4 L IS lives side by side with the 17-40/4 L IS-less.



AvTvM said:


> * 28-300 L (no replacement)



The 28-300 replaced the 35-350. Apparently there's a demand for a FF superzoom, same as for the EF-S 18-200.



AvTvM said:


> * 70-200 / 4 L (replaced by IS)



Again, as long as two version of the lens make profit at two different price & feature set points, why cancel one?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 15, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> I mentioned that they were winding down production on the 24-105, in preparation for the mkII, _on this forum two years ago_:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, that was timely news. I predict that in about 7 years they will discontinue the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS, a while after they release the 24-70/4L IS II. You heard it here first. :


----------



## Ozarker (May 15, 2017)

aceflibble said:


> I mentioned that they were winding down production on the 24-105, in preparation for the mkII, _on this forum two years ago_:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Please accept our apologies. We had no idea the force was so strong in you... nor how important you think you are. I'll sleep better tonight knowing you and Larry the camera shop guy are on the job.


----------



## jolyonralph (May 15, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Are any of the following officially discontinued ?



* 50/1.8 II (replaced by STM)

Yes, seems to have been discontinued.

* 135/2.8 SF (no replacement)

Also seems to have fallen off the official lists and is no longer in stock in B&H, so I say it's dead.

* 28/1.8 USM (replaced by 28/2.8 IS)

The 28 1.8 is certainly still available, and I'm curious why you'd think an f/2.8 lens would replace this one? It's still the only low-cost wide(ish) low light lens Canon do.

* 28-135 (replaced by 24-105 IS STM "non L")

This is still listed for sale ($339) by B&H, but Canon's website doesn't list it in the current lineup, which makes me suspect it's being phased out. 

But the 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM at $599 (B&H) is hardly a direct replacement being nearly twice the price. The 28-135 was the first lens I bought to complement my 18-55 on my 500D. I used it a lot, and actually got to quite like it.

* 17-40/4 L (replaced by 16-35/4 L)

Again, the 17-40 offers a lower entry point for a high (L) quality wideangle lens. And it's much lighter than the 16-35 4L IS. Maybe we'll see this around for a little while yet.

* 16-35 / 2.8 L II (replaced by Mk. III)

Still available but again no longer promoted by Canon. The price of the 16-35 2.8 II is halfway between the f/4 and the 2.8 III. I think we'll see this one just fade away as demand for it falls.

* 200/2.8 L II (replaced by 70-200/2.8 II IS)

What? Lol. Totally different lenses. The 200/2.8L is here to stay and I think we'll eventually see a 200/2.8L IS to replace it.

* 28-300 L (no replacement)

Is that because you just don't like it? I happen to know a lot of people (especially videographers) who love being able to take a single lens out with them to cover every eventuality. There's a lot of snobbery about this lens. It's not a lens I'd probably ever want to buy, but I can certainly see the place for it. 

* 24-70 / 2.8 L (replaced by Mk. II)

The original 2.8L has been discontinued for a while now.

* 100-400 L (replaced by Mk. II)

Canon kept the Mk 1 on sale for a while because of the significant price hike of the Mark II. The Mk.1 is still available new from B&H for $1300 vs $2000 for the Mk.2 - and this will be another case of the lens being kept on until there's no more demand for it.

* 70-200 / 4 L (replaced by IS)

Another odd suggestion. The non-IS is half the price, lighter and is a superb lens. if you don't need IS why buy the heavier lens? The IS version probably is due for a refresh anyway.


----------



## JonAustin (May 15, 2017)

Chaitanya said:


> I guess 50mm Macro and corresponding life size adaptor should also be part of list.



The 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro was discontinued last year. I bought one new in 2003, and it has recently started to show its age ... the AF motor has slowed down significantly. Still works great in manual focus mode, though.

I use it mostly as a normal lens these days, as I also have the 100mm f/2.8L IS macro. It probably isn't worth the cost to get it repaired. I plan to retire mine when Canon finally releases the AHSanford Special.


----------



## jolyonralph (May 15, 2017)

JonAustin said:


> The 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro was discontinued last year.



Not according to Canon UK, it's still in their current lineup. And it's still very much available for sale. While people still want it (and it is pretty much the sharpest 50mm lens Canon currently sell - which to be fair isn't saying a lot) they'll still make it.

I love mine.

(however I haven't seen the 1:1 adaptor for it offered for sale new for a very long time)


----------



## vangelismm (May 16, 2017)

JonAustin said:


> Canon finally releases the AHSanford Special.



50mm ring USM 1.4 IS macro 1:1? lol


----------



## Jopa (May 16, 2017)

I'd take that, but *nano* USM please. It will be ideal for video as well.


----------



## drnedel (May 16, 2017)

More out of curiosity: Has the 35mm 1.4 mark I already been officially discontinued? At least at some online-sites, It is still available for purchase ...

As great as the mark II version might be optically, it is a little bit pricey for me ...


----------



## YuengLinger (May 16, 2017)

drnedel said:


> More out of curiosity: Has the 35mm 1.4 mark I already been officially discontinued? At least at some online-sites, It is still available for purchase ...
> 
> As great as the mark II version might be optically, it is a little bit pricey for me ...



In my opinion, it would be a poor investment to pay for a version I 35mm. Mine was not especially sharp and had purple fringing even at f/5.6. I went with the Sigma Art 35mm 1.4 for a couple of years, thought it much better than the Canon I, but had some reservations about AF on outer points, and I wasn't crazy about the bokeh.

Enter the Canon II, wow, what a lovely lens! If I'm not mistaken, it has already been available refurbished from Canon, and I'd much rather get one of those than a new version I. 

Yes, the newer one is pricey, but sometimes it's worth it to save up a while longer and spend a bit more than lay out cash for something that would likely never quite satisfy, leading to buying the version II later anyway.


----------



## symmar22 (May 16, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> * 70-200 / 4 L (replaced by IS)
> 
> Another odd suggestion. The non-IS is half the price, lighter and is a superb lens. if you don't need IS why buy the heavier lens? The IS version probably is due for a refresh anyway.



Don't fully agree here, the 70-200 f4 IS is the sharpest of all Canon 70-200 I've had. It is much better than the f2.8 IS V1, and at least equal to the f2.8 V2 that replaced my V1 (if not slightly sharper on my 5DSR). Distortion is about the same, as is chroma and vignetting, but for half the price and the weight. When paired with the x.1.4 converter (v3) I get better results with the F4.

The only flaws IMO are the very noisy stabilizer, and a known mechanical weakness in the design of the focusing ring, that can just stop working in manual focus (mine was repaired for that very reason and I am not the only one).

The 70-200mm f2.8 IS V2 is perfect on the 5D3, but shows it's limits more on the 5DSR than the 70-200mm f4 IS.

Somehow, when I do not absolutely need f2.8, the f4 is always my choice over the f2.8.

As for the 50mm CM, it is still the best choice for my architectural and interior work, since canon failed to deliver a better option (actually the better option is the 40mm STM).


----------



## JonAustin (May 16, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > The 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro was discontinued last year.
> ...



Fair enough. If Canon maintains an online resource showing when its lenses are discontinued, I haven't found it. I'm happy to hear that the lens lives on in other regions, if no longer in the U.S. The source for my comment was The Digital Picture (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Specifications.aspx?Lens=287)

I love mine as well, for what it is, and I agree about its great sharpness (and low distortion, as well).


----------



## JonAustin (May 16, 2017)

vangelismm said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > Canon finally releases the AHSanford Special.
> ...


50mm ring USM f/1.x IS without macro, actually ...


----------



## scrup (May 16, 2017)

Lenses only get discontinued once stock gets low. 

They probably still have a boatload of the 50mm 1.8 Micrometer in stock and others that are still on the list.

The 75-300 lenses are bundles with Rebel kits so they will keep on making them.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 16, 2017)

scrup said:


> They probably still have a boatload of the 50mm 1.8 Micrometer in stock



That's a pretty small lens! That must be why they invented nano USM.


----------



## leadin2 (May 16, 2017)

YuengLinger said:


> drnedel said:
> 
> 
> > More out of curiosity: Has the 35mm 1.4 mark I already been officially discontinued? At least at some online-sites, It is still available for purchase ...
> ...



Perhaps I am the other person who refuses to pay more for mark II.

I was waiting for the price drop on mark I when mark II was announced, but my local Canon website didn't do that. They removed mark I immediately. I believed they stop importing mark I as none of the local stores have any stock. I remembered reading somewhere that mentioned Canon has stopped production on mark I. Just bought one recently from B&H, it was probably the last batch. The lens code indicates that it was from early 2016 batch.


----------



## PCM-madison (May 16, 2017)

I hope Canon is working on a DO replacement. My light travel kit is a 6D + 24-105 F4 L IS + 70-300 DO IS. For me, because the DO lens is smaller, lighter, and less conspicuous than the L zooms, it is a great travel zoom for many trips that are not photography focused. I have also been very happy with the images it makes so long as I shoot in RAW, like this eared grebe I shot earlier today (on a trip to visit my MIL).


----------



## Tom W (May 17, 2017)

I own 2 of the 3, and have owned the third at one time or another. 
The 24-105 - still a very good, versatile lens.
70-300 IS - fairly decent lens, but no competition for the L.
70-300 IS DO - an intermediate range lens, with a price tag higher than it's IQ.


----------



## PCM-madison (May 17, 2017)

I agree that the recently discontinued 70-300 DO IS is not a good value when considering MSRP vs IQ. I payed in the current used price range for mine ($500) and consider it to be a bargain at this price. I am fortunate to also own the 70-300 L IS and have compared the DO to the L in real world situations several times. With good light, they give very similar results for me with a very small edge for the L. The difference is larger in marginal light. On balance, the lower size and weight lead me to bring the DO on trips where photography is a minor focus (like my current visit to my MIL) and the L when photography is more important (like hiking trips in a national parks). My hope is that a new DO zoom with improved technology such as found in the 400mm DO IS II would make a new DO zoom a winner for every situation.


----------



## neonlight (May 21, 2017)

> (however I haven't seen the 1:1 adaptor for it offered for sale new for a very long time)



From what I can tell, the 25mm extension tube will give 1:1 at half the price of the 1:1 converter. Which gives the better results?


----------



## johnhenry (May 21, 2017)

Gee, I guess I have to go and dump my 25-105 f/4 because its no longer the best.

Just revamping old lenses into new ones is not innovation.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 21, 2017)

johnhenry said:


> Gee, I guess I have to go and dump my 25-105 f/4 because its no longer the best.
> 
> Just revamping old lenses into new ones is not innovation.



Who exactly said that? People still use the Magic Drainpipe and the 50/1.0. And the 400/5.6. And lots of others. Who said that because Canon moved their support on you had to ditch a lens?


----------



## ahsanford (May 30, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> There are a good number more Canon lenses that could and should be "officially discontinued".
> First and foremost 75-300 III and 75-300 III USM come to mind, pieces of junk.
> 
> Are any of the following officially discontinued ?
> ...



Yikes. A few glaring errors above. 

The 28 f/1.8 was not replaced with the 28 f/2.8 IS. The 28 f/2.8 IS version replaced the 28 f/2.8. As far as I can tell, Canon sees fit to offer a [fast] and [slow + IS] 28 prime for the FF folks. They are separate product lines for different needs.

And the IS version of the 70-200s did not replace the non-IS version of anything. Canon for a long time wanted 4 price points in the 70-200 L space -- f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS.

And the 200 f/2.8L II was not replaced by a 70-200 -- it's just another option. Some folks love the 200 prime's size and weight compared to the zoom.

And the 17-40L may be on it's way out (someday), but Canon doesn't seem to be in a hurry there. How many folks are snapping that one up when they jump from crop to FF and need a (relatively) affordable UWA zoom option?

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 1, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> And the IS version of the 70-200s did not replace the non-IS version of anything. *Canon for a long time wanted 4 price points in the 70-200 L space -- f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS.*



Not to challenge, but I'm curious - where did they say that? That seems unusually open for them (and seems like a very cluttered 70-200L range, especially alongside the two 70-300s.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 1, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > And the IS version of the 70-200s did not replace the non-IS version of anything. *Canon for a long time wanted 4 price points in the 70-200 L space -- f/2.8 and f/4, IS and non-IS.*
> ...



Never _stated_, only inferred from what was offered. They kept all four lenses in production simultaneously and sold them alongside one another.

I believe the IS II replaced the original IS at one point, and the non-IS f/2.8 was eventually obsoleted, but at one point, it was indeed a _four_ price point market offering -- the envy of the industry, IMHO.

- A


----------



## PCM-madison (Jun 17, 2017)

One more plug for the much maligned Canon 70-300mm DO (hoping for and update), here is a Jamaican Hummingbird shot on a 60D with a high density APS-C sensor and the 70-300mm DO.


----------



## BeenThere (Sep 13, 2017)

seawitch185 said:


> Hi,
> I need help about my lens, it is a CANON 300MM F4 L IS USM, i am looking for the FRONT GLASS/FRONT ELEMENT and METAL MOUNT. Please let me know where i can buy any of those parts.
> Cheers.
> 
> Cesar Legaspi


I'm sending you a PM.


----------



## DJL329 (Sep 13, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Actually, the non-IS 70-200mm f/2.8L was not retired. It is still part of the line-up and available for purchase, even direct from Canon.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/91680-USA/Canon_2569A004_70_200mm_f_2_8L_USM_Autofocus.html

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/ef-70-200mm-f-28l-usm

Having four different versions/price points gives consumers a choice based on the features they want/price they're willing to pay, in a popular focal range.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 13, 2017)

DJL329 said:


> Actually, the non-IS 70-200mm f/2.8L was not retired. It is still part of the line-up and available for purchase, even direct from Canon.



I stand corrected, thanks.

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 13, 2017)

DJL329 said:


> Actually, the non-IS 70-200mm f/2.8L was not retired. It is still part of the line-up and available for purchase, even direct from Canon.
> ...
> Having four different versions/price points gives consumers a choice based on the features they want/price they're willing to pay, in a popular focal range.



Correct, the 70-200/2.8 L non IS is also still listed with Canon in Europa and at stores. 

But actually i rather believe Canon is still sitting on a large stockpile of unsold 70-200/2.8 L (non IS) lenses ... probably they made some "minimum size production run" ... customers either went for the IS versions or got the f/4 with IS for less money, if budget was tight. 

I'd be really surprised, if they still produce that lens currently.


----------



## Rachael Alice (Sep 18, 2017)

Replacement for every discontinued product (here I mean to say for the lens) is available?


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 18, 2017)

Rachael Alice said:


> Replacement for every discontinued product (here I mean to say for the lens) is available?


as stated in start post of thread: for 2 of the 3 officially discontinued lenses canon has launched successors. for 70-300 DO there is no direct successor (yet).

for most of the other "non officially discontinued old dog lenses" there are good/better alternatives available, by Canon and /or 3rd party brands. 

overall there are far more overlapping lens models offered than really needed. only 2 lenses are truly missing: EF 50/1.4 II (possibly with IS) for ahsanford and EF-M 85/2.4 IS STM for me ... ;-)


----------



## stevelee (Sep 18, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> First and foremost 75-300 III and 75-300 III USM come to mind, pieces of junk.



That is clearly the worst lens I own. But I have a new appreciation for it after I saw the pictures I got of the eclipse. Some CA, but otherwise sharp. Sunspots show up well in the photos before totality.

Once I buy a 6D2, I'll start looking at lenses. I'll get a 24-105 kit lens with it, and will want something wider, and then I'll replace the 75-300, but I haven't decided with what. I don't shoot a lot of telephoto pictures, but some of that comes from not having a particularly good telephoto lens. I don't use the 10-22mm lens with my Rebel that much either since I don't shoot for realtors any more. So I might not be in a big rush for a super wide.


----------



## mnclayshooter (Sep 18, 2017)

Be careful. Someone will come along here and tell you their old rebel could capture photos like these and that you shouldn't be able to do this without the flagship body in hand. 

Nice work.


----------

