# The Next Lens from Canon Will be an EF-S Prime



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 19, 2017)

```
We’re told that the next new non-kit lens Canon will announce is an EF-S prime. We weren’t told what focal length the new EF-S prime lens would be, but we do know that it’s not a specialty lens like a macro.</p>
<p>We’ve also been told that we may see a new EF-S 18-55 kit lens alongside the new Rebel next month.</p>
<p>What focal length of EF-S prime would you be interested in?</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 19, 2017)

Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
...


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Jan 19, 2017)

It won't make sense for it to be in the tele range for obvious reasons. Rule out 24, 28, 35, 40 and 50mm as well. I'm guessing a UWA prime. Something like an EF-S 8 or 10mm (~13-16mm FF equivalent). At least f/2.8. Might be STM, no IS.


----------



## vau (Jan 19, 2017)

Mark D5 TEAM II said:


> It won't make sense for it to be in the tele range for obvious reasons. Rule out 24, 28, 35, 40 and 50mm as well. I'm guessing a UWA prime. Something like an EF-S 8 or 10mm (~13-16mm FF equivalent). At least f/2.8. Might be STM, no IS.



I think we have the 10-18 for mirrors and 11-22 for the ones who cannot affod a mirror. In that range and those are fairly good choices.

I think it will be a 30 or 35 mil to be a standard for APS-C. There's nothing fast there currently.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 19, 2017)

I don't think a standard prime is ruled out at all, but my second guess would be a UWA as well. A fast 12-14mm (~20mm equivalent) would be yummy.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 19, 2017)

It would be nice if there were a true wide angle prime EF-S lens. At more than 38 mm equivalent I never felt the 24mm was a proper wide angle. 15mm would be much more useful.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 19, 2017)

30mm would be fantastic!
15mm would be fantastic!

but 29mm or 16mm will mean that Canon is *******!


----------



## ashmadux (Jan 19, 2017)

It could be an efs version of the *WONDERFUL EF-M 22/f2*.

There is no real equivalent to this joyful lens that not made by sigma and weigh a ton.

The lens has treated me well for 3 years, though I cant use it on a rebel


----------



## Cory (Jan 19, 2017)

A 14 2.8 would be pretty cool to complement my 10-18 so I won't have to get a Samyang/Rokinon for astrophotography. Probably not gonna be that, but that'd be my first choice.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 19, 2017)

ashmadux said:


> It could be an efs version of the *WONDERFUL EF-M 22/f2*.



I'm afraid the EF-S version of the EF-M 22mm/2 is the already-existing 24mm/2.8 pancake; the faster aperture of the EF-M is probably only feasible due to the shorter flange distance of a mirrorless mount.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 19, 2017)

EF-S 30mm F1.8 for sure.
Just because I already gave up waiting, and bought the Sigma 30 Art. :

I would very much like an EF-S 20mm F1.8 as well.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

After the 'There will be no EF 50mm lens in 2017' CR post, aka 'This just in: it's a big pile of poop for ahsanford', I did not think it could get any worse.

Now this. An EF-S 32mm f/nooneknows IS USM may be coming. 

In all seriousness, new glass is never a bad thing. Congrats to crop users -- hopefully it's not a stinky turd of a lens. It's a total shot in the dark here, but my best guess would be an illuminated macro lens like the recent EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

ashmadux said:


> It could be an efs version of the *WONDERFUL EF-M 22/f2*.
> 
> There is no real equivalent to this joyful lens that not made by sigma and weigh a ton.
> 
> The lens has treated me well for 3 years, though I cant use it on a rebel



Canon's already done that. The EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM pancake is that attempt for EF-S. I recognize that it's not f/2, but the likelihood of Canon offering two primes that basically do the same job _for the crop market_ is next to nil, I'd wager.

- A


----------



## zman2596 (Jan 19, 2017)

I would like to see a fast EF-S 35mm like f/1.8 or f/2.0


----------



## andrei1989 (Jan 19, 2017)

of course it will be a cheap EF-S 35mm or 14mm...i'm getting both from samyang very very soon ))


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 19, 2017)

EF*-S* 85mm f/2.4 IS STM. Just to piss off AvTvM.  

Seriously, I think an 85mm APS-C lens is a possibility (likely f/2.8, but maybe f/2). It's at the edge of a focal length that will benefit from the smaller image circle, and the current 85/1.8 is 'old' while the 85L is expensive, so an APS-C short tele prime may have a decent market.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> EF*-S* 85mm f/2.4 IS STM. Just to piss off AvTvM.


----------



## hne (Jan 19, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Now this. An EF-S 32mm f/nooneknows IS USM may be coming.



I think it'll be an EF-S 31 f/2.8 STM. No-frills $200 pancake half way between the EF-S 24 f/2.8 STM and EF 40 f/2.8 STM

I'd like to see an EF-S 55 f/1.8 USM (and an EF-S 15-45 f/1.8 IS USM)


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 19, 2017)

hmm my bet is on a 30mm or a 50mm prime.

since they have a 60mm macro, you'd think that 30 would make more sense.

of course some will go .. but.. but.. BUT .. it's not a 31.25mm ..


----------



## BasXcanon (Jan 19, 2017)

I guess the 3rd party lens manufacturers (samyang and loawa) are pushing canon to release a new faster wide angle 12mm lens for crops indeed. 12mm F2.8 and IS would be a no brainer for the 70D/80D bloggers.
Ofcourse we had the 10-18mm already which is great, but not indoors.

Other possibility is that Canon makes a copy of the Nikkor 10,5mm Fisheye for crop for Eos cameras.

BTW I just got an update on the Canon app on my smartphone.
It says, when wifi connected to the camera, it can create GPS tags in the exif file.
*So the 80D/70D now have GPS*


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 19, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> ...
> What focal length of EF-S prime would you be interested in?


Something wider than the EF-S 24 pancake.

I don't know if any longer focal length would have an advantage in beeing an EF-S.


----------



## TeT (Jan 19, 2017)

EF-S 8mm or 10mm, I would PAY for that.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

Maximilian said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Purpose-built lenses for crop -- even if they overlap with what a FF lens could do -- will always have the advantage of being smaller diametrically, i.e. an EF-S 85mm prime to simulate an 136mm FF prime doesn't need to cover an FF image circle and therefore should be smaller/lighter, even if made from the same materials as the FF lens.

Canon doesn't offer such EF-S primes for a host of reasons, though. That's why this announcement is a little surprising. Why is Canon doing a positive thing for the EF-S brand now after neglecting it for so long? 

- A


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 19, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> EF*-S* 85mm f/2.4 IS STM. Just to piss off AvTvM.
> 
> Seriously, I think an 85mm APS-C lens is a possibility (likely f/2.8, but maybe f/2). It's at the edge of a focal length that will benefit from the smaller image circle, and the current 85/1.8 is 'old' while the 85L is expensive, so an APS-C short tele prime may have a decent market.



LOL. ;D
I would possibly buy it anyways if it were compact and focuses reasonably well with EF-M adapter.


----------



## mrzero (Jan 19, 2017)

An EF-S 12 or 14mm, ideally at f/2.8, with autofocus would be great if it was reasonably priced. Anything from 17mm or wider would be good. When I started on crop, I relied heavily on the 20mm/2.8 for indoor shots, and frequently wished for a wider option.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 19, 2017)

Canon's EF-S strategy has been pretty consistently creating FoV equivalents to existing EF lenses where there's no "good enough" EF alternative already available.

Let's see what the situation is regarding primes:


*EF**Eqv. ƒ**Crop alternative*14mm ƒ/2.8L9mmNone20mm ƒ/2.8L12mmNone24mm ƒ/2.8,
24mm ƒ/1.4L15mmNone (unless you count the 14mm/2.8L!)28mm ƒ/2.818mmNone35mm ƒ/2.022mmNone (unless you count the 24mm/1.4L!)40mm ƒ/2.824mmEF-S 24mm ƒ/2.850mm ƒ/1.830mmEF 35mm ƒ/2.0 (but current IS version is not cheap!)
EF 28mm ƒ/1.8 (old, not cheap, optically not awesome)85mm ƒ/1.850mmEF 50mm ƒ/1.8 nifty-fifty100mm ƒ/2.8 MACRO60mmEF-S 60mm ƒ/2.8 MACRO135mm ƒ/2L85mmEF 85mm ƒ/1.8

Longer than that, there's practically no advantage in special EF-S glass anymore, it's going to be expensive no matter the size of the image circle.

There's a distinct lack of alternatives for wideangle primes which might tell us something. WA is also the FL region where the smaller image circle matters the most.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 19, 2017)

you forgot the EF-S 24mm/2.8


----------



## PeterT (Jan 19, 2017)

Interesting move, which can hopefully give us the first real Canon EF-S prime (no specialty lens, no low-cost pancake) after more than 16 years of Canon ASP-C DSLRs existence.

I really miss the classic focal lengths combined with apertures usual for modern primes (2.8 is a good maximum aperture for a zoom, not for a prime) and size kept as small as possible thanks to the smaller image circle.
So my wish-list is quite long and I sorted it on how much I wish each lens to happen:
EF-S 22mm f/1.8 or at least f/2, IS would be great
EF-S 15mm f/2 or at least f/2.4
EF-S 56mm f/1.8 IS
EF-S 85mm f/2 IS

But I am afraid that those commenters that expect a 30 to 35mm one may be right... Maybe Cannon wants to release a new lens in the least needed interval of FLs (the EF 35mm F/2 IS is good and small enough) and sending again the message saying: "You want real primes? Go FF!" (as it did with every new EF-S lens in the past).


----------



## GDPhoto (Jan 19, 2017)

I'd love to see something WIDE. As mentioned above, an 8mm or 10mm would be fantastic! I know we all want beautiful portrait lenses that flatter our subjects as well as the compression longer lenses to isolate subjects ...... but getting in close with a wide lens is where the party is! Wisely used, it produces oodles of character.


----------



## ritholtz (Jan 19, 2017)

PeterT said:


> Interesting move, which can hopefully give us the first real Canon EF-S prime (no specialty lens, no low-cost pancake) after more than 16 years of Canon ASP-C DSLRs existence.
> 
> I really miss the classic focal lengths combined with apertures usual for modern primes (2.8 is a good maximum aperture for a zoom, not for a prime) and size kept as small as possible thanks to the smaller image circle.
> So my wish-list is quite long and I sorted it on how much I wish each lens to happen:
> ...


Most probably very small lens to complement M users as well. There was a talk about Canon moving 15-45mm kit lens from 18-55mm kit lenses. What happened to this?


----------



## Tanispyre (Jan 19, 2017)

I would like it to be a 55mm F-1.2 EF-S. There really isn't a good crop sensor equivalent to a portrait lens.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

Tanispyre said:


> I would like it to be a 55mm F-1.2 EF-S. There really isn't a good crop sensor equivalent to a portrait lens.



Fuji makes one -- 56mm f/1.2 -- but they don't have a professional FF platform they are trying to sell you instead like Canon does. :

I peg a very low chance for this new EF-S prime to be an L-equivalent-ish large aperture tool.

- A


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Jan 19, 2017)

It could very well be a 30mm. 
I am not saying it is not a 22mm. Canon did in fact release the EF 24mm, 28mm and 35mm IS USM lenses in 2012 back to back.. But those are full frame. 30mm is more likely tho becuase its more of a 48mm equivalent and Canon does need to fill that gap between the 24 f/2.8 and 40mm f/2.8 STM. Yea the 40mm is FF, but its still a budget STM lens. Canon is not going to make another 50mm since the STM fills that budget line already and is a fantastic lens. 
Now could it be wider? Very likely could also be a 20mm. Then again they may even go super wide and release a 8mm linear fisheye.. Would that not be cool.. But.. in reality. Its likely a 30mm to compete with Sigmas junk..


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Jan 19, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Tanispyre said:
> 
> 
> > I would like it to be a 55mm F-1.2 EF-S. There really isn't a good crop sensor equivalent to a portrait lens.
> ...



Agreed... 

I would have to say tho I would be ecstatic if they tricked us all and released something like a 90mm STM or Nano USM f/2 lens with IS..


----------



## asl (Jan 19, 2017)

a good 15-16 mm maybe.


----------



## slclick (Jan 19, 2017)

A couple things which help drive my 2nd body choices to the M5 and 80D over a 6D1/2 are the pancakes (sure, I mean the ef-s 24 since I already have the 40) and the possibility of new great crop primes. Especially an 8, 10 or 12mm ef-s lens.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 19, 2017)

It'll either be a 16mm f/2.8 or a 35mm f/1.8

There's very little point in them doing anything else as it'll either be too specialist or too much of an overlap with other lenses.


----------



## Gnocchi (Jan 19, 2017)

I think it will be a replacement for the efs 60mm macro.


----------



## DaveN (Jan 19, 2017)

I'd love a 15 f/2.8 STM (24mm equiv.), no IS, priced under $300, with solid sharpness and distortion control. Perfect for wide-scene video and landscape stills. Canon would sell a ton of them.


----------



## justawriter (Jan 19, 2017)

Wonder if this is a reflection of increasing interest in the 7D MII from higher level photographers who are the ones most likely to buy a bag full of lenses. If so, there could be more such announcements coming.


----------



## bdbender4 (Jan 19, 2017)

I gave up on EF-S. How about EF-M? 14mm f/2.8? Or 90mm f/2? Fuji did it...


----------



## countofmc95 (Jan 19, 2017)

A lot of predictions here are usually from the standpoint of enthusiasts and pros, what we'd like. But I think the reality is the vast majority of APS-C Canon users are hobbyists, amateurs, etc that will only buy 1-2 lenses. So I think this next lens will be pretty "boring". I'm thinking EF-S 35mm f/1.8 to directly compete with Nikon's DX 35mm f/1.8, with a similar price of about $200.


----------



## Azathoth (Jan 19, 2017)

Something between the 8-16 mm range please. Btw it only makes sense doing a EF-S prime on the wider end because on the tele end you already have all the EF lenses.


----------



## DaveN (Jan 19, 2017)

Azathoth said:


> Something between the 8-16 mm range please. Btw it only makes sense doing a EF-S prime on the wider end because on the tele end you already have all the EF lenses.


Exactly - the 50 STM is a nice small and inexpensive replacement for the 85/1.8 USM on APS-C(80mm equiv.). $125 instead of $369. Then the 85 USM is a 135/1.8 equiv for only $369, compared to the 135 L for $999. The 15-85 EF-S zoom is $799, weighs over 20 ounces, and starts at f/3.5. Give us a 10 ounce, 15/2.5 EF-S STM for $300 and they will FLY of the shelves!


----------



## SpartanII (Jan 19, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> There's very little point in them doing anything else as it'll either be too specialist or *too much of an overlap* with other lenses.



Seems like overlap is the name of the game considering there are:

EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM
EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM
EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5 - 5.6 that seems to get a refresh every other year
EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5 -5.6
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5 - 4.5

I'll stop here as there are many more wide angle offerings. For the love of sweet baby jesus could Canon please give some attention to the 50mm-100mm focal length range that is priced sub $500 range. Preferably a prime with a max aperture of f/2-4. Just thinking that it would fit rather nicely with their current EF-S 24mm and EF 40mm offerings however in a longer focal length. There are some aps-c shooters that shoot portraiture. Jusssst sayin.

(My rant was not directed towards you jolyonralph) Just frustrated with the aps-c offerings.


----------



## rjbray01 (Jan 19, 2017)

Its such a shame that in order to get excellent wide angle shots you have to buy a full frame camera.

There doesn't seem to be anything in the Canon range for APS-C cameras to compete with the EF-14mm or EF 16-35mm in the full frame world.

IF Canon were to bring out a fantastic high-quality "L" equivalent prime lens somewhere in the range of 8-12mm then this would be absolutely wonderful. The EF-S 17-55mm is a fantastic mid-range zoom and there is no shortage of high quality telephoto lenses ... so I really hope this extends the Canon APS-C world into very high quality wide angle.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

justawriter said:


> Wonder if this is a reflection of increasing interest in the 7D MII from higher level photographers who are the ones most likely to buy a bag full of lenses. If so, there could be more such announcements coming.



Doubt it. Higher level / 'Pro' APS-C users with a 7D2 probably also own an FF rig and have EF glass to call upon for gaps in the EF-S arsenal. Consider: every time you've seen a red-ringed lens on a Canon body with a pop-up flash, _you're looking at a crop user_. For instance, it's not uncommon at all to see a 7D2 user with a 16-35 L lens as their walkaround.

So I don't think this new crop lens would be aimed at a specific crop _body_ so much as a type of user that spans many parts of the crop camera portfolio. Ideas:


The Instagram travel/lifestyle folks would love a compact macro for food photography, perhaps an illuminated lens like the one just released for EF-M (28mm f/3.5 IS STM). I've also wondered if that illuminating element (if modified/tweaked/boosted) could serve as illumination for vlogging.


The budding enthusiast crowd would love a simple / cheap / large aperture tool like the 50 f/1.8 STM but for crop, say an EF-S 35mm f/1.8 STM


The keep it small crowd might want to collect a small set of pancakes. As the 24mm and 40mm pancakes are already out there, a wider pancake might make sense, perhaps a EF-S 15mm f/2.8 STM

These are just guesses, of course. They may just be updating one of the two existing crop primes, in which case it would surely be the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

rjbray01 said:


> Its such a shame that in order to get excellent wide angle shots you have to buy a full frame camera.
> 
> There doesn't seem to be anything in the Canon range for APS-C cameras to compete with the EF-14mm or EF 16-35mm in the full frame world.



Disagree _somewhat_ -- Canon just won't give you a *fast* one for astro/events/sports. But the EF-S 10-18mm lens is no joke for landscapes. That lens is sharp.

I think Canon could make stellar EF-S ultrawide primes, but why would they do that when they want people to go FF and get on the much more expensive EF spending highway? 

- A


----------



## slclick (Jan 19, 2017)

bdbender4 said:


> I gave up on EF-S. How about EF-M? 14mm f/2.8? Or 90mm f/2? Fuji did it...



Canon hasn't given up on it. But you could call them and give your 2 cents.


----------



## SpartanII (Jan 19, 2017)

slclick said:


> bdbender4 said:
> 
> 
> > I gave up on EF-S. How about EF-M? 14mm f/2.8? Or 90mm f/2? Fuji did it...
> ...



I gave them my 2 cents that they should introduce more fast primes for their EF-M mount on Facebook. They deleted the suggestion. Sigh. He'll probably get a dial tone if he called in.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 19, 2017)

slclick said:


> bdbender4 said:
> 
> 
> > I gave up on EF-S. How about EF-M? 14mm f/2.8? Or 90mm f/2? Fuji did it...
> ...



Canon hasn't given up on EF-S, but they surely aren't setting the world alight with new offerings.

Since the year EOS-M was first announced (2012):

New EF lenses: 17 
New EF-M lenses: 7 
New EF-S lenses: 6 

(taken from http://www.eflens.com/lens_articles/canon_lens_date_codes.html#history_of_EF_lenses)

- A


----------



## slclick (Jan 19, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > bdbender4 said:
> ...



Perhaps more EF-S shooters get what they need and stay there or drop out of the race. You know, the kit and the 55-200


----------



## SpartanII (Jan 19, 2017)

slclick said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



Or just buy EF (L) lenses which is probably what Canon desires.


----------



## PeterT (Jan 20, 2017)

SpartanII said:


> Seems like overlap is the name of the game considering there are:
> 
> EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM
> EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM
> ...



I disagree.
1. We are talking about primes, the last three are zooms, so they cannot "overlap" for this discussion.
2. I (and probable many others) need primes for low light situations when f/2.8 is just not enough. In the 35 to 135 equivalent range I would never consider buying a prime being darker than f/2 (and for 24 to 35 darker than f/2.4).
3. I do not consider manual focus lenses. I used to manually focus on film SLR, but the viewfinders of crop sensor SLRS are for me totally inadequate for manual focusing (but I admit that I never looked at a 7D).

So I see *none* suitable primes in the <= 35mm equivalent range (except the old Sigma 20mm f/1.8, which has, according to photozone.de, horrible IQ wide open and it is a big and heavy FF lens, and the new huge and expensive FF Sigma 20mm 1.4).

While there are plenty of primes in 50-100mm (even if I am not sure if you mean physical range or equivalent range): several 35mm 1.4, 35mm f/2 IS, many 50 or 55 1.2 or 1.4 or 1.8, 85 1.2, 85 1.8, 100 2.0... And several of them are in the sub $500 range (at least when buying them used).
The only problem that I can see in the physical range 50-100 is lack of IS (because Canon does not want to add IBIS). There is only one IS lens, the 85mm 1.8 from Tamron, but it has reportedly bad problems with focus shift...
So I would love to see an EF-S 56mm f/1.8 IS or EF-S 85mm f/2 IS. But I understand that this is very unlikely to happen.

(no rant, just facts and (different) opinions)


----------



## ecka (Jan 20, 2017)

Actually, what we really need is a new EF 20mm (pancake or not). But, for APS-C, I'd expect some kind of an F1.2 portrait lens, to compete with all the overpriced F1.2 placebos from other players.


----------



## anden (Jan 20, 2017)

EF-S 10mm f/1.4
EF-S 15mm f/1.2
EF-S 22mm f/1.2
EF-S 35mm f/1.2
EF-S 50mm f/1.2
EF-S 80mm f/1.2



ahsanford said:


> I think Canon could make stellar EF-S ultrawide primes, but why would they do that when they want people to go FF and get on the much more expensive EF spending highway?


Because budget limited enthusiasts wanting an really good camera and a range of really good lenses, may see that the price for an FF system is too high for them, while a crop system still gives really good photos except where you need speed.

Maybe today's competition is so strong, that Canon don't have much time and resources left after being busy defending their high-margin (FF) body and lens segment, high-volume (compact) segment, and crop body segment. So they may have had to leave the quality crop lens market, even if not happily.

How long before Sigma announces an Art DC ~10-20mm f/1.8 zoom?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 20, 2017)

anden said:


> EF-S 10mm f/1.4
> EF-S 15mm f/1.2
> EF-S 22mm f/1.2
> EF-S 35mm f/1.2
> ...


I would be very happy with these EF-S F1.4 lenses and also F1.2 ...
But the reality of the optics makes it very difficult (and expensive) to make ultra wide-angle prime F1.4, and F1.8 zoom.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 20, 2017)

*pancake-ish" *

My guess is a very compact, "pancake-ish" EF-S 35/1.8 STM - small, light, sharp, low cost. Very similar to EF-S 24/2.8 STM and EF 40/2.8.


----------



## Woody (Jan 20, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
> Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
> Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
> Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
> ...



Yes Yes Yes Yes


----------



## Woody (Jan 20, 2017)

Nikon has this:

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-dx-nikkor-35mm-f1.8g.html

I am really hoping Canon offers something similar. Nikon and Canon usually have very similar lens line-up.



ahsanford said:


> I think Canon could make stellar EF-S ultrawide primes, but why would they do that when they want people to go FF and get on the much more expensive EF spending highway?
> - A


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 20, 2017)

I think:
macro lens with built-in lighting system

I'd prefer:
20mm f/1.8 nUSM (i.e. excellent street lens)


----------



## slclick (Jan 20, 2017)

Woody said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > Please let it be a fast ~30mm at a reasonable price
> ...



Meaning less expensive than the wonderful Sigma 30 DC Art?


----------



## Chaitanya (Jan 20, 2017)

Whatever the new lens is, I hope it comes with IS and Nano-USM. Its good to hear the Ef-S mount getting new lens other than usual cheap plastic crap.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 20, 2017)

I know I'm a bit late to the party on this thread, but after reading through I'm in agreement with many others that this will probably be a "normal" prime, something in the 30mm to 35mm range. As much as we all have our own personal, exotic wishlist, I'm guessing that this normal prime would be a good 3rd lens for casual users who already have the kit lens and have added the 55-250 telephoto zoom. That one key lens for low light, like the nifty fifty but crop only, lighter, and wider FL to adjust for the crop factor.


----------



## Woody (Jan 20, 2017)

slclick said:


> Meaning less expensive than the wonderful Sigma 30 DC Art?



Sigma 30 f/1.4 weighs 435g. Price US$499
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/918894-REG/sigma_30mm_f_1_4_dc_hsm.html

Nikon 35 f/1.8 weighs 200g. Price US$197
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html

I have the Sigma 30 mm f/1.4 DC Art lens. Lens is expensive and heavy, optical quality is downright AWFUL and focusing on Canon bodies is inconsistent (whether AF adjusted or not).

Can't wait to dump it.


----------



## slclick (Jan 20, 2017)

Woody said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Meaning less expensive than the wonderful Sigma 30 DC Art?
> ...



That's a lightweight. The 50 Art is 28 ounces and is what I would classify as the new normal for lens sizes. Not everything can be light, small and fantastic. You can have 2 out of 3 but.....(still, I do love my pancake 40)


----------



## Kwwund (Jan 20, 2017)

32mm, f1.X, IS. I'm about to by an EF-35 f2 IS; this one would be even more ideal


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 20, 2017)

Something like a "Canon EF-S 12mm f/2.0 STM" (for ~399€) would be great, as Canon doesn't have an UWA APS-C prime.


----------



## kalieaire (Jan 20, 2017)

If I'm really expected to move over to an EOS M5 platform, I'm going to need the two primes to shoot my style which usually is the 35mm 1.4L and 85mm 1.2L. I generally can pass on all other focal lengths, so in a crop factor equivalent, the 22mm and 53mm would be what we should be seeing from Canon. Canon would probably sell a lot of 31mm lenses (50mm equiv), but not because they're any good, but because they're popular in photo classes.

9mm f2.8
15mm 1.4
* 22mm 1.4 (35L equiv)
31mm 1.2
* 53mm 1.2 (85L equiv)
66mm f2
15-44mm f2.8
44-125mm f2.8 IS


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 20, 2017)

I'm going to be optimistic, hoping it'll be the 500mm f/5.6 ef-s, being about 2.5 pounds and a tad bigger than the 400mm 5.6 L. Oh, and it'll go for $1800, with an intended market of us bird/wildlife guys hefting 7D2s.


----------



## Berowne (Jan 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> justawriter said:
> 
> 
> > Wonder if this is a reflection of increasing interest in the 7D MII from higher level photographers who are the ones most likely to buy a bag full of lenses. If so, there could be more such announcements coming.
> ...



This is exactly what my son did. He purchased a 7DII and 16-35/4 (and a 100-400 Mk. II). The 16-35/4 is a great lens for crop, I used it a lot with my 70D. But after having a new 6D, I will not buy another crop-only lens. The second best compared with the EF-S Macro was the 10-18 STM. An updated 60mm Crop-Macro will be nice, epecially when it will have an IS, but I would not buy it, rather take the 100L.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 20, 2017)

kalieaire said:


> If I'm really expected to move over to an EOS M5 platform, I'm going to need the two primes to shoot my style which usually is the 35mm 1.4L and 85mm 1.2L. I generally can pass on all other focal lengths, so in a crop factor equivalent, the 22mm and 53mm would be what we should be seeing from Canon. Canon would probably sell a lot of 31mm lenses (50mm equiv), but not because they're any good, but because they're popular in photo classes.
> 
> 9mm f2.8
> 15mm 1.4
> ...



I don't see Canon doing that, for reasons:

1. It has a clear interest to push big spenders into FF.

The 7D series is an exception, as higher pixel density sensors cater to a niche pro market.

2. Designing and setting up manufacturing facilities is a big expense. Why make an EF-S 53mm f/1.2, when an EF 50mm f/1.2L already exists? An EF-S 15-44mm f/f2.8 when an EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 & EF 16-35mm f/2.8L already exist? Why make an EF-S 22mm f/2, when an EF-S 24mm f/2.8 is available, which is so close in spec?

Furthermore, the more EF-S lenses one has, the less likely he is to upgrade to FF.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 20, 2017)

kalieaire said:


> If I'm really expected to move over to an EOS M5 platform, I'm going to need the two primes to shoot my style which usually is the 35mm 1.4L and 85mm 1.2L. I generally can pass on all other focal lengths, so in a crop factor equivalent, the 22mm and 53mm would be what we should be seeing from Canon. Canon would probably sell a lot of 31mm lenses (50mm equiv), but not because they're any good, but because they're popular in photo classes.
> 
> 9mm f2.8
> 15mm 1.4
> ...


This thread is about a new lens for EF-S (Canon APS-C DSLR) not for EF-M (Canon APS-C Mirrorless) so M5 is a bit off topic.


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 20, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> I know I'm a bit late to the party on this thread, but after reading through I'm in agreement with many others that this will probably be a "normal" prime, something in the 30mm to 35mm range. As much as we all have our own personal, exotic wishlist, I'm guessing that this normal prime would be a good 3rd lens for casual users who already have the kit lens and have added the 55-250 telephoto zoom. That one key lens for low light, like the nifty fifty but crop only, lighter, and wider FL to adjust for the crop factor.



There is already a good and cheap 35mm normal prime from Canon. It is also light and small and can even be used for fullframe. That is the reason why I think they will go for a different focal lenght, something really new but nothing too exotic. Like samyangs 10mm 2.8 prime for APS-C, except with AF.

Does this make sense?


----------



## svatsal (Jan 20, 2017)

No mention of 200-600mm yet. Sigh!!!  
It's like waiting for John Cena to turn heel in WWE ;D


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 20, 2017)

SpartanII said:


> Seems like overlap is the name of the game considering there are:
> EF-S 24mm f/2.8 STM
> EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM
> EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM
> ...



+100 

A compact EF-S 85/2.4 STM IS would be nice. It would not be a "pancake", but could still be built fairly compact. 

However, I bet its going to be another boring "normal FOV" lens ... something like an EF-S 30mm or 35mm / 2.8 STM. *At best* it might be f/2.0 or f/ 1.8. Build / quality will be along the lines of EF-S 24/2.8 STM. Plastic tubus and possibly also plastic mount. Nothing wrong with that for me, I do like my crop glass to be small, optically decent and as DIRT-CHEAP as possible. 

@all pipe dreamers: no way for Canon to bring an f/1.4 or f/1.2 *CROP* EF-S lens. Only few people would be stupid enough to buy big, expensive lenses that can be used on CROP bodies only. If we spend big bucks and lug around heavy gear, it's gotta be 100% FF-capable without any compromise.


----------



## tapanit (Jan 20, 2017)

The only new EF-S prime I can see myself buying would be a wide-angle - noticeably wider than 20mm (but no fisheye) and at least f/2.8, preferably faster. And significantly smaller than full-frame 14/2.8.


----------



## anden (Jan 20, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> @all pipe dreamers: no way for Canon to bring an f/1.4 or f/1.2 *CROP* EF-S lens. Only few people would be stupid enough to buy big, expensive lenses that can be used on CROP bodies only. If we spend big bucks and lug around heavy gear, it's gotta be 100% FF-capable without any compromise.


DC 30 1.4 and DX 35 1.8 are relatively small, light, and affordable. There may be plenty of room for refining such designs to a bit higher speed and quality level without tripling the price.

Canon didn't make a good short tele zoom for crop range, and probably by perfectly good business sense for them, however Sigma were in another situation and could deliver. I guess something similar could happen with primes.

But yes, the Canon lens rumored here may certainly be something else, like a 1.8-2.8 IS of whichever focal length.


----------



## Snzkgb (Jan 20, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that the next new non-kit lens Canon will announce is an EF-S prime. We weren’t told what focal length the new EF-S prime lens would be, but we do know that it’s not a specialty lens like a macro.</p>
> <p>We’ve also been told that we may see a new EF-S 18-55 kit lens alongside the new Rebel next month.</p>
> <p>What focal length of EF-S prime would you be interested in?</p>
> <p><em>More to come…</em></p>
> <span id="pty_trigger"></span>


Please please make it to be 60-70mm pancake


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 20, 2017)

Snzkgb said:


> Please please make it to be 60-70mm pancake



I'm fairly sure "60-70mm" and "pancake" are mutually exclusive.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 20, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> Snzkgb said:
> 
> 
> > Please please make it to be 60-70mm pancake
> ...


Perhaps well into cupcake territory at that point.


----------



## Steve Dmark2 (Jan 20, 2017)

Why not a 10mm 4.5 STM Pancake.
They already made a 10-18mm zoom for EF-S.
So why not?


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jan 20, 2017)

15mm F2.8 would be nice - so we have a 24mm equivalent field of view.

The Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM lens has a F5.6 aperture at 15mm and above.
So this new prime could be 2 stops faster and sharper as well.


----------



## riker (Jan 20, 2017)

I really don't see why everyone is skipping tele lenses. There you would have the most weight/size saving.
Have you given up on Canon so badly? 

Anything around 70-100mm and f/2.8 would be magical. 90/2.8 macro? Is it too wet of a dream?


----------



## rs (Jan 20, 2017)

riker said:


> I really don't see why everyone is skipping tele lenses. There you would have the most weight/size saving.
> Have you given up on Canon so badly?
> 
> Anything around 70-100mm and f/2.8 would be magical. 90/2.8 macro? Is it too wet of a dream?



The more tele the lens, the less the weight/size saving would be making it specifically for a smaller sensor.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 20, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> I'm fairly sure "60-70mm" and "pancake" are mutually exclusive.



not at all. 70mm/2.4 pancake is "proven possible" ... for APS-C 
http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.uk/en/k-mount/group/14/body/overview/HD-PENTAX-DA-70mm-F2.4-Limited.html






even a 77mm/1.8 AF lens for FF image circle is possible in "ultra-compact" size: 




http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/k/telephoto/smcpentax-fa77/

That's why I see no problem for Canon to make me a decent, tiny EF-M 85/2.4 STM IS


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 20, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Only few people would be stupid enough to buy big, expensive lenses that can be used on CROP bodies only.



Sigma has a 30mm F1.4 lens that sells quite well...

The 17-55 F2.8 from Canon sells quite well......

The 18-200 zoom from Canon sells quite well.....

There might be a lot more "stupid people" out there than you realize, and for Canon to ignore the "stupid people" market would be.... well..... stupid!


----------



## Snzkgb (Jan 20, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> Snzkgb said:
> 
> 
> > Please please make it to be 60-70mm pancake
> ...







This is Pentax SMC-DA 70mm f/2.4
As you can see, it is a pancake.
So why Cannon couldn't make something like this?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 20, 2017)

I'm not a big fan of pancakes. I prefer the lenses of the cupcake format.

So could lenses exist such as:
EF-S 8mm F4 Cupcake
EF-S 10mm F2.8 Cupcake
EF-S 15mm F2 Cupcake
EF-S 22mm F1.8 Cupcake
EF-S 30mm F1.4 Cupcake
EF-S 55mm F1.8 Cupcake
EF-S 85mm F2 Cupcake

Anyone else like cupcake?


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 20, 2017)

Snzkgb said:


> Sharlin said:
> 
> 
> > Snzkgb said:
> ...


Obviously a long pancake is possible....

The problem with long pancakes is that you have to bend the light more sharply, and the sharper you bend the light, the more problems you have with image quality, particularly chromatic aberration.... This is the reason why Canon makes all it's big whites so physically long....


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 20, 2017)

rjbray01 said:


> Its such a shame that in order to get excellent wide angle shots you have to buy a full frame camera.



The 8-15L on crop is an absolutely wonderful combination. It's my second most-used lens on crop.



> There doesn't seem to be anything in the Canon range for APS-C cameras to compete with the EF-14mm or EF 16-35mm in the full frame world.



10-18STM, 10-22, Sigma 8-16.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 20, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> Obviously a long pancake is possible....
> 
> The problem with long pancakes is that you have to bend the light more sharply, and the sharper you bend the light, the more problems you have with image quality, particularly chromatic aberration.... This is the reason why Canon makes all it's big whites so physically long....



Pentax *Limited* lenses - no matter how tiny - are highly regarded and have *no issues* regarding optical quality. They may not be suitable for today's 50 MP and tomorrow's 100 MP sensors though. But for EF-S that's not on the plate anyways. So I remain convinced, that Canon could definitely build a 75 to 85mm/2.4 "pancake" lens for EF-S mount. 

For EF M-mount it might be more difficult due to much shorter flange distance. But a "long pancake" should - hopefully - still be possible. With decent IQ and everything. And me plus possibly one or two other fellas will buy it!


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 20, 2017)

I don't think we should poo-poo the idea of a long lens ef-s, as a very major benefit would be the potential for much smaller size/weight. 

It also makes sense business-wise for Canon, enabling it to price-stratify the market with a non-L long lens that might take the wind out of the 150-600 third party lens sales, but only apply to the crop sensors. 

I'm not actually so optimistic as to think this is likely, but I do think it's sensical. In fact, having a crop version of a long lens makes a lot more sense than having a crop version of a short lens, as the relative benefits are greater. 

I have a fantasy of the 7D3 paired in an kit with a 500mm f/5.6 ef-s L IS for $3500-$3800. Oh, and that would be optimized to work with the version III 1.4x teleconverter and exploit the new body's f/8 focusing capabilities. Sigma and Tamron would be back to the drawing board for the long side of the market. Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself. This is exactly how people become disappointed with Canon.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 20, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> I have a fantasy of the 7D3 paired in an kit with a 500mm f/5.6 ef-s L IS



It will remain a fantasy. That lens would have absolutely no size advantage in EF-S mount vs. EF mount. Law of Optics. Physics. Unfortunately.


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Jan 20, 2017)

Kwwund said:


> 32mm, f1.X, IS. I'm about to by an EF-35 f2 IS; this one would be even more ideal



I have the Ef 35mm f/2 IS USM.. Its a fantastic lens.. Really good sharpness, excellent micro contrast and color reproduction. Plus it focuses accurately and consistent each time. I recommend it..


----------



## Woody (Jan 20, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> The problem with long pancakes is that you have to bend the light more sharply, and the sharper you bend the light, the more problems you have with image quality, particularly chromatic aberration.... This is the reason why Canon makes all it's big whites so physically long....



You may want to take a look at the performance of the Pentax 70 mm f/2.4 pancake lens:

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/127-pentax-smc-da-70mm-f24-limited-review--test-report?start=1

- "As mentioned in the other pancake lens reviews this kind of lenses tend to produce a very even resolution across the frame and the Pentax DA 70mm f/2.4 Limited is no exception in this row. The center resolution is already excellent at f/2.4 whereas the borders and the outer corners follow on a very good level. At f/4 the quality is exceptionally high across the whole image frame and the peak is reached at around f/5.6."

- "Lateral chromatic aberrations (color shadows at harsh contrast transitions) are almost a non-issue for the Pentax specifically at large apertures. The problem increases a bit starting at f/5.6 to an average width of ~0.5px at the image borders but this is nothing to worry about in field conditions. As you may/will see in the sample image section the lens can also produce a slight degree of purple fringing (a color blooming effect) in extreme contrast situations."


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Jan 20, 2017)

anden said:


> EF-S 10mm f/1.4
> EF-S 15mm f/1.2
> EF-S 22mm f/1.2
> EF-S 35mm f/1.2
> ...



LMBO, Canon is not going to create a but load of entry level primes. They are going to have the marketing department research what will sell the most. Look at the cost of making it and if it will turn a profit. Making crap load of primes for APS-C bodies is not happening. While some of us are an exception and use APS-C bodies in a professional manner. Most will not. Most APS-C users buy their DSLR and use it with the kit lens. Eventually some want better portraits so they get the 50mm f/1.8 STM. Or for those that need wider for indoor photos, they get the 24mm f/2.8 STM. Thats really it.. For those few other creatives, the 10-18mm STM and the 55-250mm STM fill all those niches.. Normally when those lens no longer suit their needs, the majority upgrade to full frame. Canon is simply not going to make lens that sit on the shelfs and collect dust for maybe 5% of the APS-C camera market.. For that 5%, there is plenty of great EF lenses to fill those gaps like the EF 35mm f/2 IS USM and countless others.. 

Now that said. The EF-S 10-22mm USM lens is up for a update and it is a special case lens as its one of the few if the ONLY enthusiast grade lens made for the EF-S mount. This is becuase it fills the gap for APS-C users that use higher end EF lenses on their APS-C bodies like say the 24-105mm L or 24-70. Thus the 10-22mm fills that gap and why it also cost more then $500 bucks.. 

Edit: I think technically the new EF-S 18-135mm Nano USM may be considered a enthusiast grade EF-S lens..


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 20, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> I don't think we should poo-poo the idea of a long lens ef-s, as a very major benefit would be the potential for much smaller size/weight.
> 
> It also makes sense business-wise for Canon, enabling it to price-stratify the market with a non-L long lens that might take the wind out of the 150-600 third party lens sales, but only apply to the crop sensors.
> 
> ...


If there were a 500/5.6 for APS-C only then I'd be willing to make a few compromises on say weather-sealing, minimum focus distance, max-magnification, flare-resistance and TC-performance in order to keep down cost.


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Jan 20, 2017)

Woody said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > The problem with long pancakes is that you have to bend the light more sharply, and the sharper you bend the light, the more problems you have with image quality, particularly chromatic aberration.... This is the reason why Canon makes all it's big whites so physically long....
> ...




Your comparing apples to oranges. You simply can not compare how a lens performs from one camera to the other becuase the sensors are also different. IIRC most of the latest Pentax APS-C cameras are only at 16mp. Which means they have a larger pixel pitch and will suffer less from chroma issues..


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 20, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > I know I'm a bit late to the party on this thread, but after reading through I'm in agreement with many others that this will probably be a "normal" prime, something in the 30mm to 35mm range. As much as we all have our own personal, exotic wishlist, I'm guessing that this normal prime would be a good 3rd lens for casual users who already have the kit lens and have added the 55-250 telephoto zoom. That one key lens for low light, like the nifty fifty but crop only, lighter, and wider FL to adjust for the crop factor.
> ...



Definitely makes sense and I don't necessarily disagree with you. However, I assume you're speaking of the 35mm f/2 IS? That is still like a $500 or $600 lens I believe. That's not terribly cheap in Rebel land. Also, while the size may not shrink that much, certainly the weight would be greatly reduced by using a lot less glass to cover the smaller sensor. Look at the EF-S 60mm as an example, that thing is light as a feather with a lot less glass. Either way, greatly reduces costs for Canon. This could be a $200 or so lens retail.

In any case, the 30mm something FL was just my best guess, vote. Could easily be wrong.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 20, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Only few people would be stupid enough to buy big, expensive lenses that can be used on CROP bodies only.
> ...



Count me as one of those stupid people! 

I owned the crop only 15-85mm zoom. It was big and heavy! I especially enjoyed that it went to 15mm (24mm FF equiv) and not the more common 17mm or 18mm.


----------



## CapturingLight (Jan 20, 2017)

As an APS-C shooter (80D) and enthusiast. I am not adverse to primes but they have to offer something over a zoom to interest me. The EF-S 24 2.8 pancake has been tempting but it is really not that fast, ie the same speed as the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. What I really want to buy is the latter, the size does not bother me and I would appreciate the versatility. While I could get the 24 to hold me over I am just trying to save for what I really want. I have the 50 1.8 II and love the fast aperture for portraits. I also have the 100L 2.8 Macro which is a great macro lens and does get used for portraits on occasion.

So what does this leave me wanting as far a as EF-S prime? I would have to put my vote in for a fast UWA for astro, that hopefully does not break the bank. I have the EF-S 10-22 for good light. 

I see a lot of EF-S bashing and comments that people will just upgrade to full frame rather than buy expensive EF-S. I decided a while ago to commit to the Canon APS-C ecosystem, I refuse to buy a less than optimal EF focal range just because I may change to a full frame eco systems one day. It is however nice having access to EF lenses where it makes sense.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 20, 2017)

Lee Jay said:


> rjbray01 said:
> 
> 
> > Its such a shame that in order to get excellent wide angle shots you have to buy a full frame camera.
> ...



Just want to add the Tokina 11-16 has been a long time favorite of enthusiasts for APS-C. I got a number of great shots with that lens and loved that it was f/2.8 and could let it some light if needed.


----------



## insanitybeard (Jan 20, 2017)

Personally I would like to see a compact 10mm ultrawide, as I already own the 16-35L (f4 version) it would allow me to sell the EF-S 10-22 and have a more compact lens for when I needed wider than 16mm. The longer focal lengths are already (mostly) covered by existing EF glass but there is no APS-C compact ultrawide prime!


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2017)

ExodistPhotography said:


> Now that said. The EF-S 10-22mm USM lens is up for a update and it is a special case lens as its one of the few if the ONLY enthusiast grade lens made for the EF-S mount. This is becuase it fills the gap for APS-C users that use higher end EF lenses on their APS-C bodies like say the 24-105mm L or 24-70. Thus the 10-22mm fills that gap and why it also cost more then $500 bucks..
> 
> Edit: I think technically the new EF-S 18-135mm Nano USM may be considered a enthusiast grade EF-S lens..



Enthusiast-grade isn't really a thing, but I think I get what you mean. I generally tie that to the presence of USM:

EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM / Nano 
EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM (2004)
EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM (2006)
EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM Macro (2005)
EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM (2009)
EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM (2004)

As you can see, many of these came out in the immediate wake of the first Digital Rebel in 2004. Canon was rolling out a system and I think they had a much rosier outlook of people investing in EF-S glass back then.

You can argue -- rightly or wrongly -- that the 10-18 IS STM lens _was_ a refresh of the 10-22, but the others on that list have gone begging. Many of those older lenses would benefit from an update.

- A


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Jan 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> Enthusiast-grade isn't really a thing, but I think I get what you mean. I generally tie that to the presence of USM:
> 
> EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM / Nano
> EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 USM (2004)
> ...



Well the 17-85 and 15-85 was likely just Canon trying to figure out what optical solution works the best. Mostly since one came out in 2004 and the other 2009. Which is a 5 year gap. Another reason for the update was the change in Canons mind set that standard lenses started at 28mm, but then Canon moved to 24mm. Which is why the update was at 15mm. These were not consider Enthusiast level lenses. The first lens was released since the kit lens at the time did not have IS at first and was a micro motor IIRC. It is odd as heck that Canon would release the 15-85mm lens the same year as the first 18-135mm.. 

Now the 17-55 is a whole seperate beast since it was a f/2.8 zoom and other improved optics. Its also why it has hung around so long. This was is considered Enthusiast level lens. Mostly becuase of its optical configuration since it had 2 ultra low dispersion elements which was normally reserved for L lens. The 10-22 also has a UD element. The 17-85 and 15-85 did not.

Now the EFS 60mm Macro. I had completely forgot about this lens. This could be the one Canon is updating. It came out in 2005. So its 12yo and due for an update. But I do hope if they make a macro its at least 90mm.. 50-60mm on APS-C is still to close.. I have trouble lighting things sometimes even with a macro ring light..

But the point is USM does not mean Enthusiast lens. I do not think Canon has ever officially announced this, however I have seen them referred to as such on Canon websites from other countries. But its more of what they put into the lens and who they were marketing it to, at least for APS-C lenses go..
But all full frame non-L EF lenses are considered enthusiast level lenses. Simply becuase they are not entry level EF-S lenses, but also not L lenses.. With the exception of anything STM.. STM is entry level. 

This is also why we have 3 levels of the 50mm Lens.. 
50 f/1.2L = Pro
50 f/1.4 USM = Enthusiast
50 f/1.8 II/STM = Entry Level


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2017)

ExodistPhotography said:


> But the point is USM does not mean Enthusiast lens. I do not think Canon has ever officially announced this, however I have seen them referred to as such on Canon websites from other countries.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but 'enthusiast' in the photographic world is simply a term for a non-professional photographer who loves buying gear and talking about it online. Seeing as the term does not exist from Canon's perspective :, arguing over what we think it means seems a bit silly.

- A


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 20, 2017)

rjbray01 said:


> Its such a shame that in order to get excellent wide angle shots you have to buy a full frame camera.



I have a bunch of wide angle lenses, and a bunch of bodies, full-frame and APS-C. In general I would use the 16-35mm f/4L on the 5DSR for general wideangle, switching to the Laowa 12mm f/2.8 for really-really-wide. 

But some of my very best wide angle shots have been taken with a humble EOS 1100D converted for infrared, using the EF-S 10-22 and, more recently the EF-S 10-18 - both of which are really, really good for the money (especially the later). Now granted with infrared chromatic issues aren't a real problem, but even when I've used the lenses on a 7D I've been happy.

And the EF-M 11-22 on the EOS M3 is very good too.

Considering the price differential of APS-C kit in general with FF kit, the options for wideangle are really quite good on EF-S. Having said that, I think a 15-16mm prime would be a great seller.

But yes, it is a shame that to get the best quality shots you have to buy more expensive equipment. Still, that's how Canon make their money


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Jan 20, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> ExodistPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > But the point is USM does not mean Enthusiast lens. I do not think Canon has ever officially announced this, however I have seen them referred to as such on Canon websites from other countries.
> ...



Apologies, didn't mean to sound like I was arguing but instead carrying on a great conversation. 
But yea, until Canon officially says something, which is likely to never ever happen. Yea it would be pointless to argue. That said now, many professional photogs get board and chat online too :-D


----------



## slclick (Jan 20, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> rjbray01 said:
> 
> 
> > Its such a shame that in order to get excellent wide angle shots you have to buy a full frame camera.
> ...



The 10-22 served me very well in the crop era of my digital infancy


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2017)

ExodistPhotography said:


> Apologies, didn't mean to sound like I was arguing but instead carrying on a great conversation.
> But yea, until Canon officially says something, which is likely to never ever happen. Yea it would be pointless to argue. That said now, many professional photogs get board and chat online too :-D



You're fine -- I didn't take it that way at all. And I agree, it's a strong conversation.

- A


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jan 20, 2017)

Canon should really make a high quality standard zoom, which is weather sealed. It's strange that you can buy a solid, sealed body like the 7D2 but there are only cheap build quality lenses you can attach in the 15-100 range.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2017)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Canon should really make a high quality standard zoom, which is weather sealed. It's strange that you can buy a solid, sealed body like the 7D2 but there are only cheap build quality lenses you can attach in the 15-100 range.



Buying a 'pro' APS-C rig does not entitle us to 'pro' APS-C only lenses. There are wonderful lenses that will serve as a standard zoom on crop, but they just happen to be an UWA EF zoom.

- A


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 20, 2017)

ExodistPhotography said:


> Now the EFS 60mm Macro. I had completely forgot about this lens. This could be the one Canon is updating. It came out in 2005. So its 12yo and due for an update.



Problem is the EF-S 60mm is an awesome lens as is. I see no reason to "update" that one, especially when their are a million other holes to plug in the EF-S prime lineup.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> ExodistPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Now the EFS 60mm Macro. I had completely forgot about this lens. This could be the one Canon is updating. It came out in 2005. So its 12yo and due for an update.
> ...



I see a reason: Hybrid IS.


----------



## vscd (Jan 20, 2017)

Hey Canon, if you read this spare me with EF-S primes... come up with a real 28mm pancake for Fullframe. I like the 40STM and this would be the streetphotography-killerlens. 24mm would also be great.


----------



## ahsanford (Jan 20, 2017)

vscd said:


> Hey Canon, if you read this spare me with EF-S primes... come up with a real 28mm pancake for Fullframe. I like the 40STM and this would be the streetphotography-killerlens. 24mm would also be great.



You're OT... but I completely agree. My 40 pancake sits unused as it is a poor combination of FL and speed for me. But a wider FL pancake would work fine at f/2.8 and see regular use as a low profile build for walkaround.

- A


----------



## jedy (Jan 20, 2017)

I wish Canon would develop lenses that match classic focal lengths (or as near as) when taking the 1.6 crop into account. As an example:

13mm - 20.8mm
15mm - 24mm
22mm - 35.2mm
53mm - 84.8mm


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 20, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > ExodistPhotography said:
> ...


+ Lens Integrated Lighting System


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 20, 2017)

vscd said:


> Hey Canon, if you read this spare me with EF-S primes... come up with a real 28mm pancake for Fullframe. I like the 40STM and this would be the streetphotography-killerlens. 24mm would also be great.


I remember reading somewhere, that lenses wider than 35mm (full frame) have to be a retrofocus design, and this makes it impossible the low profile of the pancakes.

However the current EF28mm F2.8 IS remains great, and almost a pancake. So, full frame users can not whine like us, APS-C users, that we do not have any EF-S 17.5mm F2.8 IS.


----------



## SteveA (Jan 20, 2017)

Posted by: ExodistPhotography
« on: Today at 11:47:16 AM » 
Insert Quote
"Now the 17-55 is a whole seperate beast since it was a f/2.8 zoom and other improved optics. Its also why it has hung around so long. This was is considered Enthusiast level lens. Mostly becuase of its optical configuration since it had 2 ultra low dispersion elements which was normally reserved for L lens. The 10-22 also has a UD element. The 17-85 and 15-85 did not."

The 15-85 has 3 aspherical and one UD element. The 15-85 is just as sharp or more sharp than the 17-55.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 20, 2017)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> vscd said:
> 
> 
> > Hey Canon, if you read this spare me with EF-S primes... come up with a real 28mm pancake for Fullframe. I like the 40STM and this would be the streetphotography-killerlens. 24mm would also be great.
> ...



+1. The 24 and 28mm F2.8 IS lenses are short stacks at around 1.2-1.3 in longer than the pancake. I'd rather they retain the f/2.8 and the IQ in place of a shorter design.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 21, 2017)

ahsanford said:


> The Instagram travel/lifestyle folks would love a compact macro for food photography, perhaps an illuminated lens like the one just released for EF-M (28mm f/3.5 IS STM). I've also wondered if that illuminating element (if modified/tweaked/boosted) could serve as illumination for vlogging.
> 
> These are just guesses, of course. They may just be updating one of the two existing crop primes, in which case it would surely be the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM.





StudentOfLight said:


> I think:
> macro lens with built-in lighting system





ExodistPhotography said:


> Now the EFS 60mm Macro. I had completely forgot about this lens. This could be the one Canon is updating. It came out in 2005. So its 12yo and due for an update. But I do hope if they make a macro its at least 90mm.. 50-60mm on APS-C is still to close.. I have trouble lighting things sometimes even with a macro ring light..



Um...



Canon Rumors said:


> ...we do know that it’s *not* a specialty lens like a macro.



(Sorry to burst a bubble. At least that narrows it down a little).


----------



## scyrene (Jan 21, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> I don't think we should poo-poo the idea of a long lens ef-s, as a very major benefit would be the potential for much smaller size/weight.
> 
> It also makes sense business-wise for Canon, enabling it to price-stratify the market with a non-L long lens that might take the wind out of the 150-600 third party lens sales, but only apply to the crop sensors.
> 
> ...



As was stated above, the advantages with regard to size and weight reductions in EF-S versus EF lenses is much less at telephoto lengths. So you wouldn't get a much smaller or lighter EF-S 500mm lens than an EF one of the same specifications. I suspect if Canon ever produces a 500mm f/5.6, they won't want to cut out so many potential buyers (FF-users).


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 21, 2017)

ExodistPhotography said:


> Now the EFS 60mm Macro. I had completely forgot about this lens. This could be the one Canon is updating. It came out in 2005. So its 12yo and due for an update. But I do hope if they make a macro its at least 90mm.. 50-60mm on APS-C is still to close.. I have trouble lighting things sometimes even with a macro ring light..



Too close for what? Please don't assume that everyone wants to take macro photos of insects or other tiny things. Probably the major market for the 60mm macro is for product photography - where you need to get just a little bit closer than a standard lens allows.

And, if you want a 100mm macro there are already two good options available, I see no benefit whatsoever in Canon ever doing a >60mm macro just for EF-S.

Jolyon


----------



## BurningPlatform (Jan 22, 2017)

Crop cameras are aimed at several groups of customers: beginners (1xxxD), those that can't afford full frame (xxxd, xxd partly), those interested also in video (xxd), and then 7d people, who do sports or animal photography. Which group needs a new prime? My cents are on the first two groups, the beginner segment. After all, what is the general recommendation for your second lens? I think it is mosten often to get a fast standard prime. It will be a 30mm 1.8, and it will be inexpensive.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 22, 2017)

BurningPlatform said:


> Crop cameras are aimed at several groups of customers: beginners (1xxxD), those that can't afford full frame (xxxd, xxd partly), those interested also in video (xxd), and then 7d people, who do sports or animal photography.



My impression is xxxxD cameras are a just a way to squeeze the last few dollars out of existing manufacturing facilities.

E.g. the 1000D got the 400D's 10MP sensor, when the 450D got the 12MP sensor, and the 50D got the 15MP sensor. Then the 1100D got the 15MP sensor when 600D & 60D got the 18MP sensor. Same with the AF sensors. Just keeping the manufacturing facilities running to make a cheap camera someone would buy.

The xxxD is the entry level line, the xxD for those who can't afford FF, 7D for the pros who need the extra reach of higher pixel density.



BurningPlatform said:


> Which group needs a new prime? My cents are on the first two groups, the beginner segment. After all, what is the general recommendation for your second lens? I think it is mosten often to get a fast standard prime. It will be a 30mm 1.8, and it will be inexpensive.



If an xxxxD body owner is savvy enough to buy a prime, I think he'll upgrade the camera as well.

IMHO, the prime aims mainly at xxD & xxxD owners.


----------



## PeterT (Jan 23, 2017)

BurningPlatform said:


> Crop cameras are aimed at several groups of customers: beginners (1xxxD), those that can't afford full frame (xxxd, xxd partly), those interested also in video (xxd), and then 7d people, who do sports or animal photography.



I think that you miss another important group: beginners or enthusiast (xxxD or xxD users) who like the smaller size of bodies and lenses and the OVF.

They and do not want to "upgrade" to bigger, heavier and much more expensive ones (even if some of them could afford it) just because for them it would not be an upgrade (i.e. enhancing) in parameters they like (size, weight, price). And they also do not want to upgrade to a mirrorless system because they like the OVF or they have some collection of Canon lenses.

Those would like to use reasonably small (smallest possible with good IQ, but not pancake, I like the "cupcake lens" idea of ajfotofilmagem from this thread) but fast (not more than f/2.0) primes to be useful when the zoom cannot perform either because it is not fast enough or not enough IQ or they just want to have a lighter and smaller lens.

It seems to be ridiculous that, for example, the micro four thirds has a full range of "native" AF primes (from 24mm to 150mm equivalent) with f <= 2.0, even in several quality levels, but Canon still has only the arrogant answer "go FF if you want primes".

For longer FLs (>= 30mm physical) there are some reasonable FF lenses to use (and even the Sigma 30mm APS-C lens) and the dedicated EF-S one could not be that much smaller, I think. But there are *none* reasonable primes for 22mm and 15mm (35mm and 24mm equivalent) to use for crop bodies, not to speak about the UWA territory (12mm, 10mm, ...).
So the question for me is whether Canon will go on with arrogance and will introduce another 30-35mm prime, or they will change their attitude and will finally fill, at least partly, the big gap of WA and UWA fast primes for EF-S.


----------



## JP (Jan 23, 2017)

How about a 10mm f2.8 EF-S lens... That would be quite a bit useful to me..


----------



## ecka (Jan 24, 2017)

So what's a "specialty lens" anyway? If you think about it, they are all specialty lenses of sorts. Wide primes, standard primes, telephoto primes, macro primes, big fast primes, small slow primes. Or is it a lens of the most limited use, like huge super telephoto, MP-E 65 super macro, tilt-shift, or fish-eye?
Does "_not a specialty lens_" means it's nothing special (the least special  ), like slow standard prime? Which would make little sense, because there is enough of those already (24/2.8, 28/2.8, 40/2.8 ).


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 24, 2017)

"specialty lens" in the context of EF-M lenses simply means "no macro lens" since any other category of specialty lens from super-tele to tilt-shift to apodization filter or MP65-micro lens would make little to no sense in Digital Rebel land populated by crop sensors. 

yes, it will be a rather pedestrian, small, optically decent, boring, cheap, tiny consumer lens with plastic mount - most likely a EF-S 35/2.0 STM or at best f/1.8.


----------



## koolman (Jan 24, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that the next new non-kit lens Canon will announce is an EF-S prime. We weren’t told what focal length the new EF-S prime lens would be, but we do know that it’s not a specialty lens like a macro.</p>
> <p>We’ve also been told that we may see a new EF-S 18-55 kit lens alongside the new Rebel next month.</p>
> <p>What focal length of EF-S prime would you be interested in?</p>
> <p><em>More to come…</em></p>
> <span id="pty_trigger"></span>



For me a 15mm f/2.8 prime with IS.

The 24mm ef-s is a nice "normal" lens - but if you want wide angle for night shots - there is not much around - affordable.


----------



## vangelismm (Jan 24, 2017)

Anything bellow 20mm and canon can have my money.


----------



## andrei1989 (Jan 24, 2017)

vangelismm said:


> Anything bellow 20mm and canon can have my money.



i would say below 17...17-18-20 si not wide at all on crop..

a cheap ultra-wide (10-12-14 mm) with 2.8/2 aperture, no IS would be great


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 24, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> vangelismm said:
> 
> 
> > Anything bellow 20mm and canon can have my money.
> ...



I'm with you.... A 15mm would be hard to resist, a 10mm means a pre-order.....


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 24, 2017)

vangelismm said:


> Anything bellow 20mm and canon can have my money.



anything above 75mm and Canon can have my money.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 24, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> vangelismm said:
> 
> 
> > Anything bellow 20mm and canon can have my money.
> ...



STUPID CANON! 

They should be releasing 2 or 3 EF-s primes.....


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 24, 2017)

Looking at amazon USA, the top lens are #1 canon 50mm STM followed by Nikon's 35mm 1.8 DX.

EF-S is still IMO, mass consumer / low-prosumer as far as canon's point of view, for the majority of users out there. probably even more so now that the full frame selection has been expanded on.

people have been crying for a normal lens for EF-S for the longest of times, Nikon's is selling very well. hard not to draw a conclusion from that.

I would be very surprised if we don't get a EF-S 30/35mm STM


----------



## andrei1989 (Jan 24, 2017)

at which focal length...length...does the smaller image circle cancel any weight/size advantages?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 24, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> at which focal length...length...does the smaller image circle cancel any weight/size advantages?


For WIDE ANGLE, lenses shorter than 24mm (38mm in full frame) need to be retrofocal design, and they are no longer as compact as pancakes.
For TELE OBJECTIVE, longer than 200mm the advantage of size and weight in APS-C is lost, because of the inevitably large front element.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 24, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> STUPID CANON!
> They should be releasing 2 or 3 EF-s primes.....



Yes. In addition to pancake 24/2.8 an EF-S 12/4, 35/2.0 and EF-S 85/2.4 STM IS would have been nice. Now it is a bit late, since "Rebel and EF-S doomsday" is near.


----------



## andrei1989 (Jan 24, 2017)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> andrei1989 said:
> 
> 
> > at which focal length...length...does the smaller image circle cancel any weight/size advantages?
> ...



thanks, understood 

i still hope for a wide cheap prime, not a normal one..

i don't think it makes sense for canon to release something longer than 75mm, as someone said earlier, because there are already 4 lenses in that area only from canon and all are reasonably cheap: the 85mm and the 3 100mm versions with the 100L being the second cheapest L lens, i believe..


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 24, 2017)

Being more specific:
It is possible to save some glass on an EF-S lens that is shorter than 24mm ... But only a small saving, and it would not be much cheaper to manufacture EF-S, compared to EF lenses.

On the other hand, the shorter flange distance in EOS-M, allows a considerable saving of glass, on wide-angle lenses.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 24, 2017)

This is why I'd be very surprised to see anything except an EF-S 35mm f/1.8

The only question is whether it'll have IS or not.


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 24, 2017)

Wow, so many who would like it to be a UWA prime. I'm with you guys. I just hope that it will have the same or even better quality than the EF-M 11-22 @ 11mm (which is pretty good, far better than most of its rivals, almost excellent - I've used it a few days ago). 

You know there's the option to buy the Samyang 10mm 2.8 for now. But I'm holding off to buy it because of this rumor. Maybe we have a chance to hear more about this new EF-S prime in february. I'm not saying that it WILL BE a UWA prime, but I certainly hope so. Something to rival said Samyang, just with AF and hopefully even better image quality - especially in the corners - like the EF-M 11-22.

Canon is known for some of their outstanding and very unique lenses.


----------



## funkboy (Jan 24, 2017)

The flange-focal distance of the Canon EF mount is 44mm. Given that the rear element can protrude a little bit into the body, the widest non-retrofocus EF lens is probably the 40mm f/2.8 STM pancake (& from the patent it's really a 39mm lens).

EF-S has short back-focus. Let's say for sake of argument (as I can't find the data so I eyeballed it) that the minimum distance from the rear element to the focal plane is ~35mm (maybe less, but in this ballpark). So normally they should be able to design a small, light <35mm-ish non-retrofocus EF-S lens with enough room in the lens barrel for a wide aperture (say f/1.8 or f/2) AND their consumer-grade image stabilization (or alternatively, f/1.4 without IS), which would of course provide a "standard"-ish (~50mm) equivalent focal length on APS-C sensors.

Which most enthusiasts with an EF-S compatible camera will immediately dash out & buy (if they manage to keep the street price sufficiently under $US 400).

But see also http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-s-20mm-f2-8-stm/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 24, 2017)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Being more specific:
> It is possible to save some glass on an EF-S lens that is shorter than 24mm ... But only a small saving, and it would not be much cheaper to manufacture EF-S, compared to EF lenses.



Can you please explain how that applies to the 10-22mm and 10-18mm compared to the FF UWA zooms (either the FoV matched 16-35 and 17-40 or the focal length matched 11-24)?


----------



## funkboy (Jan 24, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> "specialty lens" in the context of EF-M lenses simply means "no macro lens" since any other category of specialty lens from super-tele to tilt-shift to apodization filter or MP65-micro lens would make little to no sense in Digital Rebel land populated by crop sensors.



I'd say that "specialty lenses" also includes fisheyes.

(Not trying to be pedantic, just covering all the bases)


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 24, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > Being more specific:
> ...


Compared to EF 16-35mm models, the EF-S 10-22mm is not so small, considering aperture is only F3.5-4.5.
The EF-S 10-18mm really is small but has less zoom range, and only F4.5-5.6.
The only APS-C with comparable angle of view to 11-24mm would be the Sigma 8-16mm, again F4.5-5.6.


So far, the APS-C prime of Sigma, Samyang, Mitakon are not very small and cheap compared to wide lens for full frame. Obviously I'd like to be wrong, and be surprised by a EF-S like the EF-M 22mm F2, costing less than $ 500.


----------



## ecka (Jan 25, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> "specialty lens" in the context of EF-M lenses simply means "no macro lens" since any other category of specialty lens from super-tele to tilt-shift to apodization filter or MP65-micro lens would make little to no sense in Digital Rebel land populated by crop sensors.
> 
> yes, it will be a rather pedestrian, small, optically decent, boring, cheap, tiny consumer lens with plastic mount - most likely a EF-S 35/2.0 STM or at best f/1.8.



OK, but I wouldn't call let's say 10mm UWA prime not specialty lens for any APS-C system. While EF-S 35/2 STM Macro sounds pretty generic.


----------



## Woody (Jan 25, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> I would be very surprised if we don't get a EF-S 30/35mm STM



Yay!!! ;D


----------



## vangelismm (Jan 25, 2017)

Tamron 17-50 2.8 is not so big, remove some glass and make a effort to leave at 15mm.


----------



## x-vision (Jan 25, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> It'll either be a 16mm f/2.8 or a 35mm f/1.8
> 
> There's very little point in them doing anything else as it'll either be too specialist or too much of an overlap with other lenses.



My thoughts exactly!


----------



## phree_ed (Jan 25, 2017)

At least 15mm or wider and f1.8 or better.


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 25, 2017)

x-vision said:


> jolyonralph said:
> 
> 
> > It'll either be a 16mm f/2.8 or a 35mm f/1.8
> ...



I don't see the point why they should release a 35 when this focal lenght is already well covered by several small and low cost options for EF/EF-S: old 35, new 35IS 2.0, and 40 pancake, 28IS are pretty close. I'm sure I've missed something. Isn't that enough for enthusiast photographer within the APS-C range (even if these are able to cover FF circle)?

A 15 1.8 would be pretty cool, but I doubt they will make it so fast. A 15 or wider with 2.0 - 2.8 is more likely I guess, and rather with STM than nUSM. One interesting addition in the UWA area would be an 8mm 2.8, but... wouldn't that be too specialist again??


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 25, 2017)

An EF-S 35mm f/1.8 non-IS would be around half the price of the EF 35mm f/2 IS

Big difference for the lower end market.


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 25, 2017)

Actually, less than half the price. According to Amazon.co.uk the RRP on the EF 35mm f/2 IS is £799 (although they sell it for £470) and, the comparable Nikon 35mm f1.8G lens is £183 (their price £152.)

I would expect Canon to produce an EF-S 35mm 1.8 lens for under £250, probably under £200.

Of course, if you wanted a cheap bargain 35mm lens now, the Yongnuo 35mm f/2 is available for £85 on Amazon.


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 25, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> An EF-S 35mm f/1.8 non-IS would be around half the price of the EF 35mm f/2 IS
> 
> Big difference for the lower end market.



I agree, just thought that it is still considered low-priced, even for the entry level market, especially when looking up to their L glass.

Are there even any Canon UWA patents at or below 15mm APS-C? I'm not sure. What about a new and cheap 85 2.0 IS STM - is that out of question or how do you see it?


----------



## vscd (Jan 25, 2017)

> I don't see the point why they should release a 35 when this focal lenght is already well covered by several small and low cost options for EF/EF-S: old 35, new 35IS 2.0, and 40 pancake, 28IS are pretty close.



Don't judge "close" on the difference on millimeters. The Difference between 28, 35 and 40mm is quite visible. The difference beteen 400mm and 407mm not that much


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 25, 2017)

vscd said:


> > I don't see the point why they should release a 35 when this focal lenght is already well covered by several small and low cost options for EF/EF-S: old 35, new 35IS 2.0, and 40 pancake, 28IS are pretty close.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't judge "close" on the difference on millimeters. The Difference between 28, 35 and 40mm is quite visible. The difference beteen 400mm and 407mm not that much



Haha yeah you're right  
I thought they're all still pretty close to 35mm, especially when using your feet a little bit (if it is possible) or doing a small panorama with proper handholding technique (if your subject is static). Well, I tend to experiment a bit as I'm used to limiting myself to one focal lenght, or maybe two, which makes me "think" more creative.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 25, 2017)

Crosswind said:


> I don't see the point why they should release a 35 when this focal lenght is already well cvered by several small and low cost options for EF/EF-S: old 35, new 35IS 2.0, and 40 pancake, 28IS are pretty close. I'm sure I've missed something. Isn't that enough for enthusiast photographer within the APS-C range (even if these are able to cover FF circle)?



The old 35mm is not in production anymore, it was replaced by the quite a bit more expensive IS version. The 28mm IS is expensive and only f/2.8. The old 28mm/1.8 is long in the tooth and not good bang for the buck. The 40mm is cheap but only f/2.8. I'd say there's definitely room in Canon's lineup for a 28..35mm f/1.8..2 STM to mirror the recently upgraded nifty fifty - the question is just whether it makes more sense for it to be EF or EF-S.


----------



## slclick (Jan 25, 2017)

Sharlin said:


> Crosswind said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see the point why they should release a 35 when this focal lenght is already well cvered by several small and low cost options for EF/EF-S: old 35, new 35IS 2.0, and 40 pancake, 28IS are pretty close. I'm sure I've missed something. Isn't that enough for enthusiast photographer within the APS-C range (even if these are able to cover FF circle)?
> ...



I the big scheme of things, these IS wide lenses you speak about are actually some of Canon's less expensive FF glass. Usually all are found <$500.00. So, unless you are comparing prices to EF-S lenses, they are the new inexpensive. True money is a subjective and relative term but I'm not using in the context of salaries but as in Canon's Pricelist. http://www.canonpricewatch.com/prices/


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 25, 2017)

slclick said:


> I the big scheme of things, these IS wide lenses you speak about are actually some of Canon's less expensive FF glass. Usually all are found <$500.00. So, unless you are comparing prices to EF-S lenses, they are the new inexpensive.



Agree that "expensive" might have been too strong a word. I just meant that it appears there's room for a cheaper tier of lenses at those focal lengths, especially for EF-S for which none of the existing glass is a really good alternative to a hypothetical ~$300 ~30mm ~f/2 STM.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jan 25, 2017)

Canon doesn't really have any fast wideangle prime or zoom for APS-C, something like 9-10 or 11mm and at least F2.8.


----------



## ecka (Jan 25, 2017)

jolyonralph said:


> Actually, less than half the price. According to Amazon.co.uk the RRP on the EF 35mm f/2 IS is £799 (although they sell it for £470) and, the comparable Nikon 35mm f1.8G lens is £183 (their price £152.)
> 
> I would expect Canon to produce an EF-S 35mm 1.8 lens for under £250, probably under £200.
> 
> Of course, if you wanted a cheap bargain 35mm lens now, the Yongnuo 35mm f/2 is available for £85 on Amazon.



The cheap Nikon *DX *35/1.8G is not comparable, at all.
EF 35/2IS is a much better tool. While Nikon *FX *35/1.8G costs £439 and has no IS.


----------



## Azathoth (Jan 26, 2017)

Fisheye , UWA lens or a 400 f5.6 would be sweet.


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 26, 2017)

Azathoth said:


> Fisheye , UWA lens or a 400 f5.6 would be sweet.



Agree, especially with the UWA, but it won't be a Fisheye (specialty lens) nor a 400mm 5.6 (they won't produce it only for EF-S), and I'm 99% sure. Though I'm not sure if it will be a 35 or some UWA lens.



blackcoffee17 said:


> Canon doesn't really have any fast wideangle prime or zoom for APS-C, something like 9-10 or 11mm and at least F2.8.



Canon has always been lacking some good options in the UWA range, with some (partially very expensive) exceptions; 11-24L, 14L II, 8-15L (fisheye), EF-M 11-22. The 10-22 or 10-18 doesn't count as they are far off in either built or image quality when compared to named lenses. At least that was my impression when I have compared them myself. 

I do own the 8-15L fisheye zoom and there is defonitely a bigger gap between it and my 24IS, so I'm looking (and hoping) for a cheaper, but high resolution UWA prime between 8 and 14mm. The only cheaper alternative would be Samyang's 10mm 2.8. The others are either too expensive, too low resolution (esp. in the corners), or only for EF-M mount (don't want to invest into it).


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 28, 2017)

Azathoth said:


> Fisheye, UWA lens or a 400 f5.6 would be sweet.



Canon seems happy to cover the fisheye spots with the EF 8-15mm f/4L*, and let 3rd party manufacturers cover the cheaper prime spots (read: Sigma 10mm diagonal & 4.5mm circular fisheyes).

AFAIK, there's no saving in size, weight, or price in making a super tele for crop cameras.

A fast UWA prime would be nice.



* To be frank, I didn't buy the EF 8-15mm. I own an EF 15mm f/2.8 since before the zoom came out, and decided to wait until the zoom's price fell, and DXO supported it. By the time that happened, I lost interest in favor of the Samyang 12mm, and lately Canon EF 11-24mm. I'mm happy enough with the later, that I'll probably sell both the EF 15mm & Samyang 12mm whenever I feel the urge to upgrade / buy some other lens.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 28, 2017)

PeterT said:


> It seems to be ridiculous that, for example, the micro four thirds has a full range of "native" AF primes (from 24mm to 150mm equivalent) with f <= 2.0, even in several quality levels, but Canon still has only the arrogant answer "go FF if you want primes".



Micro Four Thirds is a standard, not a manufacturer, and third parties make other lens options for the Canon EF-S mount; your comparison is therefore not quite fair.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 28, 2017)

Azathoth said:


> Fisheye , UWA lens or a 400 f5.6 would be sweet.


As much as I would love to see a new 400F5.6, it won't be an EF-S mount, at that focal length there would be virtually no difference between it and an EF mount.....

Now an ultra wide, count me in!


----------



## PeterT (Jan 28, 2017)

scyrene said:


> PeterT said:
> 
> 
> > It seems to be ridiculous that, for example, the micro four thirds has a full range of "native" AF primes (from 24mm to 150mm equivalent) with f <= 2.0, even in several quality levels, but Canon still has only the arrogant answer "go FF if you want primes".
> ...



OK, but if I replace "Canon still has" with "All manufacturers still have" then my statement will be still true. There is no full range of dedicated APS-C primes for canon mount DSLRs for those users that do not want to "upgrade" to larger bodies and lenses. There is no reasonable (AF,size,quality,price) 22mm f/2 or f/1.8, no reasonable 15mm f/2 or at least f/2.4. From any manufacturer.


----------



## andrei1989 (Jan 28, 2017)

PeterT said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > PeterT said:
> ...



these lenses you are mentioning would cost the same as their FF equivalents.

why, from a business point of view, would canon invest R&D/manufacturing in some lenses only for half their camera range?? Panasonic/Olympus don't have this problem, their whole camera range has ONE sensor size so R&D will focus on that aspect only. Same with Fuji. Nikon/Sony are in the same situation as Canon.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jan 29, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> PeterT said:
> 
> 
> > There is no reasonable (AF,size,quality,price) 22mm f/2 or f/1.8, no reasonable 15mm f/2 or at least f/2.4. From any manufacturer.
> ...



The APS-C diagonal is 26.8mm, close to 20mm. Wouldn't that indicate it would be much easier to design a 20mm for crop than for FF?

If the answer is no, Canon's 20mm lens is old, and Sigma's 20mm f/1.4 indicates there's interest in an upgrade.


----------



## PeterT (Jan 29, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> PeterT said:
> 
> 
> > There is no reasonable (AF,size,quality,price) 22mm f/2 or f/1.8, no reasonable 15mm f/2 or at least f/2.4. From any manufacturer.
> ...



I did not say "cheap". When I mention price then I mean "reasonable price".

I am not sure what do you mean under "FF equivalents". Is the equivalent of EF-S 22mm f/2.0 an FF 22mm f/2.0 or FF 35mm f/2.0 or FF 35mm f/3.2?
The FF 35mm f/2.0 IS can be bought for 489 EUR, that would be an ok price for me for an EF-S 22mm f/2.0 IS.
But I do not need that much the IS for a wide angle lens, so without IS it may be smaller and cheaper.

Even in the worst case (if you meant FF 22mm f/2.0 as "equivalent"):
The FF 24mm 2.8 IS can be bought for 485 EUR. When considering that the EF-S lenses can protrude a few millimeters deeper into the body, there would be no IS and a big part of the price is a pure marketing decision then I can imagine that EF-S 22mm f/2.0 could be about the same size as the mentioned FF lens and somewhat cheaper.



andrei1989 said:


> why, from a business point of view, would canon invest R&D/manufacturing in some lenses only for half their camera range??



They did invest R&D/manufacturing in several EF-S zooms, so why not into primes that would fill the gaps where there are no reasonable sized and priced lenses available? 
It may help them to keep some customers like me, who do not want to go FF and are considering go micro four thirds. And if they had a full set of EF-S primes then "commitment to EF-S" would not be just an empty marketing slogan, but a real fact.


----------



## andrei1989 (Jan 29, 2017)

"reasonable price" is a relative and subjective term.

the existing zooms for crop are really cheap, except the 15-85, which is "reasonable". These zooms exist so they can be sold as kits with the crop cameras or to people who need a second/third lens (at most!).

regarding the primes, to me at least, the 22/24mm length is awkward...i had the ef-s 24mm and sold it because i wasn't using it..not wide enough, not "normal" enough either..the 40mm is better for me.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 29, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> "reasonable price" is a relative and subjective term.
> 
> the existing zooms for crop are really cheap, except the 15-85, which is "reasonable". These zooms exist so they can be sold as kits with the crop cameras or to people who need a second/third lens (at most!).



The first statement is true. I think most people ('most' being defined as buyers of Canon's entry level xxxD bodies) would find the 15-85 – a lens costing more than their camera, which already came with a lens – to be quite expensive, not at all 'reasonable'. 

For those of us routinely carrying around $10-20K in camera gear, with another $20-30K of camera gear in the closet at home, an $800 lens is more likely 'reasonable'...if not downright cheap.


----------



## Crosswind (Jan 29, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> an $800 lens is more likely 'reasonable'...if not downright cheap.



What you consider as "cheap" is somewhat...

INCONCEIVABLE!!!

(  )


----------



## PeterT (Jan 29, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> "reasonable price" is a relative and subjective term.



In general, you are right.
But you can "calibrate" the meaning of those words against the existing prices of other EF-S lenses and non-L EF primes. I would say that "cheap" is below 200 EUR and "reasonable" is below 500 (or 600) EUR.



andrei1989 said:


> the existing zooms for crop are really cheap, except the 15-85, which is "reasonable".


The 17-55 costs more than the 15-85, the 10-22 is not "cheap" either.
By the way, I think that 15-85 is crazily overpriced. The proof for that is, IMO, that I was able to buy it used in good condition on eBay for 260 EUR including a Hoya Pro1 CPL filter (after a week of searching and bidding).



andrei1989 said:


> These zooms exist so they can be sold as kits with the crop cameras or to people who need a second/third lens (at most!).


I do not understand the argument. Now they exist, but at the time when they were deciding to develop them they did not exist. And they decided in favor of developing them, even the not-so-cheap ones...



andrei1989 said:


> regarding the primes, to me at least, the 22/24mm length is awkward...i had the ef-s 24mm and sold it because i wasn't using it..not wide enough, not "normal" enough either..the 40mm is better for me.


35mm was the usual FL for point and shoot film compacts, so I think that it is a quite interesting FL for some people (of course, not for everybody, so your taste may differ).
For "normal" I have the EF 35mm 2.0 (and I am thinking to upgrade to the IS version).
But it is actually the widest reasonable prime for Canon APS-C (to be exact, the widest is the 30mm Sigma, but having a 35mm I do not plan to buy it). And in low light situations I often need something wider...
In not so low light situations I often find myself to use the 22mm end of the 10-22 zoom. But it is dark (4.5) for low light and also not that stellar IQ (as the upper ends of zooms use to be). So I think that I would use a fast 22mm lens.


----------



## traveller (Jan 29, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> andrei1989 said:
> 
> 
> > "reasonable price" is a relative and subjective term.
> ...



What price would 7D Mk. II owners call reasonable? They've already bought a camera that cost the same as the 6D. If you are a 7D Mk. II or even an 80D user, you currently face a bit of a Hobson's choice as your standard zoom (ignoring the kit zooms): 

the ageing EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8,
the slow EF-S 15-85mm f3.5-5.6,
sacrifice the wide end with the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II (or the EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS II),
or give up the long end with the EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L III (or EF 16-35mm f/4L IS).

To be honest, your best option is probably either the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM (because whilst the Canon version is slightly superior, it probably doesn't justify it being over double the price), or the superb Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. 

What about wide angle options: 

the EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5
the EF-S 10-18 f/4-5.6

A very short list that leaves either the Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6 DC HSM or the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 AT-X PRO DX MKII as probably the best choices. 

The situation is even worse for wide angle primes: you have a choice of the budget EF-S 24mm f/2.8, the EF 24mm f/2.8 IS, or expensive L-series primes which are somewhat over-designed for APS-C. Again, you would probably be better off with third party options, although there isn't much choice here either. That this situation is also replicated across the EF-M line is very sad, especially considering the lineups in m4/3rds and Fuji X-mount. 

As you have so correctly pointed out many times in the past, the majority of Canon's sales are in the lower price brackets. It appears to me that there is a gulf opening up between the budget/entry level and the 'Prosumer'/Professional range. If Canon isn't careful, I can see them losing their mid-range market to a combination of leakage of people "side-grading" to mirrorless systems and third-party lens manufacturers.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 29, 2017)

@traveller
totally disagree. 
EF-S 17-55 is a brilliant lens, no third party offering can even remotely touch it.
EF-S 24/2.8 is a brilliant lens. No APS-C third party 24mm lens can even remotely touch it.
EF-S 10-18 is a very good lens. No thrid party offering at reasonable cost can even remotely touch it. 

Canon Rebel and xxD and 7D/II shooters have an excellent array of high quality, reasonable price Canon EF-S lenses. In addition to the entire Canon EF lens universe. Only very few third party lense of any interest to Canon APS-C mirrorslapper users.


----------



## slclick (Jan 29, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> @traveller
> totally disagree.
> EF-S 17-55 is a brilliant lens, no third party offering can even remotely touch it.
> EF-S 24/2.8 is a brilliant lens. No APS-C third party 24mm lens can even remotely touch it.
> ...



http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-17-70mm-f-2.8-4-DC-Macro-OS-C-Lens.aspx


This is no slouch. It's 3rd party and it runs contrary to your remotely statement.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 29, 2017)

That Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 cannot even remotely touch the Canon EF-S 17-55. Especially not at f/2.8. That Sigma is a subpar variable aperture consumer zoom. The Canon EF-S 17-55 /2.8 is a brilliant lens. No problem to max out 80D or 7D II sensor with it.


----------



## traveller (Jan 29, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> @traveller
> totally disagree.
> EF-S 17-55 is a brilliant lens, no third party offering can even remotely touch it.
> EF-S 24/2.8 is a brilliant lens. No APS-C third party 24mm lens can even remotely touch it.
> ...



We'll agree to disagree: 

the EF-S 17-55 is optically excellent (perhaps slightly less so at MFD), but getting a bit old fashioned mechanically and only 17mm on the wide end -it's good, but would benefit from an update
I'm sure the 24mm f/2.8 is great, but it's a bit long and a bit slow for APS-C: fine as a budget lens, but hardly competition for the Fuji 23mm f/2, let alone the f/1.4, nor even the EF-M 22mm f/2
the EF-S 10-18mm is very good value for money and is a brilliant selling point for the Canon system, it's optically solid but not outstanding and its build quality is on the cheap side. 
Canon Rebel and xxD and 7D/II shooters have an excellent array of budget quality, reasonable price Canon EF-S slow zoom lenses, one fast zoom, one macro and a slow moderate wide angle prime. In addition to the entire Canon EF lens universe of increasingly excellent, increasingly large and expensive L-series lenses; a bunch of old mediocre legacy EF lenses from the film era; plus two other modern slow zooms and three primes. Only very few third party lenses are of any interest to Canon APS-C mirrorslapper users, because all the action has disappeared elsewhere. 

Canon EF-S mount -14 glorious years, 22 lenses of which 12 are kit zooms and 3 of the others are 55-250mm f/4-5.6 tele-zooms... 

Fuji X-mount - <5years, 23 lenses, of which 11 are primes and over half have an aperture >= f/2.8... 

M4/3rd... well, I won't bother going there.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 29, 2017)

traveller said:


> Canon EF-S mount -14 glorious years, 22 lenses of which 12 are kit zooms and 3 of the others are 55-250mm f/4-5.6 tele-zooms...
> 
> Fuji X-mount - <5years, 23 lenses, of which 11 are primes and over half have an aperture >= f/2.8...
> 
> M4/3rd... well, I won't bother going there.



Canon – 14 glorious years selling more interchangeable lens cameras than anyone else...

Fuji X-mount – has fallen off the bottom of the sales chart...

M4/3rd – well, yeah.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 29, 2017)

traveller said:


> Fuji X-mount - <5years, 23 lenses, of which 11 are primes and over half have an aperture >= f/2.8...
> M4/3rd... well, I won't bother going there.



I must say, even as a very vocal critic of Canon I am absolutely happy with all 3 sets of Canon lenses. 
* EF-S 
* 17-55 / 2.8 IS = best f/2.8 APS-C standard zoom on entire market. With IS and at a fair price. See no need whatsoever for an update. Mechanics? Perfectly fine with me. 
* 55-250 IS STM = best APS-C tele zoom on the market. Better IQ than those crazy expensive Fuji tele zooms.
* 10-18 - performance 99% of Fuji 10-24 but at 1/4 the price 
* 60 / 2.8 = excellent macro and portrait lens, and "dirt cheap" to boot
* 24/2.8 = small, dirt cheap, excellent IQ. not really behind Fuji 23/2 [except f/2.8 vs. f/2] ... at 1/3 the price
For everything just use EF lenses, they are less expoensive than those Fuji crop lenses. 

Fuji and Sony lens lineup and their absurd high lens prices have really kept me from switching, despite Canon's shortcoming in EOS M bodies.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 29, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> That Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 cannot even remotely touch the Canon EF-S 17-55. Especially not at f/2.8. That Sigma is a subpar variable aperture consumer zoom. The Canon EF-S 17-55 /2.8 is a brilliant lens. No problem to max out 80D or 7D II sensor with it.



The 17-55F2.8 is the default lens on my 7D2.... an update would be awesome!.... but I don't expect it.


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 29, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > That Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 cannot even remotely touch the Canon EF-S 17-55. Especially not at f/2.8. That Sigma is a subpar variable aperture consumer zoom. The Canon EF-S 17-55 /2.8 is a brilliant lens. No problem to max out 80D or 7D II sensor with it.
> ...


what update? 4 stop IS, ok. But optical formula? And Mk. II then costing 1999,- ... thanks, but no thanks!


----------



## traveller (Jan 29, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> That Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 cannot even remotely touch the Canon EF-S 17-55. Especially not at f/2.8. That Sigma is a subpar variable aperture consumer zoom. The Canon EF-S 17-55 /2.8 is a brilliant lens. No problem to max out 80D or 7D II sensor with it.


Wrong lens: I was referring to the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX DC OS HSM (read my post again  ), which is constant aperture and optically superior to the Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC OS Macro HSM C Lens. It's still not as good as the Canon, but it is less than half the price. 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Lens-Review.aspx

I'd love to see an EF-S 15-55 f/2.8 IS USM, supplemented with an EF(-S) 50-135 f/2.8 IS USM and an EF-S 10-22 f/2.8 USM. Add a 15mm, 22mm f/1.8 and 31mm f/1.8 primes and I will actually buy into the argument that Canon's APS-C system, supplemented with longer and specialist EF lenses is a comprehensive cmaera system. 

Of course, this won't happen, because both Canon and Nikon are sold on the strategy of trying to persuade everyone to upgrade to full frame as soon as they want anything more than a few basic zooms, and they're terrified that selling people lots of APS-C only lenses stands in the way of this.


----------



## traveller (Jan 29, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...


Start at 15mm, weather sealing to go with the 7D series bodies would be a great start. Pricing it competitive with the Fuji 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR and the Olympus M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-40mm f2.8 Pro Lens would prove a point too... 

Or how about something to make people sit up and take notice... or just copy the Samsung 16-50mm ƒ/2-2.8 S ED OIS NX -they'd probably even sell the patents and the toolings to Canon at a knock down price


----------



## slclick (Jan 30, 2017)

traveller said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > That Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.0 cannot even remotely touch the Canon EF-S 17-55. Especially not at f/2.8. That Sigma is a subpar variable aperture consumer zoom. The Canon EF-S 17-55 /2.8 is a brilliant lens. No problem to max out 80D or 7D II sensor with it.
> ...



As was I,my bad... I actually had the original 17-70 (Pre Contemporary and it was very soft) I have no experience with the 17-50 but have many friends who loved it.


----------



## Crosswind (Feb 11, 2017)

Now that the specs and images of the 77D, t7i and M6 have leaked, where's that EF-S prime??? I'm so curious!


----------



## andrei1989 (Feb 11, 2017)

i expect it will be launched with these 2 new bodies and the new kit lens, whenever that will be..next week maybe?


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 11, 2017)

there won't be additional EF-S primes. only another, cheaper to manufacture iteration of 18-55 kit zooms.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 11, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> there won't be additional EF-S primes. only another, cheaper to manufacture iteration of 18-55 kit zooms.



Right, why would Canon make further investment in APS-C dSLR systems, given that dSLRs outsell MILCs 3:1 globally, and the majority dSLRs sold have APS-C sensors? 

I see you continue to put your business degree to good use. :


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 11, 2017)

If it is an EF-S prime, it is probably a wide angle lens. It doesn't make much sense to make an S specific prime above 50mm, and there is already a 24mm EF-S prime, so my bet is 12mm...


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 11, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > there won't be additional EF-S primes. only another, cheaper to manufacture iteration of 18-55 kit zooms.
> ...



well neuro, i don't see you pouring money into rebel-land ... neither am i .. why should Canon? 
mirrorslappers are dead. nothing a rebel cam do better than an EOS M5. except price ... for now.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 11, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> well neuro, i don't see you pouring money into rebel-land ... neither am i .. why should Canon?



The difference is that I recognize and understand that I'm among a small minority of the ILC market...so are you, even though you seem unable to grasp that reality.


----------



## Crosswind (Feb 11, 2017)

AvTvM said:


> nothing a rebel cam do better than an EOS M5. except price ... for now.



You shouldn't compare the M5 with any rebel. It is playing in a completely different league...

Also, do not forget the huge advantage of OVFs. You can work much, much more efficiently regarding energy consumption - something that MILCs will never be able to offer. I think DSLRs are here to stay. Maybe for another decade or even longer. Just because of this. And a very new, much better battery-type than Li-ion (which will come for sure) would change nothing. DSLRs will stay strong for a very long time.



Don Haines said:


> If it is an EF-S prime, it is probably a wide angle lens. It doesn't make much sense to make an S specific prime above 50mm, and there is already a 24mm EF-S prime, so my bet is 12mm...



I hope you are so right! Small and superb image quality like the EF-M 11-22mm. Just a bit faster 

It would complete the holy trinity on the wide end for my super lightweight, small and high quality EOS M5 travel kit (currently 24IS, 50STM). All fits within a super small, inconspicuous Mantona colt bag (http://ow.ly/fij2308UNJv). And there's still room for a (smaller) third lens! Doesn't even look like a camera bag (at least from a certain distance). Y'know - don't give papaya... when possible! I always try to hide the equipment as good as I can.

Anything bigger like my 8-15L or 100L would require my adaptor 45 backbag (http://ow.ly/13v7308UPg1), which I'm only using for longer trips. Can only recommend it. Very ergonomic and lotsa' space! And you don't even have to lay it down on the ground to grab something from the inside. You have access to every gear part on-the-walk.


----------



## picture-maker (Feb 11, 2017)

It maybe as long ago as 2 years that I saw in canonrumors or another "rumors site" an item showing that Canon had registered a patent for an EF-S 22mm f2.0 with a few comments about why? I have been looking and looking for it and haven't managed to trace it. Nevertheless, I will be absolutely delighted myself if this is the anticipates new EF-S prime lens.

A 35mm SLR with a 35mm f2.0 lens is beautifully simple compact combination. In passed times I would regularly "play it simple" put my 35mm f2.0 lens on my SLR - very compact compared to my 18-135mm zoom. The 35mm lens gave a very nice angle of view, and f2.0 gathers buck loads of light. Shallow depth of field at f2.0 to f2.8, and on the other hand, at f16, just focusing (manually) at something 10 feet away results in everything from about 5 feet to infinity being in focus.

Yes a 22mm F2.0 for APS-C is the ideal lens for me. Its the lens I want NOW.

Followed by a 56mm or 55mm f1.8. About 88 to 90mm on full frame. Next a 16mm f1.8 or f2.0 (or f2.8) - 24mm on full frame. And finally a 32mm f1.8 to give an equivalent "nifty 50 lens" for APS-C cameras.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a 22mm lens, and I will be very disappointed but not surprised if its a "nifty 50 equivalent".


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 11, 2017)

picture-maker said:


> Yes a 22mm F2.0 for APS-C is the ideal lens for me. Its the lens I want NOW.
> 
> Followed by a 56mm or 55mm f1.8. About 88 to 90mm on full frame. Next a 16mm f1.8 or f2.0 (or f2.8) - 24mm on full frame. And finally a 32mm f1.8 to give an equivalent "nifty 50 lens" for APS-C cameras.



_One _of those might happen, but if you really need all of those in a compact dedicated APS-C size, Fuji is really the only move, right?

- A


----------



## andrei1989 (Feb 12, 2017)

picture-maker said:


> Yes a 22mm F2.0 for APS-C is the ideal lens for me. Its the lens I want NOW.
> 
> Followed by a 56mm or 55mm f1.8. About 88 to 90mm on full frame. Next a 16mm f1.8 or f2.0 (or f2.8) - 24mm on full frame. And finally a 32mm f1.8 to give an equivalent "nifty 50 lens" for APS-C cameras.
> 
> I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a 22mm lens, and I will be very disappointed but not surprised if its a "nifty 50 equivalent".



you's still be missing a 23mm 2.4 between the existing 24 2.8 and the 22 2.0 you want....


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 12, 2017)

andrei1989 said:


> picture-maker said:
> 
> 
> > Yes a 22mm F2.0 for APS-C is the ideal lens for me. Its the lens I want NOW.
> ...



lol!

it is amazing how uninformed of existing products some posters wishing for ever new lenses snd gear are ...


----------



## picture-maker (Feb 12, 2017)

I went to a wedding in October 2016. Where the official photographer was using two Fuji's, one with the 23mm lens and the other with the 56mm. Lovely sharp pictures, good use of depth of field. B/W pictures were very, very nice. However, the colours of the colour pictures were not true to life. Perhaps this was because photographers pictures were processed to his personal taste. Nevertheless, the pictures are not as pleasing as those from my EOS 80D and 24mm f2.8. Or those from my 18-135mm USM lens.

Over the years, I have been very pro Canon. But I bought a Nikon DSLR. The Nikon lens was "the best" without question. However, the focus and the exposure accuracy were both appalling. I had more picture of my dog just out of focus (in fact blurred) and exposed completely wrong for his black fur and brown eyes. I talked to Nikon for help to get these issues corrected and two photo experts in stores. To make sure it wasn't me I went back to using my EOS 350D. Straight out of the camera I got in focus beautifully exposed pictures. Finally I stopped using the Nikon because I couldn't trust the results I would get just used the 11 year old Canon. At this point I bought the 24mm f2.8 STM and waited patiently for the next new EOS APS-C to be released> 

My feeling is that Canon are definitely innovators, may be a bit slow on getting stuff to the market. But mainly everything works perfectly.

So I will stick with it and nag and nag Canon for the lenses I want.


----------



## andrei1989 (Feb 12, 2017)

then get the M5 with the ef-m 22 2.0 and use the adapter for the 24 2.8

maybe you could put a 1.4 TC on the 40 2.8 and get the 56mm you want so much 
#sarcasm

my point is you have a solution to the problems you stated above: if the 50 1.8 is to short, for ef-s/m you have the 60mm macro. if you switch to ef-m system you have 8 primes to choose from between 22 and 60 mm..


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 12, 2017)

exactly! 

i own and use EF-M 22/2, EF 40/2.8, EF 50/1.8 STM and EF-S 60/2.8 on my EOS-M.


----------



## picture-maker (Feb 12, 2017)

First of all. I never said I wanted a 23mm lens. I did say I want a 22mm f2.0 and that’s because I saw an article some time ago saying Canon had a patent for a 22mm F2.0 EF-S lens. That’s the lens I would like because it is the equivalent of a 35mm F2.0 lens on a 35mm SLR. I have used this combination on a 35mm SLR and loved using it. I took a large percentage of pictures with this combination. 

Secondly, I typed in 16mm in error this should have been 15mm.

Last of all: Reading through this thread, it appears there is a lot of confusion about the focal length of full frame lenses and how they compare with APS-C.

So from the Canon website, I have looked through the specification of the lenses we are all writing about and listed them the angle of view for each lens except that of the 31mm lens.

My DSLR has a vari-angle screen LCD Monitor and Live View when I look through the bright view finder, I see 100% of what the sensor will take a picture of. I like this and don’t want a mirrorless cameras.

Some people buy Volvo, some buy Ford some buy other brands. That’s their choice. I bought a Canon DSLR that’s my choice.

Full Frame DSLR 35mm Lens: Angles of View Horizontal 54° Vertical 38° Diagonal 63°
APS-C DSLR 22mm Lens: Angles of View Horizontal 54° 30’ Vertical 37° 50’ Diagonal 63° 30’


----------



## picture-maker (Feb 15, 2017)

At 05:26 on Wednesday 15 February 2017 I received an e-mail. So is the mystery now over? Canon have announced 3 new cameras  and a new lens. It’s the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/4-5.6 IS STM will cost £219.99 in the UK :-\ .

The first new lens to be announced in 2017 was rumored to be an EF-S prime lens so can we anticipate another lens being announced and if so, when? :


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 16, 2017)

picture-maker said:


> At 05:26 on Wednesday 15 February 2017 I received an e-mail. So is the mystery now over? Canon have announced 3 new cameras  and a new lens. It’s the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/4-5.6 IS STM will cost £219.99 in the UK :-\ .
> 
> The first new lens to be announced in 2017 was rumored to be an EF-S prime lens so can we anticipate another lens being announced and if so, when? :


At the same time of the rumor "EF-S prime", there was a rumor of "new kit lens". So, it must be concluded that the EF-S prime should be announced in the coming months.


----------



## picture-maker (Feb 16, 2017)

I really, really hope so.


----------



## kphoto99 (Mar 22, 2017)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that the next new non-kit lens Canon will announce is an EF-S prime. We weren’t told what focal length the new EF-S prime lens would be, but we do know that it’s not a specialty lens like a macro.</p>
> <p>We’ve also been told that we may see a new EF-S 18-55 kit lens alongside the new Rebel next month.</p>
> <p>What focal length of EF-S prime would you be interested in?</p>
> <p><em>More to come…</em></p>
> <span id="pty_trigger"></span>



Next lens is a EF-S prime, the EF-S 35mm f/2.8 M IS STM , but it is a macro or just 'M' so maybe 'M' does not stand for 'Macro'.


----------



## slclick (Mar 22, 2017)

Y'all come over to the other post, it's been settled.


----------

