# Lenses in 2011 [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 8, 2010)

```
<p><strong>Lots to come

<span style="font-weight: normal;">2011 will be the year of the lens, Canon is set to do a big refresh of their lens lineup in 2011. Nikon has done it in 2010.</span></strong></p>
<p>The first lens I’m still told will be the 24-70 redo, and we already know about the 500 & 600.</p>
<p>The lenses being replaced will be popular flagship type lenses to improve resolution power. The next 1Ds and 5D will be big megapixel cameras (sorry, they’re not done with that yet).</p>
<p>Does that mean no EF-S lenses? The only one I could getting a refresh is the 60 macro. I’d like to see the 17-55 get a build quality upgrade (they break a lot as a rental item).</p>
<p>There was also <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ja&tl=en&u=http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100925_396112.html">this interview</a> that mentions a big commitment to the EF mount and new products.</p>
<p><strong>Canon’s Mirrorless Entry

<span style="font-weight: normal;">“It’s a 2012 product”</span></strong></p>
<p>That’s all I was told about that.</p>
<p><strong>The Photographic, Video & Digital Imaging Show

<span style="font-weight: normal;">I’ll be heading to Toronto/Mississauga next Friday to attend the <a href="http://www.henrys.ca/Show/Imaging-Show.html">Henry’s show</a>. There won’t be anything new there, but I can bother the Canon reps. I’m hoping more of the new lenses will be available to touch.</span></strong></p>
<p>Happy Thanksgiving Canada!</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## unfocused (Oct 8, 2010)

I hope 100-400 mm zoom qualifies as a "flagship" lens.


----------



## kubelik (Oct 8, 2010)

unfocused, I'm going to second you on that one. otherwise, maybe a new 400 f/4 L IS? ... to replace the 400 f/5.6 and partner the 300 f/4 L IS


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 8, 2010)

I doubt that the 400mm f/5.6L qualifies as a 'flagship-type' lens - that would be the 400mm f/2.8L IS that is being updated right now. I'd love it if they updated the 400/5.6 with IS, but I'm not holding my breath. The current 400mm f/4 is the DO lens - Canon doesn't seem in a rush to do much more with DO lenses...

The 100-400mm seems like a 'maybe' to me. 

The 35mm f/1.4L would probably count as a flagship lens (it's in the 'holy trinity' 35/85/135L), making it likely that the 135 f/2L will also see an update (IS anyone?).

The 16-35/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 IS were updated recently, so the 24-70mm would complete the 'holy trinity' of f/2.8 zooms. Anyone think they'll start on the f/4 trinity (17-40/4, 24-105/4, 70-200/4 IS)?? 

Here's my guess on 'flagship lens' updates - we'll see a 24-120mm f/4L IS from Canon launched as a kit lens with the 5DIII early in 2011. After the hue and cry from all the folks wanting a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, they'll _eventually_ release that one along side a 1DsIV, but not until 2012.


----------



## traveller (Oct 8, 2010)

Wow, that's a bad translation! It could mean anything by the time Google twists it! Anyone speak Japanese? 

On a serious note, it's high time that Canon started to address some of the weak spots in its lens line up. Canon seem to have been polarised into releasing only low-end consumer zooms and high end 'L' series lenses for the last couple of years. The EF 50mm f/1.4 needs an upgrade to improve it optically at wide apertures (cf. Nikkor AF-S 50mm) and fix the design flaw that is its delicate AF system; I think that the latter issue puts off many a potential buyer (myself included). Canon badly needs a normal prime for APS-C users that is competitive with the offerings from the other manufacturers. And yes, a new 100-400mm would be nice, as well as a replacement 24-70mm f/2.8 L for the professionals (they're now a generation behind Nikon and Sony). I don't know if they'll bother with an EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 replacement; an EF-S 15-55mm f/2.8 with better build quality would be an obvious development, but the reality is that the price of such a lens would probably put off potential buyers. Only 7D owners would be prepared to pay >$1500 for this lens and a lot of those have designs on moving to full frame. The Nikkor equivalent has pro build quality because it was released before Nikon went to full frame. 

Here's hoping for a better 2011, lens wise, than 2010 was.


----------



## macfly (Oct 8, 2010)

Well they better be good, I rented the Nikon D3s for a shoot (with Elton John) in a recording studio yesterday where I had to work with available light. I was able to put up a row of little Christams tree lights around the triple paned soundproof window to light him, and also use a couple of well placed instument stands with built in lamps, before he arrived. I used the Nikon at 10,000 ASA, and the quality of the images was just breath taking. The camera almost created light where the eye couldn't percive any allowing me to shoot at 200th at between f1.4 - f2 with their 85 f1.4. Also the focusing screen is way nicer than the EOS, it is completely clear and clean, and the spread of auto focus points is wider, and more useful.

Canon, get a move on, and put your cards on the table, the competition is pushing the boat way far beyond where you are at the moment. After being a Canon user since 1991 I am not ruling out a switch back to Nikon. I bulit my career on their F3P, and it still my favorite all time camera. I still have mine, with my favorite primes, but haven't used them in almost twenty years!


----------



## J (Oct 9, 2010)

Why is this posted in the bodies forum? Meh...

Year of the lens... like 10+ new introductions? That would really be something. I want more than one EF-S per year. I don't think Canon is gonna hit even that much this year.

EF-S 30mm f/1.8 USM
EF-S 60mm f/2.8 IS USM Macro
EF-S 15-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
EF-S 50-150mm f/2.8 IS USM
etc...

If the EF-S zooms were weather sealed to match the 7D, that would be quite godly.

(Cross your fingers!)


----------



## tzalmagor (Oct 10, 2010)

neuroanatomist said:


> I doubt that the 400mm f/5.6L qualifies as a 'flagship-type' lens - that would be the 400mm f/2.8L IS that is being updated right now.



Note the words used are "*popular* flagship lenses" - I'm uncertain whether the 400mm f/2.8L is one of Canon's popular lenses.

My thoughts on lenses which I think are natural candidates for replacement:

A. Long non-L primes: 85/1.8, 100/2, 135/2.8, and 200/2.8 II.

B. Special lenses: TS-E 45mm & 90mm, MP-E 65mm f/2.8.

C. Misc lenses: 100-400/4.5-5.6L, 28-135/3.5-5.6, 35/1.4L, 17-40/4, 24-70/2.8L.

D. Wide non-L primes: 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 28/1.8, 35/2, 50/1.8 II, and 50/2.5


IMHO, Canon will not upgrade any of the lenses in group A, because they are sharp, and because any upgrade will make the upgrades compete with the similar L lenses. Between lack of popularity and lack of competition, I'll bet canon will not upgrade any of the lenses in group B.

My 2 cents is 3-4 out of the 5 lenses in group C will be upgraded, and a new ultra-wide lens will be announced to compete with the Nikkor 14-24 and Sigma 12-24. With the already announced 500mm & 600mm lenses, that makes 6 lenses.

This makes me wonder about 2012 - with group C practically emptied in 2011, and group B being small, would Canon start replacing the lenses in groups A & D in 2012 ?


----------



## NSX (Oct 10, 2010)

didn't we hear the same thing back in 2010?

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/01/predictions-for-2010-part-2-lenses/

IIRC you said 10+ lenses or more for 2010.



> I have predicted 11 new lenses. My brain tells me thatâ€™s probably 3 too many. The big white lenses and fisheye lenses wonâ€™t be massive volume sellers, so I can see those produced alongside the volume lenses.
> 
> So the bold prediction? This will be the year of the lenses!



I'm curious, what has changed?


----------



## richy (Oct 11, 2010)

A 100-400 , weather sealed with 3-4 stop IS thats sharp wide open please mr canon  I'll take one immediately at full list price if they do.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 11, 2010)

richy said:


> A 100-400 , weather sealed with 3-4 stop IS thats sharp wide open please mr canon  I'll take one immediately at full list price if they do.



Just after they've offered you a weather-sealed 70-300mm with 4-stop IS that is sharp wide open (based on MTF charts anyway)? 

Well...hope is a good thing (and in this case, it's a hope I share!).


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 11, 2010)

The current generation of IS seems to have 4 stops claimed performance, which has translated into better than three and a half everywhere I've seen reviews. Three stops is what the third party manufacturers are up to now.

Interesting post...Canon has sprung another rebate (printer + DSLR combo) but I'm wondering if I really shouldn't sit tight for now. At the least, new purchases would be with an eye towards an upgrade.


----------



## Chio (Oct 11, 2010)

They took care of the tele range (well, 2 are not out yet) so I'm hoping they will focus on the wide/standard range now. 14-24 and the new version of current lenses.

But too bad that the only thing we can do is hope. Nikon announced many great lenses in the past few months!


----------



## MackieMoore (Oct 11, 2010)

I don't know if any of these are realistic but
35mm f2.0 needs an update... (with USM or less noisy motor)
Also 35mm f1.4L with IS will be awesome.

And also it's good to know that
24-70mm f2.8L *IS* is coming ;D


----------



## off topic (Oct 11, 2010)

From the conversation I had with the canon folks at canon Expo I would include the list of 10 lenses
45mm TS-E
90mm TS-E


----------



## c.d.embrey (Oct 11, 2010)

It's been 4 years since I've used a lens longer than 85mm, so *I couldn't care less about Big Whites*.

The only zoom I use is the EF-S 10-22. Don't use any zoom on full frame.

Where are the Canon equivalents to the 10.5 DX and 35 1.8 DX? The Nikon FX 24 1.4 , 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 are really excellent, *Canon has some catching-up to do*. Canon has never had anything like the 105 2.0DC and 135 2.0 DC lenses, *why not?*

i won't be selling my Canon stuff, but everything new will be Nikon. *Nikon seems to be listening to me, and Canon isn't, simple as that.*


----------



## Justin (Oct 12, 2010)

Nothing has been taken care of as far as I am concerned. Until the 24-70 is in my hands it doesn't exist for me. 

A 35L 1.4 IS upgrade would be superb. I'd like to see the holy trinity upgrades with IS and improved performance. although the 135 holds the least appeal for me, maybe upgraded to f 1.4 and given the super tele treatment?

35L is a great lens and I like using it, but it leaves something to be desired until stopped down to 2.8 or narrower. IS would help hugely at f/2.8-f/4 handheld in dark conditions. 

85L 1.4 IS. This is a dream lens for me. I don't need 1.2 if it is slow to focus and doesn't deliver very good wide open performance. I've played around with the 85 1.2L II and while I see the appeal and think it should remain in the lens lineup, I think I would be better served by a faster, sharper, IS enabled 1.4 version.

135 1.4L IS. Sure, what the hell. Let's imagine it's a big honking white lens a la 200 f2L IS. But it's shorter at 135 and faster at 1.4. 

Canon doesn't like to flat out replace lenses if they can help it. By adding IS and or reducing the widest aperture setting Canon can diversify its lens lineup without sacrificing the existing models. 

Forget 10 (2 are super teles anyway), if I could pick 5 in 2011 here is my dream list in order of lust:

24-70 2.8L IS
12-24 2.8L
35 1.4L IS
85 1.4L IS
24-120 4L IS









MackieMoore said:


> I don't know if any of these are realistic but
> 35mm f2.0 needs an update... (with USM or less noisy motor)
> Also 35mm f1.4L with IS will be awesome.
> 
> ...


----------



## Justin (Oct 12, 2010)

Feel your frustration. 2010 was supposed to be the year of lenses. It started great with the 70-200 2.8 IS II, but from there is got weird. I want a tele but I'm not buying one anytime soon at those prices. The 70-300 seems really redundant and looks heavy, fat, is too short at 300mm (70-400mm would have been a more noble pursuit Canon) and it has a variable aperture, blah. The zoom fisheye? For circular shots I guess--fringe.

But where are the mainstream lenses, L or otherwise? 



c.d.embrey said:


> It's been 4 years since I've used a lens longer than 85mm, so *I couldn't care less about Big Whites*.
> 
> The only zoom I use is the EF-S 10-22. Don't use any zoom on full frame.
> 
> ...


----------



## epsiloneri (Oct 13, 2010)

c.d.embrey said:


> The Nikon FX 24 1.4 , 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 are really excellent, *Canon has some catching-up to do*. Canon has never had anything like the 105 2.0DC and 135 2.0 DC lenses, *why not?*



I agree that many Canon primes are in dire need for update and that Nikon seem to have more attractive versions, though I would have thought the EF 24/1.4L II to be a good match to the Nikon FX 24/1.4. I'm not too familiar with the Nikon lineup, but in what way are the Canon EF 100/2.0 USM and EF 135/2.0L USM nothing like the Nikon 105/2.0 DC and 135/2.0 DC lenses? Do the Nikons have significantly better IQ? Or do they have some other desirable property (IS? Low weight? Certainly not price?)?


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 13, 2010)

I don't know what's going on, but surprisingly The Digital Picture has the TS-E 24mm just trouncing the EF 24mm f/1.4. At all shown apertures. Even wide open, at f/3.5, the TS-E is showing about as much - if not more - detail than the EF does at f/8. CA is better wide open on the TS-E than it is in any of the EF images. Looking at the reflection of the window - well, not only do you perhaps see a hint of there being a screen door in the TS-E shots, but in all the TS-E shots you can clearly see the moulding on the windows has a gentle inward curve, whereas in most of the EF 24mm shots it looks flat as a plank; the details are completely blotted out.

I've personally had great experiences with my 50mm, in most situations (especially around f/8 on sunny days of course) but some recent researches has led me to be skeptical of faster lenses.


----------



## epsiloneri (Oct 13, 2010)

Edwin Herdman said:


> I don't know what's going on, but surprisingly The Digital Picture has the TS-E 24mm just trouncing the EF 24mm f/1.4.



I think it's because the the EF 24/1.4L II is strongly optimised for wide open 1.4 performance, which is very different from 3.5. It is reasonable that photographers would use the 24/1.4 wide open a lot of the time, since it's the defining feature of the lens. You may also note that the EF 24/1.4L II @ 2.8 is sharper than the EF 16-35/2.8 II @ 2.8, but the latter is sharper when both are @ 5.6.

I think it's the same optimisation that's been done for the EF 50mm/1.2L, where its much cheaper brethren beats it in terms of sharpness for smaller apertures.

So, in conclusion, if you don't care too much after low-light performance (or very shallow DOF) but are more interested in having the ultimate sharp lens (as commonly the case in landscape photography), the slower lenses might be better for you. They're also often cheaper (though not the TS-E 24/3.5L II, obviously). The only caveat is that almost all of the non-L primes are of old design, and as we know from the recent L-updates (during the last couple of years) that performance tends to improve a lot with an update.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 13, 2010)

Edwin Herdman said:


> I don't know what's going on, but surprisingly The Digital Picture has the TS-E 24mm just trouncing the EF 24mm f/1.4.





epsiloneri said:


> I think it's because the the EF 24/1.4L II is strongly optimised for wide open 1.4 performance...



Bingo. Fast is 'easy'. Wide is 'easy'. Fast and wide is a much bigger optical challenge. I think the optimizations for the 24/1.4 and the 50/1.2 are not quite the same - the 50L is sacrificing sharpness wide open in favor of bokeh, whereas the 24/1.4 is optimized for sharpness wide open, but it's just too darn hard to achieve at that wide an angle and that wide an aperture. You can see the effect of wider angle in the pair of wide TS-E lenses - the 17mm f/4 is slower (a little, anyway) than the 24mm f/3.5, but the 24mm is much sharper especially in corners.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Oct 14, 2010)

Sure, that seems to be a fair general statement. I suppose I could've said I didn't know exactly what's going on; knowledge what sort of tradeoffs are being made is the stuff of trade secrets.

It does present an interesting quandary that I imagine was less apparent to many photographers before the current time: In the days of the first consumer zooms (I have an old generic green manual for FD zoom lenses on the table next to me) your choices were either for a zoom lens - convenience at the cost of quality, which is still true, though not as much as then - or for a fast prime, as the fast aperture was so often needed to give a good exposure even with fast films. Like Barry Lyndon - today Stanley Kubrick wouldn't need to use f/0.7 lenses, and probably wouldn't bother tracking them down for empty bragging rights. (I wonder what he would think of camera movements, though.) Now that sensitivity is less of an issue than it once was, some optics are being designed that (sheer speculation ahead) pack more resolution into an area at a given f-ratio than a higher f-ratio would allow. (Why this is I am still trying to research, but it makes sense that it would be the case.)


----------



## L-Fletcher (Oct 15, 2010)

I can see the 100-400mm being updated. Possibly would have some reduction of the dust problems.

I don't think there will be any update of the EF-S line, at least in the first part of next year, anyway. I don't see the 17-55mm being updated, and as Canon has updated their 100mm macro within the past 1+1/2 years, I don't think the 60mm being updated is entirely feasible. But it's possible.

What I do see is a new kit lens being released with a new line of xxxD's (Rebel bodies), in the next few years (first quarter 2012). Whether it'll be a 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II or something else entirely, I'm not sure. But Canon will most likely upgrade their kit lenses to match the rising sensor resolutions.


----------



## L-Fletcher (Oct 15, 2010)

Oh, by the way - a tangent here... should this not be posted in the lenses section?


----------

