# EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 7, 2014)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/05/ef-s-10-18-f4-5-5-6-is-stm-ef-16-35-f4l-is-around-the-corner-cr2/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/05/ef-s-10-18-f4-5-5-6-is-stm-ef-16-35-f4l-is-around-the-corner-cr2/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><a href="http://digicame-info.com/2014/05/ef-s10-18mm-f45-56-is-usmef16-.html" target="_blank">More reports</a> [DCI] have popped up today about two new wide angle zoom lenses from Canon. We <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/05/more-wide-angle-lens-speculation-cr1/" target="_blank">reported about this yesterday</a> and there has now been some clarification of what the lenses will be.</p>
<p>The first will be an EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM. The EF-S 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 would probably stay current even after the new EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM is announced. I imagine the new EF-S lens is smaller, lighter and cheaper. The rumor from yesterday seems to have missed the mark on this lens being a constant aperture of f/4. Though more clarification may be forthcoming.</p>
<p>The second will be an EF 16-35 f/4L IS, which will be the exciting one for a lot of people. For the record, a <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/03/patent-ef-16-35-f4l-17-40-f4l-and-others/" target="_blank">patent for the EF 16-35 f/4L IS appeared in March of this year</a>.</p>
<p>There has been no more information on a new EF 100-400.</p>
<p>More to come….</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## hoodlum (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

The new 100-400 will get announced around the same time as the 7Dii. And the 7Dii will get announced within a few months of the D9300. Nothing to do but wait until the first shoe drops.


----------



## NancyP (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I would love to see an optically outstanding 16-35mm update, and if the coma is well controlled at f/4, wouldn't mind it being only f/4 aperture. As with everyone else, I am really most anxious to see a 12-24mm lens of at least the same image quality as the Nikon offering. Image stabilization on WA lens - nice, but not a necessity for me, I use a tripod or steady the camera against a ledge or tree limb or knee or..


----------



## unfocused (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I'm inclined to believe this, since I've got a 17-40 f4 ordered. 

On the other hand, this will probably be significantly more expensive anyway.


----------



## transpo1 (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I'm not excited about a 16-35mm F4 but would be about a 12-24 or a 14-24 F2.8.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



unfocused said:


> I'm inclined to believe this, since I've got a 17-40 f4 ordered.
> 
> On the other hand, this will probably be significantly more expensive anyway.



IQ & build quality will define the price tag


----------



## Woody (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I hope the 16-35 f/4L IS becomes available asap. It has the same focal length range (in 35 mm equivalent) as the EF-S 10-22. Cooool...


----------



## Zv (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I like the sound of the 16-35 f/4 with IS. A lot of my wide angle stuff is done while on vacation and without a tripod I'm usually cranking up the ISO quite high to maintain a decent amount of dof. I wouldn't be too bothered by the loss of 5mm on the long end if I did trade up my 17-40L for this anyway. The 24-105 has that covered. 

I feel like there have been quite a few wide angle zoom rumors that something is finally going to emerge from it. 

The EF-S one doesn't seem all that great an idea, so it has less range than the current 10-22mm plus it's slower with a varying aperture through 8mm of zoom range? That seems stupid. What's the plus here? Just Image stabilization? 

APS-C users already have one stabilized lens with a 24mm equivalent fov in the form of the 15-85mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IS USM. 

If I really needed an APS-C wide angle with stabilization wider than 24mm, I'd go with the EF-M 11-22 f/4-5.6 because if you don't have a tripod then chances are it's because you're moving around a lot or saving space.


----------



## Dylan777 (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



transpo1 said:


> I'm not excited about a 16-35mm F4 but would be about a 12-24 or a 14-24 F2.8.



I like the idea of 16-35 f4 IS or 17-40 f4 IS. Be able to use thread mount filters is a plus on the field. Just make sure this new UWA is good as Nik 14-24 or better. Having IS on UWA is nice, especially when we don't have a tripod around - be able to shoot 1/10 will be awesome.


----------



## Chaitanya (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Interested in the EF-S 10-18mm STM lens. If its priced right then I might get that lens for shooting videos.


----------



## sanj (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

16-35 would be a landscape/architecture lens for many. If I would be shooting any serious such shots I would certainly use a tripod with f11. IS would not be useful. 
If I am indoors shooting people at a party or such with available light I would need wider f stop to freeze the subject motion. IS would not be useful. 

Unlike the 24-70 where I want IS, I am not sure how important IS is to such a wide lens. 

I know there are loop holes in my thinking process here but I would prefer an updated lens with 2.8 aperture and IS. 2.8 will help me freeze the subject motion and I would have the mental peace that if I am ever stuck somewhere without a tripod I could take a slow shutter shot.


----------



## preppyak (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

The EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM would probably have to be a $3-400 lens to not be DOA. Especially at f/4.5-5.6. The IS would be a nice addition for video people, but, at the expense of that aperture loss. How many people would take the Canon when there are now a variety of 10mm and 11mm options at f/2.8...even worse when you consider the 2 stop loss at 16mm vs the Tokina (f/2.8 vs f/5.6), and the 3+ stop loss vs the Sigma at 18mm. That's basically the difference of IS


----------



## dadgummit (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Meh.....

Less range, slower focus motor, IS where it is not needed, less light, it had better be $300 or less because it is only good for video.


----------



## Marsu42 (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



Zv said:


> I like the sound of the 16-35 f/4 with IS. A lot of my wide angle stuff is done while on vacation and without a tripod I'm usually cranking up the ISO quite high to maintain a decent amount of dof. I wouldn't be too bothered by the loss of 5mm on the long end if I did trade up my 17-40L for this anyway.



I don't know, to reach a very deep dof w/o focus stacking you'll still need higher iso, most likely higher than the optimal iso range (maybe -400 on ff). Also IS doesn't stop leaves from moving... not that I wouldn't exchange my 17-40L with a 16-35L/IS for free  but Canon replacing the "photo journalist" 16-35/2.8 with f4 does sound like [CR0] for me.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

The EF-S version with IS & STM sounds good for some great UWA handheld video work ... but the EF version with IS :-\ :-X ... hmmm!


----------



## ahsanford (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



preppyak said:


> The EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM would probably have to be a $3-400 lens to not be DOA. Especially at f/4.5-5.6. The IS would be a nice addition for video people, but, at the expense of that aperture loss. How many people would take the Canon when there are now a variety of 10mm and 11mm options at f/2.8...even worse when you consider the 2 stop loss at 16mm vs the Tokina (f/2.8 vs f/5.6), and the 3+ stop loss vs the Sigma at 18mm. That's basically the difference of IS



Price will be interesting on the crop version. There is currently an EF-S 10-22 USM F/3.5-4.5 (a decent lens) that is faster for aperture and faster for focusing (USM > STM).

So this new 10-18 STM lens will have IS and be ten years newer (presumed to be sharper), but it will be slower on those two fronts.

So does this make the new lens a _budget_ variable aperture EF-S wide angle, or is it a true replacement for the EF-S 10-22?

- A


----------



## pdirestajr (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

The EF-S 10-18 sounds like it might be a budget/ plastic mount lens to go with the 18-55 & 55-250 IS STM lenses.

Remember that every lens isn't for every person- before there are countless threads about the downfall of Canon and their lack of innovation.


----------



## fotoray (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Is the 16-35 f/4L intended as a replacement for the current 17-40 f/4L ???


----------



## Canon 14-24 (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



fotoray said:


> Is the 16-35 f/4L intended as a replacement for the current 17-40 f/4L ???



No.


----------



## ahsanford (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Regarding that EF 16-35 F/4... Does F/4 mean 77mm front filters will stick around?  

That would make me very happy -- I have three other 77mm lenses and my Lee setup is based off of the 77mm ring. (I never opted in for the 16-35 II or 24-70 II, so I haven't had to make the 82mm plunge yet.)

- A


----------



## rbr (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I only want sharp corners at the wide end. Everything else is secondary to me. Can Canon do it? I doubt it judging by what we have now.


----------



## mrsfotografie (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



fotoray said:


> Is the 16-35 f/4L intended as a replacement for the current 17-40 f/4L ???



A 16-40 f/4L IS would get my attention. I find the 40mm end of my 17-40mm very useful as a 'standard FL' when I'm traveling and conditions (weather/dust) make me not want to change lenses at that moment.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Interesting, but I sure as heck wish it could've been extended to 40mm if at all possible. Then you could easily get away with a 16-40 IS (and for sure if it had been the earlier 16-50 rumor) when you need IS more than anything and use it instead of 24-70 at times and the gap to a paired 70-300L or 70-200 wouldn't be too bad. 35mm to 70mm starts being a bit of a gap and sneaking it in for more portraits and such at 35mm is getting to be just a bit uncomfortable. EVen if it had a mediocre 35-40/50mm I wish they snuck that in. 45mm would've helped a ton.

The fact that it is f/4 and such a limited range does give hopes that it might perhaps deliver 24-70 II performance to the FF edges though. I do wish they had been able to tack on an extra 5-15mm focal length though, even if the performance there had been sub-par compared to the rest of the range, for people shots you can get away with it more and for nature stuff at least it's an emergency and likely better than quality from heavy crop. Although maybe it doesn't work that way and allowing to extend more would make the lower end suffer somehow (although I wouldn't think so, it could just keep extending and sliding and if the quality goes down more and more so be it, of course some would've screamed bloody murder about how the lens is junk because it's not so hot 40-45/50mm even though it's ultimate perfection 16-30mm).

Or if it wasn't going to go long, maybe 14-30mm f/4 IS would be more sense than 16-35mm f/4 IS since not sure 35mm is quite enough to quite make is dual purposed general lens. It's really kind of a pure wide angle on FF. And 14-30mm means you can dump Samyang 14mm and such. Hard to say though, 14mm is probably harder to pull off in a zoom especially without making it bulbous and weird and maybe 35mm gives JUST enough reach to at least make it a dual general wide landscape can just barely get away with it pairing with 70-200/300 at times. You can always pop in a light little 50mm 1.8 or 1.4 to cover the gap for the times non-stops lenss switching wouldn't be too much of a bother I guess, although in some cases that would be too slow and a bother.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



sanj said:


> 16-35 would be a landscape/architecture lens for many. If I would be shooting any serious such shots I would certainly use a tripod with f11. IS would not be useful.
> If I am indoors shooting people at a party or such with available light I would need wider f stop to freeze the subject motion. IS would not be useful.
> 
> Unlike the 24-70 where I want IS, I am not sure how important IS is to such a wide lens.
> ...



IS can be nice for a wide lens. Sometimes you want to enjoy as much as photograph yet still want to take as serious and high quality shot as you can and IS could mean two stops plus lower ISO for better detail and more DR without having to do the tripod dance. Sometimes you are with people and constant tripod use bogs things down and then well they get annoyed and you are no longer with people hah. IS could help that a bit. Sometimes the light is changing fast and being able to quickly hand hold a bunch of shots lets you capture a whole bunch of wild stuff while tripod means you maybe miss half the shots if not more. Sometimes you are on the more city part of a trip and dragging a tripod around is a drag or not allowed and IS is good for those times.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



rbr said:


> I only want sharp corners at the wide end. Everything else is secondary to me. Can Canon do it? I doubt it judging by what we have now.



But look at the 24-70 II and 24-70 f/4 IS at the wide end or the 24 2.8 IS or 24 T&S II or 17 T&S. YOu used to be able to say doubt it when you looked at 24-105 and 24-70 2.8 and 28-135 and 24 2.8 and 16-35 and 17-40, but they have released a lot of stuff since then.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



mrsfotografie said:


> fotoray said:
> 
> 
> > Is the 16-35 f/4L intended as a replacement for the current 17-40 f/4L ???
> ...



I sure do wish it could make it to 40/45mm!! Even if it's a very average IQ at 40-45mm.


----------



## cellomaster27 (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



pdirestajr said:


> The EF-S 10-18 sounds like it might be a budget/ plastic mount lens to go with the 18-55 & 55-250 IS STM lenses.
> 
> Remember that every lens isn't for every person- before there are countless threads about the downfall of Canon and their lack of innovation.



If anything, your explanation makes most sense. I didn't think about the range "fit" for the STM line of lenses. Looks like I'm keeping my UWA.


----------



## Frage (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

How is supoused to be good for video a zoom lens (EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM) with no constant max. aperture?
Am I missing something? Please do not tell me "you shouldn´t zoom while making videos".


----------



## carlosmeldano (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



Frage said:


> How is supoused to be good for video a zoom lens (EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM) with no constant max. aperture?
> Am I missing something? Please do not tell me "you shouldn´t zoom while making videos".



what do you zoom in the 10-18mm range?

this lens is for stabilized video recording with silent AF. and for that, it's the missing link. it's pretty good for making video from family events. I love my 17-55 USM for photos but don't like the rattling while focusing. it's good indoors, but outdoors, no fast aperture is needed. STM lenses are much better for this.

if a fair price is given to it (~$300), I have my birthday


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

16-35 f4 IS would be good if they match it up with Nikon's VR offering and can keep it around $1200ish. Though, even if it's a stellar performer I'm not sure if I'd ditch my 17-40 for it. Like everyone else, I really want a 14-24 f/2.8


----------



## MichaelHodges (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

A new 16-35 IS would be very tempting. But as an owner of an excellent copy of a 17-40L, I'd need a 12-24 IS or 14-28 IS to migrate.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



Frage said:


> How is supoused to be good for video a zoom lens (EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM) with no constant max. aperture?
> Am I missing something? Please do not tell me "you shouldn´t zoom while making videos".



If you did zoom at that width then just set it to a fixed f/5.6, who says you have to shoot it set f/4 on the wide end and then glide to f/5.6 as you zoom in? Just lock it at f/5.6.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 7, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



cellomaster27 said:


> pdirestajr said:
> 
> 
> > The EF-S 10-18 sounds like it might be a budget/ plastic mount lens to go with the 18-55 & 55-250 IS STM lenses.
> ...



thing is those budget plastic mount 18-55 IS STM and 55-250 IS STM are actually mad sharp, heck the 55-250 STM is said to rival the 70-200 f/4 IS for optics.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

erggg what is with all the underwhelming slow aperture lenses! why not a 16-35 f2.8 IS? really c'mon canon
f4 wow awesome... NOT


----------



## Slyham (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I've been saving for the 10-22 so I will be waiting to see the 10-18. Lower cost would be nice and can I wish for a 67mm filter size? I'd rather not buy a 77mm CP filter. STM will be nice for video.


----------



## JM Photography (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I can vouch for the new plastic STM's. The 7D was not getting any use at all until I picked up the rock bottom priced 18-55 and 55-250 STM's; now it's a lot of fun with huge improvements on image quality as opposed to using full frame L glass on the crop 7D.

The news of a cheap wide angle STM is very welcome.



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> cellomaster27 said:
> 
> 
> > pdirestajr said:
> ...


----------



## sagittariansrock (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> thing is those budget plastic mount 18-55 IS STM and 55-250 IS STM are actually mad sharp, heck the 55-250 STM is said to rival the 70-200 f/4 IS for optics.



Sorry, but that's a bit of a stretch. They are good, but not that good. Then again, you don't expect them to perform the same as a lens costing 1K more, do you?
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=856&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=2&LensComp=404&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0


----------



## bardamu (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Canonites are constantly lamenting the lack of a 12-24mm to rival the Nikon, but then the Nikonians are lamenting the lack of a TS-E 17mm to rival the Canon. Not to mention that the PC-E 24mm is generally thought to be slightly inferior to the Canon TS-E, and Canon's newish 24, 28 and 35 IS options were also well received. With a lot of Zeiss options to choose from as well the Canon mount wide angles don't seem too bad (as long as you are shooting full frame), of course some improvements would be very welcome and are perhaps overdue.


----------



## sanj (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > 16-35 would be a landscape/architecture lens for many. If I would be shooting any serious such shots I would certainly use a tripod with f11. IS would not be useful.
> ...



That would be a great place to have IS.


----------



## Etienne (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I'll take a 16-35 f/4 IS as long as it's really good ...

Shallow DOF is not possible with UW unless you get down under f/2. f/2.8 doesn't cut it there. And you often want deep DOF in wide shots, so you end up at f/8 - f/16 a lot of the time anyway
With new cameras getting good results at really high ISO's, the extra light is getting to be less important too.

the f/4 solution gives you a smaller, lighter lens that may outperform the other ultrawides .

Now IS ... I took this HDR photo handheld standing on the sidewalk at 16mm. https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/9103336331/ 

The light was just right when I was walking by with no tripod. The light did not last long. Image Stabilization would have helped a lot.

And for video ... IS takes away the micro-shakes and makes a huge difference . The 28 2.8 IS and the 35 f/2 IS work like a dream for handheld video.


----------



## AvTvM (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Along my lines of expectation.

EF 16-35/4 IS ... Yes, if IQ is excellent from f/4 - including sharp corners. Price will be much higher than 17-40 but with an upper limit ... 16-35/2.8 II. 
no competitor to nik 14-24/2.8 though. If at all, that univorn will only be released together with the mythical canon hi-res body ... "D800E-killer" ... Until that day, serious landscape requires nikon. 

EF-S 10-18/4.5-5.6 IS STM ... Shorter and even slower than i expected. No replacement to EF-S 10-22. Really sounds like the WA end of a "plastic fantastic STM trinity". If it's very compact & light and IQ matches EF-M 11-22, priced around 300 i expect it to sell very well. Maybe also as triple zoom kit with sl-1/100d and 700D ... 10-18/18-55/55-250 ... all with silent stm for video. Rather nice, light and inexpensive "travel kit" ... and Nikon currently has nothing to compete with such a kit

Just got the 55-250 stm to go with my 7D when i am not willing to carry 70-200 2.8 II. IQ of the STM is no match of course ... but definitely ok. AF is quite slow though (for stills) in comparison.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

I may be the only one here whose glad that neither of these announcements excites me! With so many other things to upgrade, it's good to know the UWA doesn't need to be, well, this season at least!


----------



## verysimplejason (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



sagittariansrock said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > thing is those budget plastic mount 18-55 IS STM and 55-250 IS STM are actually mad sharp, heck the 55-250 STM is said to rival the 70-200 f/4 IS for optics.
> ...



They're almost the same. Just add a little bit of contrast and sharpening and you'll never be able to distinguish them apart. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## adhocphotographer (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

16-35 f/4 IS is interesting... wide angle with IS... good range for crop and UWA for FF... 

Anyway, it will be expensive... I will see how it does when it is in the wild before i would consider buying it, and even then i would wait 6 months - year after it is announced for the price to stabilize!


----------



## noncho (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

10-18 would be interesting to me year ago...
Now I have great 11-22 for M.

16-35/4 sounds great for FF users.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Wow....year of the lens....a pair of wides no one wanted and a set of TS-e lenses that certainly no one wanted....
Meanwhile, the 35mm f1.4 II L and 100-400 II L unicorns stay in their stable....


----------



## Marsu42 (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



GMCPhotographics said:


> and a set of TS-e lenses that certainly no one wanted....



... or no one can afford  ... but from Canon's perspective it's still a smart choice because these are (afaik) unique to their mount, so "strengthen your strengths" as marketing people advise.


----------



## tron (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



NancyP said:


> I would love to see an optically outstanding 16-35mm update, and if the coma is well controlled at f/4, wouldn't mind it being only f/4 aperture. As with everyone else, I am really most anxious to see a 12-24mm lens of at least the same image quality as the Nikon offering. Image stabilization on WA lens - nice, but not a necessity for me, I use a tripod or steady the camera against a ledge or tree limb or knee or..


 Since you referenced coma I believe that you are interested in Astrophotography. In that case a f/2.8 lens is much more useful. Also even the current 16-35 2.8 II lens will have less coma at f/4... But, for Astrophotography the faster lens the better (I have used up to 10000 to 12800 ISO and I wouldn't want to have to use 25600)

By the way I am interested in Astrophotography. I sold my 16-35 2.8 L (version I) and I use a Zeiss 21mm 2.8 and a Canon 14mm 2.8 L II (not perfect but much better than my 16-35...)


----------



## climber (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

@Tron: How do you like Canon's 14mm 2.8 for landscape?


----------



## ahsanford (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



tron said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > I would love to see an optically outstanding 16-35mm update, and if the coma is well controlled at f/4, wouldn't mind it being only f/4 aperture. As with everyone else, I am really most anxious to see a 12-24mm lens of at least the same image quality as the Nikon offering. Image stabilization on WA lens - nice, but not a necessity for me, I use a tripod or steady the camera against a ledge or tree limb or knee or..
> ...


I'm not an astro person, but from what I've read (http://www.lonelyspeck.com/lenses-for-milky-way-photography/), an F/4 zoom is not ideal. Coma isn't really covered here, but this guy's calculations would suggest *wide FL* + *wide max aperture* are king.

- A


----------



## Random Orbits (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

When the 6D was announced, a lot of people would have opted for the 5D II instead, but then the 6D's IQ and other features won out in the end. When the 24-70 f/4 IS was announced, a lot of people swore by their 24-105 f/4 IS, but now people are considering the 24-70 f/4 IS over the 24-105 f/4 IS. If the 16-35 f/4 IS has better IQ than the existing 16-35 f/2.8 II, then it will also be a winner.

I see the 16-35 f/4 IS ultimately taking over the spot of the 17-40 and will create a trio of L f/4 IS zooms: 16-35/24-70/70-200. There is still room for a 16-35 f/2.8 III and a 14-24 f/2.8. I've tried the 24 f/2.8 IS, 28 f/2.8 IS and 35 f/2 IS, and I'm not convinced that IS is needed at such short focal lengths. I could get sharper results around 1/15 with IS off (albeit with a lower keeper rate), and I can get good results with IS at 1/10 to 1/6, but the results still show motion blur at 100%. 1/6 isn't slow enough to blur clouds or water, so there aren't that many scenarios where IS would be useful (for stills). Longer than that and I'd rather use a tripod or jack up the ISO because there is too much motion blur even with IS on to get a good shot consistently.

Also agree with others thinking that the 10-18 might be sold as in a kit wit the 18-55/55-250. That would be an atttractive package to beginner DSLR users.


----------



## tron (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



ahsanford said:


> Coma isn't really covered here, but this guy's calculations would suggest *wide FL* + *wide max aperture* are king.
> - A


True but: The 35mm 1.4L and 24 1.4L II are coma kings too! In addition there are no UWA lenses faster than 2.8 (14, 16mm, etc) anyway.


----------



## ahsanford (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



Random Orbits said:


> When the 6D was announced, a lot of people would have opted for the 5D II instead, but then the 6D's IQ and other features won out in the end. When the 24-70 f/4 IS was announced, a lot of people swore by their 24-105 f/4 IS, but now people are considering the 24-70 f/4 IS over the 24-105 f/4 IS.



+1. Dead on. *In my hands and for my needs*, The 24-70 F/4L IS is a _comprehensive_ winner. It's lighter and shorter than all the L 24-something lenses, sharper than everything but the 24-70 F/2.8L II, and the 0.7x macro is unbelievably handy in walkaround shooting situations. 

Comparing to my previous 24-70, the older 24-70 F/2.8L I, I gave up one stop in return for IS, sharper performance, a _massive_ weight reduction, useful size reduction (I can get the F/4 into some sporting venues with a 6" size limit), and the macro is just gravy. That's a terrific trade for how and what I shoot.

There's a long-running gun battle between 24-70 F/4L IS proponents and _24-105 F/4L IS_ proponents, and I don't want to start the length vs. overall IQ/features debate here as people have really strong opinions about this. Suffice it to say, you know where my vote is. 



> I see the 16-35 f/4 IS ultimately taking over the spot of the 17-40 and will create a trio of L f/4 IS zooms: 16-35/24-70/70-200. There is still room for a 16-35 f/2.8 III and a 14-24 f/2.8.



Agree again. That seems to be where this is going -- Canon is pushing high quality F/4 zooms that are worthy of the L designation, but do not have the enormous / heavy / 82mm filter / built-for-war designs that the top of the line F/2.8 zooms represent. I'm tickled pink about that as I get a 9/10 lens at everything except for aperture, and I don't shoot sports (at all) or portraiture (with a zoom). So I'm just saving my back and my wallet with these 'sleeper' / 'pro-lite' lenses that work like a charm.

I know it's not what the die-hard enthusiasts and pros may want, but I'm pretty geeked about this F/4 zoom (if/when it happens).

- A


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



sagittariansrock said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > thing is those budget plastic mount 18-55 IS STM and 55-250 IS STM are actually mad sharp, heck the 55-250 STM is said to rival the 70-200 f/4 IS for optics.
> ...



Maybe, I was just going by Canon's MTF charts and a few early reports. Maybe in practice it doesn't work out. 

(although I don't entirely trust TDP, I'd like to see some photozone.de and some other reports too, TDP has had a lot of results that haven't matched my own careful tests or some other sites at times; it also depends how you do the tests, TDP might test close and I don't think they refocus for mid-frame or corner the latter you can argue which way is a more sensible way to test but regardless of that it makes radically trickier to test consistently, but even center frame.... I mean their tamron lenses all look like coke bottles and so on)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



wickidwombat said:


> erggg what is with all the underwhelming slow aperture lenses! why not a 16-35 f2.8 IS? really c'mon canon
> f4 wow awesome... NOT



room to fit in IS, $1300 instead of $2300 perhaps, potential to make it perform a touch better stopped down to landscape DOF where this focal range is most often (although yes not always) used when used on FF, makes it smaller and lighter by a lot, also nice, since you might want to hike around with it paired with one or two other lenses.


----------



## ahsanford (May 8, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> sagittariansrock said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



Trust TDP for a lot of things: usage experience, handling, databases of specs and insights about lenses' strengths/weaknesses. 

I just don't use it for IQ data. There are a boatload of sites that do that a bit better.

- A


----------



## dgatwood (May 9, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



wickidwombat said:


> erggg what is with all the underwhelming slow aperture lenses! why not a 16-35 f2.8 IS? really c'mon canon
> f4 wow awesome... NOT



Agreeed. I would ditch my 16-35 L II for an equally fast IS version in an instant. An f/4? Meh. Too much functional overlap with my 24–105.

Then again, in Canonthink™, that would reduce demand for the 24mm f/1.4 L, so I wouldn't expect them to build one any time soon.


----------



## ahsanford (May 12, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*


Let there be (potentially fake) pictures! 

http://photorumors.com/2014/05/12/first-pictures-of-the-upcoming-canon-wide-angle-lenses/

A plastic mount on the 10-18 (if true) screams being right in line with the 'budget trinity' of 10-18 / 18-55 / 55-250 that some have speculated about. That would also mean (a) it can't possibly cost much and (b) it is likely _not_ a replacement of the EF-S 10-22mm F/3.5-4.5 USM.

I can't make out the filter diameter of that 16-35 F/4L IS, but I've got my fingers crossed for 77mm. 

- A


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (May 12, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



ahsanford said:


> I can't make out the filter diameter of that 16-35 F/4L IS, but I've got my fingers crossed for 77mm.



I think it looks like 77mm! ;D


----------



## wickidwombat (May 12, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > erggg what is with all the underwhelming slow aperture lenses! why not a 16-35 f2.8 IS? really c'mon canon
> ...



One of the main reasons i use the 16-35 f2.8 II is to shoot it wide open. Although I do understand the reason for cheaper slower lenses but cmon how about giving the top end some love canon lets have a 16-35 f2.8 IS L that sharp corner to corner like the 24-70 II.


----------



## ahsanford (May 12, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Also, from PR at the bottom of the pics I linked:

"The official announcement should be in few hours."

That's a CR2.9 in my book, people. As Thom Yorke once said, _"This is really happening._"

- A


----------



## RGF (May 12, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



wickidwombat said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > wickidwombat said:
> ...



It would nice if canon would swallow it pride and license Nikons incredible 14-24 lens.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 12, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



RGF said:


> It would nice if canon would swallow it pride and license Nikons incredible 14-24 lens.



That is assuming that Nikon would even consider licensing it to their biggest rival.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (May 13, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*

Now the 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS are available for preorder at B&H for US$299 and US$1,199 respectively. You can press the keyboard now.
For those with APS-C sensor, the 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM in this price is quite reasonable for an UWA lens. I don't think I would buy the FF EF 16-35 f/4L IS, since I have the f2.8L II version but time will tell.
The MTF charts are very promissing in terms of IMO, it indicates huge improvement in sharpness from mid-frame to borders.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 13, 2014)

*Re: EF-S 10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM & EF 16-35 f/4L IS Around the Corner? [CR2]*



RGF said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



Yeah, it's really incredible at shooting lens charts and brick walls....not so good for landscapes or groups of people. The difficulty in using front filters is a serious deficiency. Most landscapes require stopping down for Depth of Field....so at f11, there is little difference between the sharpness of a 16-35IIL and this Nikkor lens...so I often wonder why I would bother with the size, bulk and cost of such a lens which really only has advantages wide open.


----------

