# New Canon Lenses-Made In Taiwan



## Secretariat (Nov 4, 2018)

By the way, is it true that the new Canon lenses, like the EF-70-200 F2.8L IS MK 3, are made in Taiwan and not in Japan anymore?
Thanks.


----------



## mirage (Nov 4, 2018)

Canon does manufacture EF lenses also at their Taiwan plant. But for all I know, not L lenses.
Do you have any indication/hints re. EF 70-200/2.8 L IS III or other L glass?

Latest information on topic i can find is a dpreview interview from March 20, 2017 with Canon managers of Utsonomiya plant (Japan) ... they explicitly state that 100% of L (and cinema and broadcast) lenses are (designed and) manufactured there.
while it precedes introduction of EF 70-200/2.8 L IS III, i have not seen any information about it being manufactured elsewhere (eg in Canon's Taiwan plant).
https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/4536277079/canon-lens-factory-interview



> What percentage of L lenses are manufactured in the Utsunomiya lens plant?
> Because this is the 'mother' factory, 100% of L lenses are made here.



In the recent teardown of EF 70-200/2.8 L IS Mk. II and Mk. III Roger Cicala does not mention anything re. manufacturing plant - but both lenses are identical except for paint (and maybe fluorine coating on front and back lens element).
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/20...ons-of-the-canon-70-200mm-f2-8-is-ii-and-iii/


----------



## Secretariat (Nov 4, 2018)

mirage said:


> Canon does manufacture EF lenses also at their Taiwan plant. But for all in know, not L lenses.
> 
> do you have any indication/hints re. EF 70-200/2.8 L IS III or other L glass?
> 
> ...




I was in Hong Kong last week and a salesman in one of the camera stores there told me that the new Canon EF 70-200 F2.8L IS MK III lens was made in Taiwan. I have a very strong feeling that he told me that because he was trying to sell me the MK II version as he didn't have the MK III version in stock.


----------



## mirage (Nov 4, 2018)

hehe, your suspicion may be well founded. otoh, if you get a good deal on Mk. II it is a much smarter buy than the identical performance Mk. III at / near full price.


----------



## koenkooi (Nov 4, 2018)

mirage said:


> [..]
> 
> In the recent teardown of EF 70-200/2.8 L IS Mk. II and Mk. III Roger Cicala does not mention anything re. manufacturing plant - but both lenses are identical except for paint (and maybe fluorine coating on front and back lens element).
> https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/20...ons-of-the-canon-70-200mm-f2-8-is-ii-and-iii/



I've seen people reporting that the mkIII focusses a lot faster than the mkII on the R, which makes me wonder if the newly released/refreshed L lenses in the past 6 months or so also have an updated processor in their autofocus module and not just handwaving about coatings.

Anyone with access to an R and both versions of the lens up for an experiment?


----------



## jolyonralph (Nov 4, 2018)

I don't have the Mark III version, but the Mark II focuses pretty damn fast on the R.


----------



## Secretariat (Nov 4, 2018)

koenkooi said:


> I've seen people reporting that the mkIII focusses a lot faster than the mkII on the R, which makes me wonder if the newly released/refreshed L lenses in the past 6 months or so also have an updated processor in their autofocus module and not just handwaving about coatings.
> 
> Anyone with access to an R and both versions of the lens up for an experiment?




Correct me if I'm wrong, when you say", R," you must have meant the new Canon EOS R mirrorless camera? Am I not right? Also, how about in the DLSR cameras, does the MK III also focuses faster than the MK II?
Thanks.


----------



## koenkooi (Nov 4, 2018)

Secretariat said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, when you say", R," you must have meant the new Canon EOS R mirrorless camera? Am I not right? Also, how about in the DLSR cameras, does the MK III also focuses faster than the MK II?
> Thanks.



Yes. the new EOS R mirrorless camera. I haven't read or seen anything about people noticing differences between the II and III besides the things you'd expect with new coatings. Since I have neither the lenses nor the R to test on I can only go on what the internet tells me


----------



## MrFotoFool (Nov 4, 2018)

I have the 70-200 2.8 IS version 3 but only because I had the non-IS version which I traded in. Obviously if I had the version 2 IS I would not have traded for version 3 since it is nearly identical. It's a stellar lens as to be expected. I just looked at the lens barrel and it says "made in Japan" so that answers that. Though honestly I don't care where it is made as long as it performs well.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 5, 2018)

Canon has been enlarging their production in Japan and pulling lens manufacturing back in house. I don't that applies to the cheap consumer lenses made in Taiwan, but more to parts and pieces made around the world.

All L and some of the higher end consumer lenses are made in Japan. My 50mm f/2.5 was made in Japan.


----------



## Secretariat (Nov 5, 2018)

jolyonralph said:


> I don't have the Mark III version, but the Mark II focuses pretty damn fast on the R.


 
If I may ask, does your Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS MK II version focus faster with the R than your DLSR camera?
Thanks.


----------



## jolyonralph (Nov 6, 2018)

I didn't bring my Canon DSLR with me on this trip so I can't yet do a direct comparison, but it does not seem noticeably different.


----------



## Secretariat (Nov 6, 2018)

Was able to test both the 70-200 F2.8 L IS MK II and MK III lenses with a DLSR( Canon 1DX MK II) and the MK III seemed to focus a bit faster than the MK II.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 1, 2018)

There's no "Mark" or "Mk" in the name of any lens ever produced by Canon. *Ever.*

"Mark" only appears in the model names of second and subsequent camera _bodies_ in the same series! Bodies! Not lenses!

If a salesman ever referred to a Canon lens as a "Mark II" or "Mark III" anything I'd turn around and walk out because he obviously doesn't know what he's talking about.


----------



## degos (Dec 9, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> If a salesman ever referred to a Canon lens as a "Mark II" or "Mark III" anything I'd turn around and walk out because he obviously doesn't know what he's talking about.



Fortunate then that this isn't a Canon dealership! 

Seriously of all the battles to fight this one seems the most trivial. There's also no Canon 5D4 or 6D2, but it's all shorthand to make conversations easier and clearer.


----------



## Michael Clark (Dec 14, 2018)

degos said:


> Fortunate then that this isn't a Canon dealership!
> 
> Seriously of all the battles to fight this one seems the most trivial. There's also no Canon 5D4 or 6D2, but it's all shorthand to make conversations easier and clearer.



5D4 or 6D2 is shorthand for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV or Canon EOS 6D Mark II, both of which actually exist.

There is no shorthand for a Canon EOS xD1, xD Mk1, or xD Mark I because no such model as a Canon EOS xD Mark I actually exists.

There is also no Canon lens that has ever had 'Mark' in the name.
Nor has there ever been a Canon lens with a Roman Numeral 'I' in the name.


----------



## Rockskipper (Dec 14, 2018)

It's kind of like trying to get people to differentiate between loose and lose, or fewer and less, or the proper use of apostrophes (not apostrophe's).

But I've always thought the Canon nomenclature was obtuse and confusing, especially their different lens categories.


----------

