Canon's next affordable Lens

[Nikon Kid]

What Lens would you like Canon to bring out.

I would like to see a 450mm L f4 lens with no IS so its affordable just that bit more light and reach where would you put the price £1750

[michael23]

What Lens would you like Canon to bring out.

I would like to see a 450mm L f4 lens with no IS so its affordable just that bit more light and reach where would you put the price £1750

That sounds like a nice idea, a nice compromise between 4 and 500mm,
There were rumours of them updating the 100-400 and giving it a constant f4 but it was also said it could be a typo, http://www.dentonimages.com/rumors.php?rumor=Canon_EF_100-400mm_4.0_L_IS_USM

If they were to bring a totally new lens out that was a zoom, i would hope that they go away from the push pull, i dont like it my self and far prefer twist actions. and i would like to see it change to something like an 80-400 and f4-4.5. L
Maybe a 500mm f8Lmirror lens, i have seen things on the net regarding the sony that people have been very pleased with it.

[Vectis Birder]

I'd like to see an affordable 500mm lens, something costing between £1000-£2000 (between and two grand seems like an achievable savings target, unlike the five and a half grand the current 500mm costs), along the lines of the existing 400mm f5.6.

[Chris Galvin]

A 500 5.6 would be a great hand holdable walkabout lens if soembody made it. The problem being that Canon would be crazy to introduce it because it would take sales away from the 500/4. So don't hold your breath waitng for this lens to appear

[Roy C]

What Lens would you like Canon to bring out.

I would like to see a 450mm L f4 lens with no IS so its affordable just that bit more light and reach where would you put the price £1750
How about an affordable 400/4, the only one at the moment cost £5k.
I reckon a 450/4 at £1750 is way out Terry - you would be lucky to get any change out of £4k ( even without DO and IS) IMO.
More affordable would be a 500/5.6 which could come in around £2-£2.5k I would have thought but as Chris has pointed out it could take sales away from the 500/4 so I can't see it happening.

[Vectis Birder]

A 500 5.6 would be a great hand holdable walkabout lens if soembody made it. The problem being that Canon would be crazy to introduce it because it would take sales away from the 500/4. So don't hold your breath waitng for this lens to appear

I'm not. I am going to save for the Sigma 500mm (http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1008348) instead, once I have got myself a job. Or look for a secondhand Canon once I have saved enough in the price range.

[Chris Galvin]

I'm not. I am going to save for the Sigma 500mm (http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1008348) instead, once I have got myself a job. Or look for a secondhand Canon once I have saved enough in the price range.

I Know all about the Sigma 500/4.5 as I had one for a couple of years before upgrading to the Canon 500/4 two years ago.The Sigma is a great lens for the price. Although I paid only £2000 for mine, it is amazing that this lens is now only 300 quid cheaper than the price I paid for my Canon 500/4

[postcardcv]

I'd like to see Canon make one like this - http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=12912 though I doubt it would be very affordable.

[HokkaidoStu]

A 400 F5.6 with IS and MFD of 1.5 metres wouldn't be bad.

I agree Canon probably won't make a 500 F5.6 as it would impact on sales of their more expensive lenses.................no reason why Sigma couldn't make one although the fact there is no 500 F5.6 of any brand suggests that the manufacturers don't think it'd sell much. Too slow for sports, a touch too big and heavy for handholding for long periods for nature photographers?

One thing I'd love is for teleconverters to work on non-pro bodies on F5.6 lenses but again I can't see Canon doing that...............

[Nikon Kid]

I am surprised that they do not bring out many new lenses, but nearly 4/5 new cameras each year.

The reason I put forward a 450mm f4 non IS it would still be nice to carry, would have thought
maybe a 1lb heavier or maybe even lighter, when you think about advances in design and lighter metals.

[Roy C]

I am surprised that they do not bring out many new lenses, but nearly 4/5 new cameras each year.

The reason I put forward a 450mm f4 non IS it would still be nice to carry, would have thought
maybe a 1lb heavier or maybe even lighter, when you think about advances in design and lighter metals.
Terry, without using DO a 450 f4 lens would be a fair bit heavier, a 400/4 would be at least twice as heavy as the 400/5.6 so a 450/4 would be heavier still. Remember a f4 lens lets in twice the light of a f5.6 lens.
A good comparison is the 300/2.8 and the 300/4 - the 300/2.8 is more than double the weight of the f4.

[michael23]

I am surprised that they do not bring out many new lenses, but nearly 4/5 new cameras each year.

The reason I put forward a 450mm f4 non IS it would still be nice to carry, would have thought
maybe a 1lb heavier or maybe even lighter, when you think about advances in design and lighter metals.

Lens technology doesnt advance anywhere near as fast as dslr technology.
When you look at canons current range of optics, i would say everything is covered reasonbly well, With regards to the 500mm f5.6, remember when sigma brought out there 500mmf7.2, i think we would have to lean towards sigma, I would say they are the most likely to bring out such a lens, maybe f5.6 or f6.3.

An update of the current 400mm f5.6 i would say would be canons next move, the closer focus at 1.5m would be great,

[Ash1456]

An 18-600mm f/2.8 lens that is about the size of the 100-400 and is hand holdable...;););););):-O:-O:-O
...........On joking that would be impossible.

A 400/f4 without DO that is under £2000. Or Zoom TC, 1.4-2X. I need to be sensible now and stop dreaming.;)

The idea of the 450 f/4 would be good.
Ash

[Nikon Kid]

Maybe I should hone this spec to 450mm L f4.5 Minium focus 2m price £2250 that sounds good, that would not weigh that much would it.

[redeyedvideo]

....or how about a new body with a no-loss 2x digital zoom? My Sony HDR-FX7 video camera has a 20x lens digitally expandable to 30x with minimum loss of clarity. In ideal light conditions it's almost impossible to tell when I've used it.

Imagine your 400mm lens becoming 600mm or 800mm without any additional weight or expense. :t:

[Clive Watson]

I agree with several other posters here, a 500mm or 600mm f5.6. I used to have a manual focus Nikon 600mm f5.6 during my film days, it's a shame these don't exist any more. Much lighter than an f4, much easier to take on planes, and of course much cheaper. Or how about a 800mm f8?

[Paul Jarvis]

I like the lens choice canon has, i just wish the prices were more affordable for the big glass.

[Ash1456]

:-OI agree with paul!!!!:-O

[Adey Baker]

Many of Canon's lenses have been around for several years now, so their development costs have long been covered. Any new design would have to include the development into the retail price and might not look good value against the nearest option. I'd like a lightweight, close-focussing 500mm F5.6 but I suspect that it'd be close in price to the F4 anyway - there's no way that Canon would make it as anything other than a top-grade 'L' series lens. 'Affordable' is all relative under such circumstances and I guess most folks who could afford a putative F5.6 would probably pay that bit more for the F4 version, anyway!

There's been a call for a closer focussing version of the 400mm F5.6 for ages - Sigma's Apo/Macro 400mm came out in the mid-90s and was even updated to include their HSM, but still Canon never bothered to update theirs. I suppose they think that the 100-400mm and the 300mm F4 IS (plus 1.4x) cover the options.

[Jaff]

I'd like to see Canon make one like this - http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=12912 though I doubt it would be very affordable.

I'm with Pete here.

But rather than a Clone of the Nikon lens with a Canon badge on my ideal Canon release would be more in line with Sigma's 120-300m f2.8, something with that zoom range but with IS.
This is where it gets tricky, don't know what this new DO process in making the lens is exactly (I've seen a diagram and all I thought was :h?: :-O ) but theory goes, as I understand it, is it's supposed to make the lens lighter while retaining excellent IQ comparable to an L lens so I'd rather have that than the L designation, I'd also rather have the usual twist zoom as opposed to 'pump action', so ideally 100-300mm f2.8 DO IS USM with a MF distance at around 2m. :t:
Unfortunately the DO thing seems to push the price of a lens up higher than if it were a straight L series so in a world of economic woes it would be better making the sacrifice and having the extra weight of an L designation in order to save a great big wod of cash. Therefore the most appealing option would be a 100-300mm f2.8 L IS USM and priced simliar to the prime! And if you see a flying pig let me know and I'll order this lens. ;)

[Fowl Mouth]

I like the lens choice canon has, i just wish the prices were more affordable for the big glass.


Yup, I'm there with ya. Throw in a cheap 1 Series body, too.

[postcardcv]

... so ideally 100-300mm f2.8 DO IS USM with a MF distance at around 2m. :t:

I really hope they don't make such a lens.. I doubt I'd be able to resist it ;)

[pe'rigin]

Instead of wishing for bigger or lighter lenses, perhaps we should look to the development of better recording of image detail on the sensor.

By increasing the enlargement factor to a realistic level, thereby reducing the need to purchase £5K+ lenses.

[Fowl Mouth]

There is some truth to that statement. But I wonder if the resolution limit of any lens prevents the cropping of denser pixel arrays from having any advantage beyond the current technology. That is one reason that nominal resolution of images from "full frame" sensors always trumps that of cropped sensors. Even the top Nikon and Canon primes look "muddier" when cropped. That's not to say that sensors can't be better, but it seems to me like that is the current surge of development right now anyway. Maybe I'm wrong?

I'd like to see a 500 1:5.6 L without IS, because I'll like not be able to justify purchasing the 500 1:4 IS to my wife anytime in the next 10 years. But I don't see that being a logical move for Canon, so I'll have to make do with dreaming.

[wrogers]

What I would like is a replacement for most zoom lenses to make them tack sharp...
either that or a 150-500 F/5.6 L IS to replace my sigma one!!

but more seriously a 500 f5.6 L or a 120-300 F/2.8 L IS
failing that making a 400mm F/5.6 L Mk2 with a shorter MFD and a similar if not lower price tag!!

what Sigma/Third Party lenses do you think need an overhaul??
I reckon sigma's 400 5.6 needs reincarnating! hopefully with USM and OS

Will

[michael23]

With regards to the sigma, im sure they would have people cueing for miles to get one, a 400mm f5.6 apo ex series lens would, im sure have people jumping up and down with joy, i had one a few years back, as well as a tokina and they were both superb.

It seems to me canon do need to bring there lens design forward, optimize their glass for digital sensors, and add in to that decently priced primes and some new zooms, if canyone from canon is reading this..PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DUMP THE PUMP ACTION!
If they added in body stabilization, not only would they develop a closer relationship with their dslr customers and up their sales, they could take is out of the lenses and make them cheaper.
Just look at the old fd lenses which could be reincarnated,
a 50-300mm f4.5 would be nice....

[AC/DC]

If they added in body stabilization, not only would they develop a closer relationship with their dslr customers and up their sales, they could take is out of the lenses and make them cheaper.

I'm fairly sure that in lens IS is usually more effective than that built in to a body. Canon will probably make a lot more by putting it in lenses and charging more for it - look at the price difference between the 70-200 f/4's. Put IS in the bodies and they would have to start rethinking all their lenses - I doubt it will happen.

[Adey Baker]

what Sigma/Third Party lenses do you think need an overhaul??
I reckon sigma's 400 5.6 needs reincarnating! hopefully with USM and OS

Will

I can't believe they ever dumped it in favour of that 135-400mm zoom, taking the 300mm F4 with it as well!

Both of the primes have genuinely useful close focus 'macro' facilities and there's no compromise on image quality. My HSM version of the 400mm compares well with my mate's Canon 400mm - there's no practical difference in image quality when used on cameras such as our 20Ds and 40Ds, though I can't speak about higher-pixel types such as the 50D. As the HSM allows full-time manual focus over-ride, you need never bother trying to find the AF/MF switch when used on cameras such as the 40D with the 'AF' button selected for autofocus rather than touching the shutter button.

All it needs is a nice 'Zen' finish and 'DG' lens coatings to complete the job (not sure about the advantages of OS - especially if it needs a second or two to 'settle down').

[dlleno]

late to the party here but thought I'd chime in... Personally I don't see what all the fuss is regarding the push pull on the 1-4. If one prefers the traditional mechanism thats fine too of course. All the POTN comments I've read end up with the sumarization that its just a personal preference, and I found that to be true for me as well. I rented a 1-4 recently and got used to it quite quickly. It's a don't care for me.

The 1-4 is wonderfully hand-holdable and fits in my Lowepro 300 AW with 40D attached. I found myself appreciating the 4x zoom ratio a lot. During my recent visit to Yellowstone I found myself wishing for a 150-600 though. Yes, sometimes I wished it was faster, but frankly at 400mm on a 1.6x crop sensor the depth of field is pretty limited even at f/5.6. I acknowledge that f/4.0 would yield one additional stop which would double the shutter speed with little DOF penalty, but I also point out that it requires rather two-dimmentional wildlife to make the most out of 400m f/4.0 at a distance of 50 feet, for example.

Would anyone else use a 150-600mm f/4.0-5.6L IS? For the 1.6 folks, Calculated DOF is just under 2 feet at 100' distance, at 600mm f/5.6...

[Robert L Jarvis]

I was looking at the title and thought to myself,do Canon make an affordable lens? Answer is No, so there will not be a next affordable lens.:-O

[postcardcv]

I was looking at the title and thought to myself,do Canon make an affordable lens? Answer is No, so there will not be a next affordable lens.:-O

Of course the do make affordable lenses, but obviously the quality of a £200 lens isn't as good as that of a £5000 lens. If you want a decent cheap lens have a look at the 50 f1.8, a very nice portrait lens for just £80 or the new 55-250 IS an outstanding mid length telephoto zoom with IS for under £200.