Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: New Canon Lenses  (Read 3699 times)

Gary Ferguson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 550
    • http://
New Canon Lenses
« on: February 11, 2012, 02:40:19 pm »

Some interesting new Canon optics, seriously improved 24mm and 28mm lenses, and a new 24-70mm.

But here's a question, why no IS on the new 24-70mm?

It can't be because it degrades image quality, or why include IS on the ultra high resolving 100mm Macro.

It can't be for some arcane reason about lens size or large elements, or why include IS on the giant 600mm f4.

It can't be that Canon judges wide angles not to need IS, because they've just included it in their new 24mm and 28mm.

Anyone any theories?

Incidentally, I seem to remember a lens upgrade preceded a previous increase in pixel count. Maybe this news heralds a forthcoming answer to the new 36MPX Nikon?
Logged

Ken Bennett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1797
    • http://www.kenbennettphoto.com
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #1 on: February 11, 2012, 04:06:41 pm »

I had this discussion with several other photogs, too. Not sure. The Canon 17-55/2.8 EF-S lens is stabilized, and it works very well. I've used it for several assignments where I really wanted the I.S., but needed the faster aperture. Helped a lot.
Logged
Equipment: a camera and some lenses. https://www.instagram.com/wakeforestphoto/

Bernard ODonovan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #2 on: February 11, 2012, 04:18:29 pm »


The rumors were Canon tried out many designs over a long period of time with testers. It may be that the IS made the lens bigger and heaver or affected the motion of the optics in such a zoom length.

Word leaking out is the new lens is very very sharp (seen a pic of a tester with it). As it is a bit smaller and lighter that should please some.

Sadly the improved optics mean Canon had to loose the reverse zoom design that saw the hood and front optic in the ideal position for different zoom positions. The new lens has the hood on the front AFAIK and so it will not be the best hood for the long end if so. I suspect the fully multicoated optics and field testing will mean that side has been considered if that is the compromise made for a much sharper zoom

A very important lens for Canon to get right...
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2012, 04:39:40 pm »

Until a few days ago my understanding was that the current IS/VR technologies were not compatible with the requirements of such a bright zoom... then Tamron announced a stabilized 24-70 f2.8 and I am not that sure any more.

I wonder what Nikon will be releasing this year.

Cheers,
Bernard

Pingang

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 117
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #4 on: February 12, 2012, 12:20:57 am »

Some interesting new Canon optics, seriously improved 24mm and 28mm lenses, and a new 24-70mm.

But here's a question, why no IS on the new 24-70mm?

It can't be because it degrades image quality, or why include IS on the ultra high resolving 100mm Macro.

It can't be for some arcane reason about lens size or large elements, or why include IS on the giant 600mm f4.

It can't be that Canon judges wide angles not to need IS, because they've just included it in their new 24mm and 28mm.

Anyone any theories?



Incidentally, I seem to remember a lens upgrade preceded a previous increase in pixel count. Maybe this news heralds a forthcoming answer to the new 36MPX Nikon?

If Nikon has it, Canon got to have it. Tamron has it, proves it can be done.  Tamron in fact sold more lenses than Nikon, was placed 2nd in Japanese market, so Canon should have owrked harder, but may be we should see the Mark III.  Many new camera has high ISO performance making them to consider a IS version of 24-70 less important?
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #5 on: February 12, 2012, 12:25:18 am »

If Nikon has it, Canon got to have it. Tamron has it, proves it can be done.  Tamron in fact sold more lenses than Nikon, was placed 2nd in Japanese market, so Canon should have owrked harder, but may be we should see the Mark III.  Many new camera has high ISO performance making them to consider a IS version of 24-70 less important?

Well, all the guys I know shooting weddings have a 24-70 f2.8 and they would all love to have VR capability.  ;D

Cheers,
Bernard

Pingang

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 117
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #6 on: February 12, 2012, 07:25:07 am »

Well, all the guys I know shooting weddings have a 24-70 f2.8 and they would all love to have VR capability.  ;D

Cheers,
Bernard

Saved that the optical quality the same, regardless who shoots what, IS will always be welcome. But both Canon and Nikon managed to disappoint customers.

BG,
Pingang
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2012, 04:38:15 pm »

Saved that the optical quality the same, regardless who shoots what, IS will always be welcome. But both Canon and Nikon managed to disappoint customers.

True, but Canon did disappoint them for good last week while Nikon is still leaving some hope.  ;D

Cheers,
Bernard

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7393
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2012, 06:05:01 am »

Perhaps the price? The new lens, even without IS, is considerably dearer than the existing one.

gubaguba

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 95
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2012, 10:35:17 am »

I will play devils advocate.  When you have cameras that can shoot acceptable images at asa 1600 and above how much need is there for it?  I am of the thought that camera technology is making lens stabilization less needed.  If your only going to gain a stop in usability it becomes less of an issue.  I may find myself on the occasion thinking it would be good to have.  If cameras continue to get better less and less so.  Rather have the best optics.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #10 on: February 13, 2012, 06:10:48 pm »

I will play devils advocate.  When you have cameras that can shoot acceptable images at asa 1600 and above how much need is there for it?  I am of the thought that camera technology is making lens stabilization less needed.  If your only going to gain a stop in usability it becomes less of an issue.  I may find myself on the occasion thinking it would be good to have.  If cameras continue to get better less and less so.  Rather have the best optics.

Hum... VR/IR is useful and this is the very reason why Canon is including in their new prime wide lenses.

Chances are that the few points in optical quality will be far more than compensated by the 3 stops of ISO you will loose in some cases by not having VR/IS. Raising to ISO is workbale but takes the imaging chain very far away from its peak performing area. Now I agree that it may still be well within the level of quality needed for actual applications.

Anyway you look at it, sensor based stabilization is superior here and Sony as a significant lead over both Canon and Nikon.

Cheers,
Bernard

torger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3267
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2012, 04:33:49 am »

Not having image stabilization on an all-around lens like the 24-70 is an absolute mystery. My guess is that the particular lens design used did not allow for an IS element, and the reason the chose the current lens design is to excel in resolution. But why do that in an all-around lens, where resolution freaks (like myself) would use primes anyway?

It all will come down to how it performs optically. If it indeed is extremely sharp, competitive with primes, I could find it useful as a landscape lens for hiking tours to save weight. I don't think I want to leave my tilt-shift back home though...

As an all-around lens for hand-held shooting it will be weak, with my shooting style at least. I have time and time again seen that image stabilization is far more important to gain sharpness than high resolving power of the lens. Yes, with say 1/40 shutter people may be blurred occasionally, but often gives a nice look of the final image, sharp environment and some people blur suggesting movement. Without IS everything just becomes blurry, especially for me which does not have clockmaker's hands.
Logged

Pingang

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 117
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #12 on: February 14, 2012, 06:01:09 am »

They are people need IS and people does not care, they are people comfortable to shoot higher ISO to get faster shutter speed and there are use want to use lower ISO as much as possible even though the higher ISO might still pretty good, but this is the decision of user, Canon should just include the IS and use can turn it off if not needed.

Pingang
Logged

Yogesh Sarkar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10
    • http://www.yogeshsarkar.com
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2012, 12:48:33 am »

Or maybe Canon should just introduce a stabilized version of the 24-70, like it does for the 70-200 f2.8. That way, those who feel IS is necessary, can pay a little more for a slightly heavier lens.

tom b

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1471
    • http://tombrown.id.au
Re: New Canon Lenses
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2012, 01:18:42 am »

I used the old 24-70 and like most people I used:

• A Speedlight

• a tripod, MLU etc

• Strobes

• high ISO when necessary.

 Yes, IS would be nice but it is not necessary to get good results.

Cheers,
Logged
Tom Brown
Pages: [1]   Go Up