I like that rumour. Especially if that lens exceeds the 16-35 performance at a lower cost. That would be one more reason not to walk away from the EF-S mount entirely. Strengthen the consumers' perception of Canon's committment to EF-S and APS-C ?
so Canon is going to a) make a wide-zoom that is superior to the 16-35 and 17-40Ls, but mount it only on consumer grade bodies, thus cannibalising both L glass sales and pro-body sales? and b) install IS into a low breadth wide angle zoom to add additional weight to already heavy 2.8 glass?
I think the chances of this happening as somewhere between a snowball's chance in hell and when pigs fly.
Don't get me wrong, it would look great on my 350D, but this is a _very_ unlikely rumour IMHO.
DavidJB wrote:
so Canon is going to a) make a wide-zoom that is superior to the 16-35 and 17-40Ls, but mount it only on consumer grade bodies, thus cannibalising both L glass sales and pro-body sales? and b) install IS into a low breadth wide angle zoom to add additional weight to already heavy 2.8 glass?
I think the chances of this happening as somewhere between a snowball's chance in hell and when pigs fly.
Don't get me wrong, it would look great on my 350D, but this is a _very_ unlikely rumour IMHO.
Exactly my toughts
DavidJB wrote:
so Canon is going to a) make a wide-zoom that is superior to the 16-35 and 17-40Ls, but mount it only on consumer grade bodies, thus cannibalising both L glass sales and pro-body sales? and b) install IS into a low breadth wide angle zoom to add additional weight to already heavy 2.8 glass?
I think the chances of this happening as somewhere between a snowball's chance in hell and when pigs fly.
Don't get me wrong, it would look great on my 350D, but this is a _very_ unlikely rumour IMHO.
Or, option C: A pro APS-C lens to go with a pro-APS-C Body.
I know a lot of Canon users would love to have the choice of a high quality crop camera.
Sounds to me like someone saw that picture of the alleged 35D that's been making the rounds and could make out the "17-" on the lens but not the 85. I'd be excited by a 17-55/2.8 but I don't think it's likely.
Tomash wrote:
"APS-C" and "pro" are mututally exclusive terms.
They don't have to be. I would jump on a 1.6 crop 1 Series in a second. The added DoF for indoor sports shooting with fast primes is a big boon to a lot of stuff I shoot.
With that said, it's probably all speculation but it's a range Canon needs to fill better. The 17-85 and 17-40 are too slow, the 24-70 isn't wide enough, the 16-35 isn't long enough. There's no good option for a mid-range L-grade zoom for the Canon system right now.
Well, the manager of one of the biggest on-line shops over here , pointed out today that the follow-up will be announced, he only spoke about a price (1800 EUR, thats equal to D200 price), and with kitlens it would be 2800 EUR.
He also said there would be in total 5 lenses announced.
Mind you, 50 % of what he tells is total bullshit, but he nailed the 350D two weeks before announcement...
Flappie wrote:
Well, the manager of one of the biggest on-line shops over here , pointed out today that the follow-up will be announced, he only spoke about a price (1800 EUR, thats equal to D200 price), and with kitlens it would be 2800 EUR.
He also said there would be in total 5 lenses announced.
Mind you, 50 % of what he tells is total bullshit, but he nailed the 350D two weeks before announcement...
Flappie
a 1,000 euro kitlens..sounds interesting. hoping this statement is on the 50% part that is true and another shot at upping his nailing record , what could this be? a 1,000 euro EF-S 17-85 II? 24-105? not a perfect kit lens range on 1.6... an ef-s 17-55 2.8 IS USM for a thousand euros? plausible?
, what could this be? a 1,000 euro EF-S 17-85 II? 24-105? not a perfect kit lens range on 1.6... an ef-s 17-55 2.8 IS USM for a thousand euros? plausible? 