that said this could easily be made up, since where are the 24 2.8 IS and 28 2.8 IS and the others are in patents and just add a few made up and there you go
and if it is real for real since it left out the two new primes that means 50 1.4 coudl still be a go
Much depends how fast a 55-70 would be. If it were f/1.2 or f/1.4 it could be as sharp as competing primes and more flexible.
An EF-S 55-70 f/1.4 or f/1.2 would be the equivalent roughly of a flexible (more useful) 85 mm and give the L lens a run for the money, probably at less cost.
bushwacker wrote:
The one that seems the most interesting above is the EF 50 f/1.8 IS. That could become a replacement to the 50 f/1.4 and put some separation between it and the 50 f/1.2L.
Sp12 wrote:
Nope, IS makes no sense on any short lenses, and is just marketing drivel from Canon to get you to buy new 850$ F2.8 non-L primes.
Sonys in on it to, trying to pull you over with 4 stop IS on every lens/FL.
More nonsense. IS is useful on the short end of the 24-105 L as well as the long. There are always situations where you push the limits if you can. No need for ISO higher than 400? No need for apertures wider than f/2? Sure, you can hand hold a wide angle lens at lower shutter speeds than you can a tele, but how about at 1/4 second? Maybe you can, I can't. I'll take IS on pretty much any lens where it's an option.
Ever leave your tripod at home due to weight or convenience or forgetfullness?
Ever make candid or street photos in low light at dusk or at night or in dim interiors?
Ever like to make a photo with f/11 depth of field and quality ISO that is not bleeding edge?
Ever make a photo on a crop factor camera that requires 1.6x the shutter speed to get the same lack of shake?
Ever make a photo on a high resolution sensor and print very large for a gallery?
Perhaps you have done some or all of those things.
He was referring to the 50mm f/1.8, which is a fast prime lens, not to shooting with IS in general. Shooting with fast primes (faster than f/2.0) typically obviate the need for IS.
DJL329 wrote:
He was referring to the 50mm f/1.8, which is a fast prime lens, not to shooting with IS in general. Shooting with fast primes (faster than f/2.0) typically obviate the need for IS.
Nonsense. Read what I wrote again. It doesn't matter how fast the lens is if you are shooting at f/11 for depth of field. There are many reasons and times to shoot handheld in poor light at the better (lower) ISOs and not shoot wide open.
IS would be handy in a new version of the 50 mm f/1.8.
DJL329 wrote:
He was referring to the 50mm f/1.8, which is a fast prime lens, not to shooting with IS in general. Shooting with fast primes (faster than f/2.0) typically obviate the need for IS.
Although I certainly hope that Canon will continue to make a moderately priced 50 without IS, I think even fast primes benefit from IS. Shooting at f/1.2 in really dim light can often mean shutter speeds that are borderline for those of us without sniper steadiness, and the steady viewfinder with IS active can even help in nailing AF right where you want it. And then you might want to occasionally stop down to 2.8, say to get two people in focus instead of one person's nearer eye. Nice not to have to switch lenses or bodies just for that.
I don't get it. Perhaps there is a typo.
