As a couple of others have said, the 24 TS/E is my most-used lens and I frequently find myself wishing for a few more mm of width. I don't think the new 24 offers me enough new features to be worth switching.
However, just a year ago, I'd have bought the 17 in a heartbeat as it would have paid for itself rather quickly. With today's business climate, I'm not so sure. A lot of my commercial clients are holding off on new advertising and that includes new photography.
M Vers wrote:
Regardless of having a more complete line of lenses, in this economy releasing two niche lenses at those projected prices doesn't seem very logical ... .
You've got to admit with about 70 lenses in their arsenal that Canon has the mainstream pretty well covered. A couple of niche lenses at niche prices won't hurt them a bit.
mawz wrote:
The massively superior performance of the Nikkor 24/3.5 PC-E over the current 24TS-E might just have something to do about this.
Any comparison shots from these two lenses? The early samples I saw from the Nikon (off-center, I mean) were not much more impressive than what I'm getting from my 24 TS-E; in fact, I was surprised the Nikon wasn't better, but I guess it's a real design challenge.
Dark Slider wrote:
You've got to admit with about 70 lenses in their arsenal that Canon has the mainstream pretty well covered. A couple of niche lenses at niche prices won't hurt them a bit.
Considering that Canon has so much invested into R&D that lenses are released when they are ready. Who knows how many they need to sell to break even, but since these are long term investments for them, I'm sure they more than payoff many many times more than the initial cost.
I wouldn't mind them releasing TS lenses if they were doing something about their other lenses. How are these two going to help wedding photographers, fashion photographers, etc.? TS, even for architectural and landscape photographers is a niche lens. Why make TWO niche lenses and not release ANYTHING significant for the large mass of people that need updated lenses? For example, the 50L has a flawed design and the 24-70 can easily be better designed - check out Sony-Zeiss and the Nikon.
The last three lenses they released:
- 24L mk 2 (a redesign of a lens that already existed and worked absolutely fine)
- two TS lenses
Did they REALLY run out of things to do and are they REALLY that bored that now they're spitting out ridiculously priced niche lenses and nothing else? If they took half the effort of making these two lenses and put it elsewhere, they might have been able to put a decent/pro AF system in the 5D mk2.
Dark Slider wrote:
You've got to admit with about 70 lenses in their arsenal that Canon has the mainstream pretty well covered. A couple of niche lenses at niche prices won't hurt them a bit.
I am purposely holding off buying the 135/2 and 24-70 because I believe that there will be updates in the near future, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that (the same applies to various other equipment). I feel Canon would generate more sales by releasing other lenses of which the majority utilize rather than filling an otherwise minuscule void with expensive niche lenses. Don't get me wrong, all you architecture photogs must have enormous hard-on's right now--but this release leaves the majority rather flaccid. Then again, every dog has his day.
i still wouldn't be surprised if canon updated a couple of primes, and holds it as a surprise for PMA itself.
possibly an upgrade to its 35mm 2.0 to combat what nikon just came out with, or even, if i may begin to fidget with myself, a 50mm 1.4 with full-on USM and upgraded formula to combat what sigma (sort of) just came out with.
I really don't understand all of the disappointment being expressed here.
When I started coming to FM a few years back, all I ever heard was "When oh when is Canon going to address its wide-angle shortcomings? Why don't they listen to our pleas? They've got great fast primes, great zooms, and great telephotos, but where are the great wide-angle lenses?"
Since that time, Canon has introduced:
14mm II
16-35 II
17mm TS-E
24mm II
24mm TS-E II
I know these lenses are not for everyone, but my point is that it's pretty hard to argue that Canon didn't listen to all of the complaining. (On the other hand, I guess the complaining we'll hear in the near term might bring about the various IS mid/long lenses people are clamoring for!)
By the way, the announcement of a 17mm TS-E is nothing short of astonishing -- a very smart response to Nikon's imitational 24, 45, and 85 T/S lenses introduced recently -- and if it tests well, I suspect it will be a LOT more popular than many here might think. I was so sure that lens would never happen!
Reason for edit: My term "bitching and moaning" was a bit of an exaggeration; "disappointment" is more accurate.
I'm not sharing in this hope... to get more sharpness out of the 45 & 90 they would probably have to destroy the beautiful rendering properties in the current lenses... also wouldn't love the new price tags either (double or triple?).
Having fully independent tilt and shift would be nice though... for the same price.
(Ok, I'm kind of cheap)
Brent Ward wrote:
So here's hoping that a new 45 & 90 are close behind.
X2 in spades.
Kinda disappointed in the crowd here.
RalphJ wrote:
I really don't understand all of the bitching and moaning.
When I started coming to FM a few years back, all I ever heard was "When oh when is Canon going to address its wide-angle shortcomings? Why don't they listen to our pleas? They've got great fast primes, great zooms, and great telephotos, but where are the great wide-angle lenses?"
Since that time, Canon has introduced:
14mm II
16-35 II
17mm TS-E
24mm II
24mm TS-E II
I know these lenses are not for everyone, but my point is that it's pretty hard to argue that Canon didn't listen to all of the complaining. (On the other hand, I guess the complaining we'll hear in the near term might bring about the various IS mid/long lenses people are clamoring for!)
By the way, the announcement of a 17mm TS-E is nothing short of astonishing -- a very smart response to Nikon's imitational 24, 45, and 85 T/S lenses introduced recently -- and if it tests well, I suspect it will be a LOT more popular than many here might think. I was so sure that lens would never happen! ...Show more →
RalphJ wrote:
I really don't understand all of the bitching and moaning.
+1
I've seen many posts pleading for a nice 17mm f4 prime (or there abouts), now there is one, AND it's a TS (no one says you have to tilt or shift ).
The 24TSE is always criticized for IQ, hopefully this addresses all those concerns. Canon seems to be working on it.
mh2000 wrote:
I'm not sharing in this hope... to get more sharpness out of the 45 & 90 they would probably have to destroy the beautiful rendering properties in the current lenses... also wouldn't love the new price tags either (double or triple?).
Having fully independent tilt and shift would be nice though... for the same price.
(Ok, I'm kind of cheap)
I just want the independent shift & tilt on all ts lenses.
Does the following from the press release: Canon was the first company to offer 35mm camera users a combined tilt and shift lens, With 36 years experience in this field, Canon has now added a new unique functionality to the TS-E 17mm f/4L and TS-E 24mm f/3.5L II, allowing users to rotate the direction of the tilt and shift independently of each other.
mean that you will no longer have to send the lens to canon to modify the lens to have parallel tilt-shift operation
Are these lens going to have the weather sealing like other new L lenses
Is there any futher info on the new Canon C-Pol filters Are they made in Japan or Tiffen like some of the other Canon branded filters in the USA
M Vers wrote:
I am purposely holding off buying the 135/2 and 24-70 because I believe that there will be updates in the near future, ...
Why? Canon L glass routinely returns >85% of new on the used market. You are only hurting yourself with this one. You can hardly rent glass for a couple of days for that little.
In terms of market timing, the "everyman" is holding off buying anything these days. Far more likely to make sales on exotic items to those that "need" them (note that need is in quotes there, ) than mainstream items.
Oddly timed for sure, but I would expect the average consumer that is upgrading to hold off in this economy.
RalphJ wrote:
By the way, the announcement of a 17mm TS-E is nothing short of astonishing...
And no one here is debating that. As for your "bitching and moaning" statement, believe it or not there are some of us out there who are let down by the latest offerings...+2K TS-E lenses are not products that will stimulate the vast majority, I'd hardly consider that bitching or moaning rather calling it disappointment.
PetKal wrote:
Robert, Robert......by the time that lens percolates thru Canon Canada to our retailers, and then the sales taxes are levied, you'll be looking at a $4,000 lens.
(BTW, you might be pleased to learn that I am done with buying any new Canon stuff. I am just about to order a used 28-70L mostly curiosity driven, and that's where it ends, by and large. )
Canon won't be able to survive if you stop buying.
What no new 14mm MKII or 24mm MKII for you I guess you are holding out for the 14-24 oops wrong brand.
I'll be looking forward to see some of your duck shots with the 28-70 but could you maybe try and get some DIF shots in front of a brick wall.
My adapter for the G1 to FD comes in tommorow so I'll see how the FD lenses I have left work with it. If it works easily then I'll be getting a G1 to use that good ole leaded glass.
?).
) than mainstream items.
)
