Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

New EF 16-35MM F4 IS, Canon's latest joke?

R

Raphael Madeira

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
245
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Paris
Good day from France fellow Redusers!

I was just surfing the web as per usual today when I came across the fact that canon just announced 2 new wide angle lenses.

Follow the link for the original article from the great guys at "News Shooter":
http://www.newsshooter.com/2014/05/...-ef-16-35mm-f4l-is-and-ef-s-10-18mm-f4-5-5-6/

Usually I wouldn't bother to create a thread just to complain about gear, but am I the only one who thinks the new EF 16-35 is ridiculous?

Priced at 1200$, we get a slow zoom lens at F4 and the exact same zoom length as their 16-35 F2.8 and, wait for it, Image stabilization! As if these wide angle lenses are the ones that need IS the most.

Who in their right mind will buy this when we got amazing and revolutionary new lenses out there like the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 Art?

Even though we don't know the optical quality of this new lens, I hardly believe it will be any better than the current Ef 16-35 F2.8, which is already surpassed by the before mentioned Sigma Art zoom lens.

I'm not a Canon hater or anything but am I really the only one that thinks that if Canon doesn't start showing actual improvement in their products, in both quality and price, they're just gonna be left behind by the professional users sooner rather than later?

I specify professional users because let's face it, Canon will always make loads of money on Consumer and Prosumer products.

Sorry for the rant guys, just sad that Canon, responsible for amazing products in the past, doesn't really seem to be learning from their mistakes.

Let's see if any agree or disagree.
 
Raphael Madeira said:
Who in their right mind will buy this when we got amazing and revolutionary new lenses out there like the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 Art?

Even though we don't know the optical quality of this new lens, I hardly believe it will be any better than the current Ef 16-35 F2.8, which is already surpassed by the before mentioned Sigma Art zoom lens.
Click to expand...

The Sigma while amazing is not a FF lens.
 
Ivan McCullough said:
The Sigma while amazing is not a FF lens.
Click to expand...

Fine then, allow me to correct myself and let us adress those who shoot on S35 or APS-C and similar, who happens to be the majority of camera users, and ask them what they think about the lens.
 
Raphael Madeira said:
As if these wide angle lenses are the ones that need IS the most...
Click to expand...

Somehow people think wide angle lenses do not need IS. For us folks shooting aerials - we have been searching for wide IS lens for years. My current favourite to use is the non-L series is EFs 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM, so I for one am looking to both of these new lenses...

:sifone: Peter
 
Raphael Madeira said:
Fine then, allow me to correct myself and let us adress those who shoot on S35 or APS-C and similar, who happens to be the majority of camera users, and ask them what they think about the lens.
Click to expand...

This lens, at that price, as an L series lens, is made for pro's or semi-pro's. They shoot FF generally.
 
For this focal length and FF the IS is something new and thats what makes this lens interesting, especially for motion work and hey, what about future sensor upgrades. Don't you think we will get something bigger after Dragon? ;)

So, while this announcing reminds me of the boring, nearly senseless, 24-70/4.0IS i think this lens could fill a little niece. I'm not over-excited about it, but i'm looking forward to some reviews. It's nice to have options. For RED-shooters it has to compete against the SiGMA, the Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8IS and of course the 16-35/2.8II. Thats a difficult task, but it is FF and has a newer IS...

It would have been great if they kept the 2.8 aperture and made it a real replacement of their 16-35/2.8 II and hey, what about that rumored 12-24?

Hmmm, SiGMA should revisit their 12-24 and make a ART-version. ;)

And hey, for usage on my Scarlet, i'm really looking forward to see some tests of that cheapish super-wide-angle EF-S 10-18. For sub 300USD it's worth a look i think.
 
As Maik pointed out, and what I still don't get is: why the f4?
The 16-35 f2.8 II is FF as well. So where's the problem in creating an IS version of that lens? It seems totally silly.

EDIT: It's the exact same shit as with the 24-70.
 
But an IS lens doesn't have much use for a landscape photographer.
 
Patrick Grossien said:
But an IS lens doesn't have much use for a landscape photographer.
Click to expand...

As Peter has mentioned there are huge advantages to having IS on a wide lens.

If you are shooting landscapes and want to go sans tripod for example or if you want to shoot from a helicopter.

This will be an awesome lens for drone work too.
 
When I saw the two new "wide" ones, I thought only, just preorder the STM for my partner (she loves low weight gear) and the 16-35 4.0 (if we can trust at all the MTF) is a great promise for a 16-35 2.8 III ;o)

IS, well, if you sell the gear later, it is a plus -- but if it makes sense in the first place, that is perhaps worth a discussion.

Sorry, I don't think it is anything to get upset about. The Sigma Art line is certainly worth exploring, I will wait until the Art series has some more variations, e.g., 85mm.
 
Well, I guess it's just me that doesn't apreciate Canon's current path I suppose.
 
This is really an answer to Nikon's 16-35mm F4 VR starting out at a lower price point. My guess is, the next 16-35mm III will become a 14-24mm to take on the Nikon version as well. Nikon and Canon are always looking at what the opposition is doing and trying to capture the same market. In this case, DSLR wedding shooters be it stills or video.
 
That 10-18 looks interesting for only 299.......despite the fact that its variable aperture.
 
The 24-70 f4 is a great lens. Not boring at all. Has macro. Is sharp, light and full frame. The existing 16-35 2.8 is the worst of the l zooms and heavy. If the 16-35 matches the quality of the 35/70 I for one will be very happy.
 
Raphael Madeira said:
No one ever said anything about my own purposes.
Click to expand...

Ok I am confused, if you have no interest in the products that Canon make why start a thread bashing their gear?

Is this like supporting a football team (red or Sigma) and slagging off a Rival team (Canon) because they buy a player that you think is overrated?

I just don't get why you are so passionately involving yourself in something you seem to be saying is of no personal interest for you.
 
Ivan McCullough said:
As Peter has mentioned there are huge advantages to having IS on a wide lens.

If you are shooting landscapes and want to go sans tripod for example or if you want to shoot from a helicopter.

This will be an awesome lens for drone work too.
Click to expand...

Of course IS is useful with wide angle lenses. Not what I was saying.
I only mentioned that most professional landscape photographers are using tripods anyway so it don't see this particular lens being made for that special type of shooters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top