New Lens Patents for Canon !!

[rendition]

14-24 looks good... anyone know whether it is 77mm filter or 82mm?

Relax.... it's still far from reality even. LOL.

 

[pplneedthelord]

Wait for the release PRICE 1st.... might cost more than the 16-35mm MkII :sweat:

i have a feeling it will cost more.

 

[ManWearPants]

Taking the cue from the AF-S version,

1) It will definitely cost more than 16-35 II
2) It will be a popeye. If Nikon and Sigma can't do a flat front lens, I doubt Canon can do it.
3) It remains to be seen if canon can overcome flare and barrel distortion, 2 of their weaknesses.

But it is good to at least see Canon catch up with the rest. I also agree that it is the 100-400 that they should be looking at, not the 70-200.

 

[Garion]

wah wah wah...my pocket is ready for the 14-24 if it is good...or as gd as the nikon

Amen to this. If it measures up to the Nikon then it would be worth considering.

Another thing would be the price tho...Nikon equivalent costs ard a whopping 3k iirc...

 

[iMac08]

Amen to this. If it measures up to the Nikon then it would be worth considering.

Another thing would be the price tho...Nikon equivalent costs ard a whopping 3k iirc...

agree...i think this one cannot hold filter one...like nikon also...(if this is a reality)

 

[Tachyon]

Hmm.... compared to the 16-35mm, the 14-24mm gains 2mm wider, but lost out 11mm at the longer end. For landscapes it is probably ideal, but with a limited range of only 10mm, it will probably not be useful as a street lens.

Still aiming for the 16-35 Mk II, no money to reach further... heh.

 

[dingzyangz]

haha... i hope its 77mm. haha.

Relax.... it's still far from reality even. LOL.

 

[PrimePhotog]

*14-24mm f2.8 L

Wow... TIME TO GO FULL FRAME

 

[auden09]

lol...

 

[PrimePhotog]

i have a feeling it will cost more.

Yep I agree... Probably $200+/- more. But it's worth the money IMHO. The Nikon one costs about $2.5k

 

[doodah]

So, with these lenses and the rumored 24-70 f/2.8 IS, it looks like Canon is all ready to take on center-stage again in the DSLR arena. :bsmilie:

 

[Andrew Hoi]

this is poison! i might sell my 17-40 for this :bsmilie:

No reason to sell the 17-40 or the 16-35 for this lens imo, cos i think with the focal length @ 14 very likely the front lens element is going bulging out excessively. As a result for some landscape photographers who use filters (ND/ND grad) extensively will be a headache since unlikely they can find a filter holder.

 

[eleveninth]

wah 14 - 24L damnnnn sweet

 

[doodah]

No reason to sell the 17-40 or the 16-35 for this lens imo, cos i think with the focal length @ 14 very likely the front lens element is going bulging out excessively. As a result for some landscape photographers who use filters (ND/ND grad) extensively will be a headache since unlikely they can find a filter holder.

Typically, when Canon releases something AFTER Nikon, they put up a better product (e.g., 10-22 vs 12-24, 7D vs D300 etc). I cannot imagine how they can top the 14-24 optically unless they include a special widget to allow mounting of filters... :bsmilie:

 

[Sydney2K]

A 14-24 lens from Canon was on the drawing board soon after Nikon released its 14-24 2.8. The Nikon lens is excellent. It remains to be seen how well Canon can design a 14-24. Wide angles zoom lenses has always been Canon's weak point. When Canon's first launched the 24-105 the intial batches had flare problems. Hopefully Canon does a better on this one.

 

[giantcanopy]

A 14-24 lens from Canon was on the drawing board soon after Nikon released its 14-24 2.8. The Nikon lens is excellent. It remains to be seen how well Canon can design a 14-24. Wide angles zoom lenses has always been Canon's weak point. When Canon's first launched the 24-105 the intial batches had flare problems. Hopefully Canon does a better on this one.

Yup. Lets see how well the "rumored" 14-24mm L will perform when it is released.

 

[Foveon]

Since they're patented the lens design, there must be some breaking through design that can produce very good IQ better than any lens design currently in market. Let's wait and see how it'll challenge the Nikon 14-24.

 

[KHC]

Hol hol,

Where the mkii for the long neck waitiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing 50mm F1.4?
It been ffffffffffffaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrr overddddddddddddue canon.:bsmilie:
It been known C need to catch up N since it 70-200 MKii vr launch.

 

[doodah]

If they can equalize the optical performance of Nikon's legendary 14-24 and still allow mounting of filters, I'll take a serious good look at FF offerings in a few years time. :bsmilie:

I'm confident a good copy (yes, I must say that now in every post I make) will perform well, the same way Canon's 17-55 f/2.8 IS and 10-22 trash Nikon's 17-55 f/2.8 and 10-24 respectively.

 

[limwhow]

Mmm... chances of the 14-24mm being a 77mm is not high. I suspect it will most likely end up an 82mm filter one, though I would love to have it a 77mm.