Updating L Lenses??

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Canon EOS FAQ forum : One Thread

Do any one of you know if the 200, 2,8 L II and the 70-200, 4 L will be updated with the IS in a near future ? Do you have any notice about? By the other hand I'm planning to buy the 20, 2.8 USM, but i'm a little worried because i've seen that this lens was marketed in 1992, this means ten years, so it could be a problem if a new version is marketed after buy the lens. Any one of you can give me some information about ?? Thanks a lot.

Joan

-- Joan Canals taron (joanicriscasa@eresmas.com), March 26, 2002

Answers

I don't know if they are about to upgrade, but they probably will, like they did to the 300/4 L, now only awalible in the IS verson. (Shame on them)

The 20 /2,8 is a great lens, i've bought one used about 2 years ago, and it was worth it, i never regreted it, and i probably wont update it if there comes a new one, this one is realy good, if you ask me :) But if you are worried, why now buy a used one? The prise hasn't changed at all since i bought mine...

John

-- John Pavval (herkemel@hotmail.com), March 26, 2002.


Hello Joan, The 200f2.8II is fairly new so I don't think it will be updated anytime soon, the same may also be true of the 70-200f4, This lens however is an outstanding performer on its own, even without IS. the 20mmf2.8 has been in production for a while but look at how long the 24mmf2.8 has been around ,15years! these lenses are both top performers so don't worry about taking the plunge, the water is fine. best of luck.

-- joe cap (joemocap@yahoo.com), March 26, 2002.

I have always heard that two of the strongest selling points of the 70-200f4L, in comparison to the 70-200f2.8, were the smaller size and weight, and the lower price. If Canon were to make the f4 model an IS lens, it would increase in both weight and cost, losing most of its previous charm. If they are going to release an IS version, they would be wise to keep the non-IS version available, as they did with the 2.8.

-- Roger Shrader (rashrader@hotmail.com), March 26, 2002.

I doubt either will ever be updated.

Canon introduced IS in the 75-300 and then added the 28-135. Neither were not considered "professional" lenses but the IS feature had lots of professional appeal. Since then the IS feature has appeared in the 100-400L and then the "big glass" L-series lenses. Newer lenses for the professional also have the IS feature: 16-35 and 400 DO as well as the 70-200/2.8. All the most recent IS updates were in the professional range. The "consumer" zooms pretty much cover the most popular amateur range of 28mm through 300mm.

Although the 200/2.8 and 70-200/4 are great lenses, the 70-200/2.8 is more popular with the professionals such as sports, nature and journalistic photographers. These are the photographers who would benefit the most from IS. Unless Canon makes a commitment to IS for the entire lens line, I don't foresee a duplication of the feature in essentially the same focal length range.

-- Lee (Leemarthakiri@sport.rr.com), March 26, 2002.


http://www.deltainternational.com/ has an EF200 2.8 IS USM listed as coming soon, email for availability. However, I bet it's a troll intended to increase site traffic (they've done it before). That said, the EF200 2.8L USM is a super fine optic, and one of my fav lenses for many years (a bargain too). I'd be surprised if Canon really adds IS.

Canon has many lenses in production that are as old or older than the EF20 2.8 USM: EF 24 2.8, EF28 2.8, EF 35 2.0, EF50 1.8 II, EF50 1.0L USM, EF200 1.8L USM, EF100-300 USM, etc. Often, updates are purely cosmetic or minor mechanical changes anyway. Maybe they'll change the color of the USM logo and stripe.

-- Puppy Face (doggieface@aol.com), March 26, 2002.



I think IS versions may eventually come out, but I don't think they would come out as replacements for the non-IS lenses. They would most likely be additions to the lens selection rather than replacing existing lenses. I assume that is the cause of your worry when you speak of 'updates'.

It would be natural for Canon to offer IS versions as additions to the lens collection rather than replacements for the non-IS lenses, much like they did with the 70-200/2.8 (IS and non-IS) and 300/3L (IS and non-IS). I think it would be very beneficial to have the addition of a 70-200/4L IS, while still keeping the 70-200/4L non- IS. Choice is always good. Yes, the 4L IS would cost a little more and weigh a little more, but it would still cost less and weigh less than the 2.8L IS.

You don't really find IS and non-IS choices in the Canon super-tele lenses because at that level the extra cost and weight of IS is probably pretty negligable for someone prepared to spend that kind of money. Plus, the market may not be able to support both IS and non-IS lenses in those focal lengths since most people would choose to go with the IS version because it is especially beneficial at large high focal lengths. For more moderately priced, higher volume lenses such as the 70-200/4L, the market would easily be able to support both versions.

-- Peter Phan (pphan01@hotmail.com), March 26, 2002.


It was suggested earlier in this thread that the 16-35 F2.8L has IS, which it does not.

IS versions typically replace non-IS versions, as has happened with the 300 F2.8, 400 F2.8, 500 F4, 600 F4, 300 F4. I am sure that the 70-200 F2.8L will be discontinued (if it has not already, and they are just selling on stock), in favour of the IS version.

As for the 20mm F2.8 USM, that is a lens I am interested in, and I doubt it would be replaced with an IS version. Canon have signalled that they don't believe IS is important for wide-angles by releasing the 16-35 F2.8L without it, and there's little they could do to improve the 20mm F2.8. It already has ring USM, and the optics are said to be very good.

The 200 F2.8L mk II might be updated with IS, since the optical design is getting on a fair bit (same as the 200 F2.8L mk I), which debuted in 1991. Canon would like to get a reasonable mileage out of each lens design (since it is costly to design a lens, you want to shift a reasonable number of them). Since the 70-200 F4L is much more recent, it is less likely to be replaced so fast, although a 70- 200 F4L IS would indeed take the market by storm. Another factor against that lens' release would be that it would really start to eat into the market of the more profitable F2.8 lens.

Don't hold your breath though. I would buy the 20mm in confidence, and then the 70-200 F4L, and recall that people take perfectly good photos without IS, and it's not so important at 200mm or less. Certainly I wouldn't look at buying a 300mm+ canon without IS now.

-- Isaac Sibson (isibson@hotmail.com), March 27, 2002.


Canon has not discontinued the 70-200/2.8L non-IS, nor have they given indication that they intend to. The 70-200/2.8L and 70- 200/2.8L IS are coexisting quite fine in the marketplace because they fit two different price-points. Keep in mind that the Canon 75- 300 and 75-300 IS have both coexisted for quite a long time with no indication whatsoever that Canon intends on discontinuing the non-IS 75-300. Why? Because for these lenses and at these price levels, price-point segmentation is extremely important. When you get into lenses costing much more, price-point segmentation due to IS/non-IS becomes pointless because the difference is fairly insignificant when factored factored against the overall cost of the lens. But at the lower price points, IS versus non-IS has a significant impact on the lens price. Therefore, it would be foolish for Canon to eliminate the non-IS versions. And Canon is not a foolish company.

-- Peter Phan (pphan01@YAHOO.COM), March 27, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ