Just the other day, Canon announced the 16-35mm f/4L IS lens. The general announcement was left with confusion, anger, annoyance and felt an awful lot like when Canon announced the unnecessary 24-70mm f/4 IS back in 2012. Between these announcements and others much like it, as well as general quietness on announcing an updated 50mm lens, we have to ask...What’s the problem, Canon?
Before I get too far into this post, I’d like to mention that I’m the Canon fanboy of the Fstopper’s Staff. Not only do I only own exclusively Canon L series glass, accusations have came out of the comments in the past about me being sponsored by Canon. I’m not, but perhaps my post history of me flirting with Canon suggests differently. Well, I’m here to let you know - I’m pissed.
Canon has had Nikon and the rest of its competitors on the ropes for years now. With almost 50% of the DSLR market share, and Nikon sitting in second with only about 30%, Canon seemed to be delivering exactly what its customers wanted. The Canon 5d Mark II was groundbreaking, and the Mark III announced a few years later was a nice little upgrade to the already exceptional camera system. So they've been on point with their camera bodies, but what about their lenses?
The last few years, Canon (in my opinion) has completely missed the mark with its consumers regarding the lens announcements they have made over the years. So lets look at their most notable announcements over the last couple years.
The Rise of The Mark IIs
Over the last 3 years or so, Canon has created some advancements to their already popular lenses with Version 2’s of them. Most notably, the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II have made extremely noticeable upgrades to their previous versions, however these upgrades didn't come without a step back. Both of these lenses, while a vast improvement to their predecessors, have came with a price hike.
| Lens In Question |  Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM |
 Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM |
 Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM |
 Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduced Price | $1,699 | $2,499 | $1,280 | $2,299 |
| Introduced | August 1, 2001 | January 5, 2010 | September 29, 2002 | February 7, 2012 |
| Weight | 1570 g (3.46 lb) | 1490 g (3.28 lb) | 950 g (2.09 lb) | 805 g (1.77 lb |
| Fstop Range | f/2.8-f/32 | f/2.8-f/32 | f/2.8-f/22 | f/2.8-f/22 |
The Rise of The IS
On the same page, Canon has also disappointed us all with the rise of IS in lenses that we simply do not need. First, Canon announced the painfully slow 24-70mm f/4L IS in 2012. While 24-70mm is considered one of the must have lenses for people looking for a general all-rounder for their camera bag, f/4 is simply not acceptable for a lens priced at $1,499. People questioned the purpose of this lens, since the 24-70mm f/2.8L II was announced earlier in the same year.
| Lens In Question |  Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM |
 Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM |
 Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM |
 Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduced Price | $1,520 | $1,699 | $839 | $1,199 |
| Introduced | September 26, 2001 | February 22, 2007 | February 27, 2003 | May 13, 2014 |
| Weight | 600 g (1.32 lb) | 635 g (1.40 lb) | 500 g (1.10 lb) | 615 g (1.36 lb) |
| Fstop Range | f/2.8-f/22 | f/2.8-f/22 | f/4-f/22 | f/4-f/22 |
They then followed up with the newly announced Canon 16-35mm f/4 IS. If that focal range sounds familiar, it’s because it is. Canon made a 16-35mm f/2.8L back in 2001 and also released a Mark II of the same focal range in 2007. Prior to that, they had a 17-35mm f/2.8L that dates all the way back to 1995.
The Fall of The Fast Glass
85L II Shot Wide OpenCanon won its market share but presenting speeds and lenses unseen by the competition still to this very day. When I started photography, I bought into Canon; not because they had a better body or a better system, but because they had a 50mm and an 85mm that could be stopped down to f/1.2. Still to this day, the competition have not reached those speeds in the DSLR market, which is why the 85mm f/1.2 is still one of the most sought after lenses on the market. Released within 8 months in 07/08, the Canon 50mm f/1.2L and Canon 85mm f/1.2L II (First model was released way back in 1989) changed the way we were able to shoot, giving us insanely shallow depth of field, with sharpness on our subject when done correctly. Since those times, they haven't made any innovations to push the bounds of our current limitations on an aperture front, all while Sigma was able to produce an f/1.8 zoom lens, previously unseen prior to now.
What Do We Really Want?
All of this talk is simply complaining if we don’t express what we really expect to see with Canon. However, there has been some chatter for years on what we really want, chatter that Canon has largely ignored.
Updated 50mm
Canon has a long history of making exceptional 50mm lenses. Not only do they still maintain the fastest 50mm available for DSLRs with their f/1.2 model, but they have once made one even faster with the holy grail known as the 50mm f/1.0L. With that said, everyone seems to be excelling in 50mm lenses as of late….everyone but Canon. Nikon released their premium 58mm f/1.4 within the last year, and Zeiss promises unparalleled sharpness with their 55mm f/1.4 Otus. Then there is Sigma, who is quickly stealing the market share with their newly announced 50mm f/1.4 Art lens setup. So while all of the competitors have announced a 50mm within the last year, Canon has remained silent, and expects its faulty auto focus system in the 50mm f/1.4 to suffice with its users.
Updated 135mm
135L Wide OpenWhile 135mm may fall under the ruse of a specialty focal range for some of us, many more of us swear that it is the absolute best focal range for portrait work, assuming you have enough room for it. Canon makes an exceptional 135mm f/2L, and with it’s price point sitting around $1,000, it makes an easy purchase for those looking to have incredible depth of field while maintaining sharpness. However, this lusted at, and well respected lens now sits at 18 years old. That is right, the 135L is now able to fight in a war, and help vote for our elected officials. Surely in the 18 years of production, there has been some advancements to auto focus speed, or sharpness within the glass - so why haven't we seen an update?
14-24mm f/2.8L
Back in 2007, Nikon announced a lens that had a lot of landscape photographers and some of us crazy portrait photographers drooling, it was the 14-24mm f/2.8G. While this lens has a short focal range, it was in a focal range that many of us haven’t really seen before. At this point in time, Canon shooters can only do 16mm on full frame cameras (unless ofcourse you’re willing to spend $2,300 for the 14mm f/2.8L from Canon). Since the announcement of this lens, I have heard rumors buzzing and patients filed by Canon for a competing lens in the same focal range. Seven years later, we've all but given up hope.
Conclusion
Perhaps Canon has different motives than what I (and seemingly the community) wants. Some people say that with their focus in video, Image Stabilization feels much more important than razor thin depth of field (Though I'd argue that a 16-35mm is easily hand-holdable and needs no IS features for video or photo). Or perhaps it'll take more of an effort from the innovators like Sigma to take the market share on lenses until Canon will finally start listening again. Regardless of the case, Canon hasn't been delivering, and it's client base is starting to look elsewhere. Feel free to vent your frustrations, or tell us what you'd like to see from Canon in the comments below - maybe, with enough fuss, they'll finally listen.
Can't believe I'm going to jump into the middle of this. Must be the tail end madness from last night's full moon! First of all, great article Zach. Well written and great points. I'm writing this as I wait for Canon to complete service on my 5D-Mark III, a 35mm f/1.4 and a 50mm f/1.2.
The Canon glass is great, when it works. It's magical and worth every penny. But my frustration with the system is enough that I'm about ready to throw in the towel.
Just a quick backnote, I've a proven and experienced veteran professional photographer with 20+ years of experience. I've used 4x5, medium format and DSLR and earn my living every single day with Canon gear and glass. My biggest complaint is three fold. Auto focus is and will continue to be the bane of the Canon system. Auto white balance sucks on most days and auto exposure is a joke. And yes, I know my gear inside and out, so for the most part it's not user error. I'll admit to being a dork on occasion, but that's simply being human!
I shoot manual as much as I can. I use custom white balance settings and struggle with the Canon auto focus. My gear was sent it to have them evaluate, repair or calibrate the lenses. The 50mm will hit critical focus 2 out of 10 shots. My 70-200 hits nearly every single time and it's tack sharp. The 50mm is one of the most disappointing purchases I've made in a long time.
The most frustrating aspect of the Canon Pro DSLR bodies and lenses is that I can pick up nearly any point and shoot, including my Fuji X100s or even my friggin' iPhone and get better results with regard to focus, white balance and exposure that my Canon system. And I'm tired of all the arguments and back and forth. It just sucks. A lot of my colleagues have jumped to Nikon and never looked back. And every single one of them have left the auto focus issues in the dust. Nikon is clearly (pun intended) a far better system for auto focus.
And I'm a Gold CPS member! With a 20% discount I'm still paying close to $700 for Canon to evaluate and fix the critical focus issues with my body and lenses. Something that should have been correct before it left the factory. My fault for being so busy I couldn't send it in until after the warranty period expired.
I have a Canon 5d mark iii and several first AND third party lenses and it autofocuses fine for NCAA sports. You might just have an issue with your copy. Autofocus has been MORE than fine. Your 50mm is the dud. Just do your research next time and buy the newer lenses with better autofocus. Don't expect Canon to renew every lens when you want them to. R&D and production releases take time, and don't forget, ALL camera companies slow down releases in response to faltering economies. Better they survive than to release everything you want and go out of business the next year...
What difference does it make? The tools needed are used to do the job. Whatever the job may be. I still don't understand your reasoning why the lenses you have at hand are holding you back, your own work doesn't appear to be restricted by them in any way.
Cause you're seeing the final result. When shooting, I get a lot of misfocuses, and I get weird flares. That makes the photos unusable, and make my job harder because Canon isn't making what the general consumer needs for his work. Sure, I get by and find my success with each of my lenses, but the fact that other companies are making better tools, it's hard to stand by Canon's side.
Then switch to Nikon. No one is stopping you.
No one is stopping me from sharing my frustrations with Canon either. Certainly Nikon shooters have similar frustrations
Zach, I think the issue here is that the only lens that you could really update that would make sense is the Canon 50 1.4, or the 35 1.4L . Are you going to pay 4K for Canon's version of the OTUS and are most working people going to value the difference in what a lens like that is? I get what you're saying but a 135mm f2L IS would be an awesome lens, but how many people are out there using the 135mm f2 as it is (more people should love this lens!)
I've never understood this "switching" mentality. If for some bizarre reason a Canon lens and/or body did something that Nikon gear couldn't (which, professionally speaking, doesn't really happen either way), I would simply go out and rent the gear and shoot with it. If I felt I would need it on a regular basis I would buy it. There's nothing stopping anyone from using two (or more) different make gear simultaneously. Whatever you need to get the job done is what you use.
"When shooting, I get a lot of misfocuses, and I get weird flares."
You think I don't? Do you put your bad shots up? I mean, c'mon. I can't agree that Canon (or Nikon) isn't making "what the general consumer needs for his work". No one lens is going to "hit it" in every photographic situation. It comes back to the photographer making whatever gear work in whatever situation. That's what being a pro is about.
The fact that other companies are making better tools is awesome. You have options. Who cares if it's not a Canon lens on your camera? That's silly thinking. Whatever tools that get the job done are the tools you use.
I think you should do a reassessment of your tools, both that you own and rent, and what they are and are not in a broader sense. I think you may just be getting caught up in specific niggles that are obviosly upsetting you. That's understandable in day-to-day production. But sometimes you just have to step back and start looking around and thinking of new and different ways to achieve the same goals. You may very well start developing new and exciting ways to get your work done with the very same tools.
You speak as if Canon lenses have a rampant focus and flair problem. How about manual focusing, shooting slower, lens hood and not into the sun? Some things a professional would think to do.
The truth of the matter is you do those things but you want better, I understand that. But to Spy Black's point it's going overboard with people not just you, complaining constantly that company A isn't doing this or that. Meanwhile the tools you have currently at your disposal are literally still the best available at any time period.
Aside from the discussion.
"finding my website is as simple as searching my name" Did you know that your website comes up on second page of google search with your full name?
He was the first hit on the first page for me.
I got facebook page as first hit. Main website in the middle of a second page.
First on Google when I search using incognito mode.
I do not agree with the article. I mean....Canon does what they believe is right. Sigma is showing where it can be done better. I do not see where I am being held back by Canon. There are so many choices out there today...different Brands, so many bodies, lenses, systems. Anything is possible. I might not be as accomplished as you are....actually not know at all to anybody but my family and friends, but....I just do not agree with the article. Some of my work: www.dylikowski.com
I do not agree with the article. I mean....Canon does what they believe is right. Sigma is showing where it can be done better. I do not see where I am being held back by Canon. There are so many choices out there today...different Brands, so many bodies, lenses, systems. Anything is possible. I might not be as accomplished as you are....actually not know at all to anybody but my family and friends, but....I just do not agree with the article. Some of my work: www.dylikowski.com.....
As a Nikon shooter, I keep wishing someone would write an article about Nikon's failures over the past 2 or 3 years. There are a lot of them. A lot. Nobody has failed as bad as Nikon in the past couple of years.
Kyle,
I know what you mean. I shared my views here. http://chrisnewmanphotography.blogspot.com/2014/02/my-take-on-new-nikon-...
Just read any of Thom Hogan's posts and you can read plenty about Nikon's failures.
I got rid of my 24-70mm f2.8 a few years ago, thinking i might get he mk 2 version. Instead I bought the fixed 28mm with the IS. This is now one of my favourite lenses. I love the prime and I love the lighter-weight. My main lens on the 5D is the 70-200mm IS mk 2 and think this is one of the best combo's out. I also bought the Nikon D800 and so i can use the 14-24mm f2.8. This combo is also astounding. So when I shot I have one hanging off one shoulder and the other combo off the other shoulder. Systems have their merits. I like the layout and 36Meg of the Nikon and I like the better/faster/quicker/more sensitive autofocus of the Canon. I've also got primes (like in my youth 30 years ago) and love them.
You mean Canon doesn't push out new products quickly enough for us to keep wanting more and more and more. Yes, what a shame a new lens and new camera body isn't available every six months. There's always an extra $10000 in the pocket for something ...
Mark II's prices actually are the same as their predecessors. The only differences is the crappier world economy.
Personally, I would love to see an L series 17-55 2.8 IS for full frame bodies. They have a non-L version for cropped sensor bodies (so not very wide after all) which is a nice lens (though, as stated, not L quality). I'm guessing and hoping that Sigma will update their current offering, at some point, to fit their new quality standards and, if so, I will pounce on that lens.
I switched to sony a99s and don't see myself going back any time soon. Body & Glass are cheaper... and just as good IQ. 3 words: In Body Stabilization. Also 1080p 60p.
Also, I bought the Sigma 35mm 1.4 ART for my a99s. Killing it.
An excellent post on Canon from a Canon user. I agree that the wait for new products has been way too long, but to the credit of Canon, their products that have been paving the way have done great for artists/creatives. Consider the 35L: Yes, Sigma now has a lens worthy of an optical dogfight, but to Canon's triumph, they have crafted a masterfully made tool that Sigma took decades to just compete against. And, aside for adding image stabilization, how much better can the 135mm portrait lens get? It cannot get better than best, right? Like the film days, when the EOS 3 held up against the flagship DSLR, EOS 1V, the improvements were so incremental, but effective. Perhaps the good news- that digital and optical technology has matured a great deal to the point of not seeing more rapid innovations- is the real news we are rejecting.
Sigma ART lenses are a good reason to why Canon's lenses are sucking right now... I'm a canon user, Canon needs to give us a 24-70 F2 IS model
if you look at inflation, the 70-200 Mark 2 had a $500 price increase. You need to take inflation into account.
So I think Canon has gotten it wrong also. They should be releasing the 24-70mm with IS! If they really wanted to do something earth shattering make it f/1.8 as well and put a competitive price tag on it. Or will Sigma beat them to the punch?
100 million lenses sold.... 10 million in the last year.. what do you know kiddo?
Look at the numbers of all manufacturers. They're rising.
It may be a surprise to you, but photography has become quite popular over the last few years....so numbers are up for everyone.
I'd like a new 16-35
2.8....but make it sharp, sharp, sharp please! I don't need IS...I don't need
it to be cheaper, i just need it to be comparable to other L lenses like the
24-70 or 70-200 (ok, that’s a bit of a miracle, but whatever)...oh and a high
megapixel pro DSLR please...oh and a medium format option...oh and a ...
What if suddenly Sigma releases an awesome body with their foveon sensor that trumps everything on the market?! @_@ Boom!!! Then a GH5 gets announced simultaneously?! Sony will of course launch their a9s-uperDuperUltraOutrageousOver9000 body!!!
Can we please start a petition now? Let millions of consumers sign up and join in.
Or we can all just wait for that Pentax K25.
I remember reading an article on f-stoppers some months back about the state of the industry concerning the big companies and small companies. It talked about Canon and Nikon having a "don't do anything to hurt the cash cow" mentality that kept them from innovating, and how on the opposite side of the coin we were starting to see sigma and these other little guys investing in innovation and how it's working out for them.
My grandfather who was a pro photographer was a canon man, and I am too. But it does look like a decline in their influence due to lack of innovation. Perhaps they've reached a ceiling, and whether they figure out how to move forward, the consumer is going to eventually shift to whoever innovates the best. I will keep using my grandfathers TL-QL and AV-1 but my digital outfit will ultimately go with what fits my business the best.
You're a very brave man Zach. I hope you don't take the trolling too personally (I know I would). Thanks for laying down a lot of concerns I share. I shy away from canikon gear now because there are much cheaper alternatives that have the same IQ. If everyone brought this up more frequently, fanboys might learn to blink every once in awhile.
Thank you. I have a good relationship with Canon, and when I posted this, a colleague was quick to say "There goes your hopes for a sponsorship. But I hope they take this as constructive criticism, and hopefully my media power might grab their attention more so than all the complaining we've been doing on the forums over the years. Ultimately, I've built a rapport with Canon and want to see them succeed. They just seem to be so short sided lately.
I think both of the "big two" are getting a bit complacent in their positions. As a Nikon shooter, I keep seeing incremental improvements with stuff like the D3300/D5300. Meanwhile, Sony just announced the A77 mkII, which shoots 12 fps at 24 mp with 79 AF points at the same price point as the D7100, which only shoots 6 fps at 24 mp and has a horrible buffer. But I'm sure Nikon will have the D7200 ready soon, which MIGHT shoot 6 fps but with a slightly better buffer.
With all given respect but i think Zach, you have to take a coffee break before you upload a text. Im (specialised in weddings owning 9 L Lenses on 1DX and 5DIII/Own a H4D with 4k lenses) satisfied by canons lenses, that there need to be no update. In my mind there is no really breathtaking update canon can deliver for our daily used lenses. An deer Zach, what about the 08-15mm and the 200-400 with 1,4 Extender, you missed them in your list? These 2 lenses are REAL inventions of the last year.
Last year? The 8-15mm FE came out nearly 4 years ago...Perhaps you need the coffee break.
I'm also not a deer....I'm not sure who keeps starting that rumor ;-)
I think you hit on part of a larger issue: the lack of innovation from both Canon and Nikon in recent years. I have been astounded by the speed of innovation at Sony: first point and shoot with a 1-inch sensor (now in its third iteration), first compact full frame, first lens that is actually a camera, first compact MILC full frame (now in 3 variations). That's a lot of "firsts" in the last few years.
What do I hear from Canon and Nikon? More of the....yawn...same. Ooh.. the T5i which is identical to the T4. Ooh..now you can get the Sl1 in white. White! Wow! What an innovation!
I honestly don't know if Canon has grown comfortable with it's market share and is content to just play it safe with occasional updates while charging exorbitant prices for evolutionary versus revolutionary products. But as the the many fans of Fuji and now Sigma are showing; that comfort may soon erode along with Canon's profit margins.
As a Canon user, I need better dynamic range and cleaner shadow. Even for a big strobe user like me, the CR2s still are not clean enough on iso100. Also for those who is gonna question my ability to make right exposures, check my site:jonasyuan.com.
"In fact, much of the glass from 30-40yrs ago is equal to or exceeds the current crop that're continuously updated."
I keep seeing statements like this, and they're usually wrong. The new 58mm came out and everyone said it wasn't as good as the Noct. Then side by side comparisons came out and proved it exceeds the Noct's image quality.
Newer lenses handle flare better, have sharper corners, are quieter, and handle CA better. Why do people keep holding on to this belief that newer lenses don't stack up? Is it the plastic?
You seem to be unaware that Nikon has been producing 50mm, 55mm, and 58mm f/1.2 lenses since the '60s. Canon does have them beat on the 85mm.
There's also the NIKKOR-N 5cm f/1.1 that came out in 1956, but that is for rangefinders rather than SLRs.
It's really about video. Everyone thinks IS lenses are must haves, especially for people who are just starting out. People who don't have money and knowledge. That market right there is huge, and it is ever growing. Canon tapped in to that. It's just business.
Another thing. For the past few years canon announced products so advanced that they are simply, legendary. Because the market is hyped by those recently released products, if they released updates for the wonderful lenses, the updates won't be appreciated as much as canon wants it too. Canon's just really playing around. All we can do is play its game.
Can't wait for canon to release medium format, if canon really bought Phase One.
I've probably gone through three 24-70 f/2.8L in my career, and I can comfortably say that all three of them were a POS. Thankfully I never had to pay for them, as they were supplied to me via my place of work at the time. However, when I became full-time freelancer a year ago the 24-70 range was missing out of my kit, and there was no way I wanted to purchase the version 1 24-70, and the version 2 I couldn't even justify because it was crazy dollars. When you're carrying multiple 1-series bodies day in and out with all the 2.8 or faster glass, it's no easy feat and the f/4L range of lenses actually bring a bit of relief when it comes to the weight game. If it wasn't for the 24-70 f/4L, I still wouldn't have a lens that covered that range as a 24-105 is a POS regardless of who manufactured it.
I agree that Canon need to lift their game, considering my last 3 lens purchases were the Sigma 18-35, 35mm and 50mm ART series. I personally would love to see an updated 45mm TS-E, but I doubt there is a huge market for that.
Meh, Honestly im over the gear posts. Canon by far continues to make the most lens options for my needs. its like complaining that BMW doesn't offer the model you want in an M series. Im sure when they find the need to make a new lens they will. And of course the price will go up, that's basic inflation and marketing. no offense to you personally Zach but these posts are why I visit this site less and less.
All we want from canon is a functioning AF system.. still waiting.
I like Canon glass, but where Canon doesn't provide, buy third party. I am waiting for my Tamron 600mm to be off backorder, but for instance, if you want 50mm, why not buy one of the new 50mm art lenses by Sigma instead of Canon? Or what is wrong with the current 50mm 1.4 Canon lens for that matter? I just don't get this rant at all...it is like you are equating improvement in your photography with buying new gear. What is it that you want to do that you can't do now?
I started photography only a few years ago, I tried doing payed gigs but I didn't enjoy it so I'm just a hobbyist and a bit of a scientist/artist with it. I have bought 2 canon bodies (t3i when I first started and then a 5Dmkii over a year ago) and luckily I only got two canon lenses (50mm 1.8 and the s***** 18-55mm kit lens). Every other lens I've used, I've rented or borrowed from a friend. I'm about to receive a very large increase in salary, and am seriously considering getting rid of my canon gear because it seems that they refuse to innovate. I wish they would change my mind.