Canon Unveils New EF 16-35mm f/4L, EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 and White Rebel SL1


Canon released a little bit of something for everybody last night in a press release that debuted, not just the expected 16-35mm and 10-18mm lenses we had already known about, but also the white SL1 that until now was not available in the United States.

Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM

First up is the Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L lens, basically a slightly slower, optically stabilized, cheaper version of the f/2.8L zoom lens Canon offers at the same focal length. The IS gives shooters four stops worth of shake reduction.

Full-frame Canon shooters will be able to pick up this lens in June for $1,200 (or pre-order now), which, in case you’re curious, is $500 cheaper than the non-stabilized 16-35mm f/2.8L USM.


Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM

Next up is the EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6: a lens for APS-C shooters or, more specifically, users of the Canon 70D and T5i (700D) who picked up those cameras in large part for the video capabilities.

At an aperture of f/4.5-5.6, this 16-29mm equivalent lens probably won’t tempt too many still shooters, but it does offer an STM motor for quiet focusing during video. It also comes at a very affordable price point of $300.

It, too, is scheduled to arrive in June and can be pre-ordered by clicking here.


White Canon Rebel ST1 Kit

Finally, the last of the announcements is also the smallest. The white Canon Rebel SL1 Kit that, up until now, was only available overseas, is making its way to the US. It will also land in June at an estimated retail price of $750.


To learn more about any of the products discussed here, head over to the Canon press room. And if you’re ready to pre-order, click on the provided links above.

  • John MacLean Photography

    I got the EF 70-200 2.8 Mark II last fall. I have to say it’s the best of them and I’ve had the previous 3 – IS, non IS, and 80-200 2.8

    I’ve see the Nikkor 14-24 at 14 before distortion correction and it’s quite a different image, ha!

    I’m thinking of selling my 16-35 Mark II, mainly because I want the TS-E 24 Mark II for my architectural work. The 16-35 has worked, but if the new f4 is going to be any sharper, I’d better move this while I can.

  • Kyle Sanders

    I used some of the TS-E’s for product work, and then tried to shoot a house with the 17-40. Immediate regret!

    I think between a 16-35/2.8II that I owned vs an f/4 that I would be buying/trading for – I don’t see the need to upgrade, unless you are doing video.

  • John MacLean Photography

    HD video is a lot less critical res requirements than 22MP stills, so I’ll take all the res I can get from the glass. And hopefully Canon will be coming out with a D800 killer. I’m getting tired of shadow noise, but that’s another topic! Ha!

  • gochugogi

    “cost effective”? Do you mean bang for buck? That 10-18 looks to be a sweet optic for amateurs and is nipping at the heels of Sigma and Tamron.

  • tonyc0101

    lol, well, yeah, that too :)

  • boka

    the 10-18 does not sound like a sweet lens at all. the price may be nice but the speed is slow!

  • Chris Malmberg

    I’m not suggesting a switch to Olympus, but if they can make a tilt screen water-resistant camera, then why can’t Canon?

  • Kelly Padgett

    The 5DMKIII isn’t that great in low light, after trading my MKII in and getting the MKIII I don’t think their were enough improvements to justify the significant cost increase. In video the higher ISO’s still have a lot of noise, even in the stills for that matter and especially in the shadows as the person mentioned above. What Canon and Nikon need to do is release a camera that can beat the Sony line. Call me crazy, but Sony is the one to beat. Isn’t the D800 already using a Sony sensor? Thats why its so smooth in shadows.

  • Kelly Padgett

    I HATED the idea of a flip out screen, made fun of people… then i used one on a commercial shoot (was trying out the A99), then again on one of my own shoots. I have to say, not having to lay down on your stomach, back etc to get a shot, is.. well time saving and a lot more efficient. When your shooting interiors and you need to back the camera all the way into a corner in a small hotel room.. that additional 6-12 inches of space your body takes up can mean the difference between getting the right shot or loosing some of the frame, and being able to stand to the side, flip the screen around and see everything.. its a no brainer.

  • Aiden

    The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 which has been out for years and years now is still a better option.

  • Chris Rogers

    Breakage bruh. For what I’d use it for Camera dropage is a very real thing and one hit on a lens with a plastic mount is carnage. I like using words with “age” in them.

  • Fullstop

    What the hell are you people doing to your cameras?

  • Los Ultimo Guerrero

    Making a living from them and actually getting full use of the things.

    I completely wore out my 600D despite the shutter count being on the lower side for its age which would make me think long and hard before buying a used body form anyone.

  • Spike Reddington

    he 17-35mm f2.8L as mentioned by John MacLean does not have a Lightroom profile.

    Also mine has fallen to bits for the second time now, and Canon can’t fix it as it.s too old and they don.t have the parts any more.

  • John MacLean Photography

    I had the 17-35mm f2.8L back in my film shooting days, prior to 2002.

  • Spike Reddington

    Ha ha, John, I remember film, I have had the 17-35 f2.8L since it was released to replace the 20-35mm f2.8L I had perviously

  • Alex Mita

    fallen to bits? What did you do. Drive over it? blow it up? Throw it off a building?

  • Spike Reddington

    Unfortunately not Alex, I could have understood it had I been so rough with it. The first time I was shooting a group of accountants and the guys in the middle looked blurry whilst the guys on the edge were sharp. On investigation why, the internal elements of the lens were rattling around!

    The second time happened gradually over a period of time, when the barrel of the lens got sloppier and sloppier and it would droop like a tilt and shift lens.

    Also another constant problem has been that the zoom ring sticks at the 17mm end and it needs extra force to get it to zoom towards the 35mm end.

    Canon tech have patched it together as best as they can and it gets me sharp photos, although I realise that I need to get a replacement before long.