I voted yes. Although I'd prefer to see a 15mm f/2, the 35mm seems a lot more likely.


Quote Originally Posted by clemmb
Why would they when you can get the EF 35mm f/2.0 for $300?

Because the existing (old) 35mm f/2 pales in comparison to what a quality new EF-S 35mm could be. Also, Nikon had a $300 35mm f/2, but they still came out with a $200 35mm f/1.8.