We are told that Canon will introduce a new macro lens in the first half of 2025. and it will have/be a “macro design first”. We weren't given any details on what the “first” will be. It will be an autofocus lens, so no MP-E 65mm update. That's not really a lens you'd use autofocus for anyway, but maybe I'm wrong.
Is there a way to make a zoom 1:1 macro? (Yes you can. Thanks AJ) Could they add tilt or shift features? I would think it would be longer than 100mm as to not overlap with the current lens. Would there be a need for a “Z” feature? I'm not a macro shooter, so I really don't know what macro shooters would want.
We have seen plenty of patents as to what Canon is going to be doing with the upcoming autofocus tilt-shift lenses with automated in-camera control, which will be an industry first. Maybe there's something they could do there for macro shooting?
The lens will also cost “significantly more” than the current RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro we were also told.
As for the new macro lens on the horizon, sound off on the forum with your opinions of what would be a desired “macro design first”.
A partial historical rambling about the Canon macro lenses
Canon released the RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro back in April 2021, and it was well received and did everything that macro shooters wanted, as well as its secondary use as a super sharp portrait lens.
The EF lineup as you all know had a lot of really cool macro lenses. In 2009, Canon introduced their first image stabalized macro lens with the EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM.
The 180mm f/3.5L USM Macro has what I would call a cult following, as most people rolled with the 100mm macro, but “if you knew, you knew”. It was among our least rented lenses when I was in that business.
There was also the EF 50mm f/2.5 compact macro, while not all that popular with everyday shooters, it was a terrific lens for art reproduction. It's what we used when I worked with that sort of thing.
The EF-S line had the 60mm f/2.8 USM Macro, which was a fantastic macro lens. They also made the EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM with a built-in ring light. I'll be honest with you, Richard had to remind that the 35mm even existed. I have no recollection of it all.
We also had the super unique MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x manual focus macro. This was such a cool lens, the bug photos made with that lens were surreal. Instead of making VR lenses for that tiny niche, howabout another one of these Canon?
Canon also made the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM, which also had a built-in macro light, and that was a cool design. The reports of my dislike of EOS M have been greatly exaggerated! It was a really good lens, though I didn't use the ring light.
The latest round of tilt-shift L lenses from Canon had a macro feature, but they were 1:2. We also saw the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM with a macro ability.
There was no such thing as a bad macro lens in the EF/EF-S lineup. I still recommend the original EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro to people that don't want to spend a lot on their first macro lens.
As for the new macro lens on the horizon, sound off on the forum with your opinions of what would be a desired “macro design first”.
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
Making this a >1:1 (or >1.4:1) super macro or a true macro tilt/shift lens with AF would be reasonable products to charge a higher price for.
Working distance is everything. My breathing affects dew on spider web shots. Too close and my shadow falls on the image. I don’t want to tromp on the flowers to get the image of the one I want to shoot. Little creatures flee when you get too close. 180mm is the minimum focal length to pique my interest. More would be better.
No focus breathing for best results with focus bracketing. I think this issue eliminates a zoom but I might be wrong.
A wide max aperture for those narrow depth of field shots like the edge of a flower petal.
I don’t think tilt-shift would be a selling point. I’ve never wished for a tilt shift when I was doing macro work but I shoot nature stuff in the field. Studio product shooters might want that feature. I do sometimes use tilt-shift in landscape and architecture shots.
The 180 is really good. A very tough act to follow.
I use the RF100-400 with a Raynox DCR-250 when I am shooting skittish insects. There is some vignetting at 400mm, and IQ is not comparable to the 100L, but this combo produces almost 4x magnification with very long working distance.
I do wonder if the new macro will be attractive enough to buy, since I already have the 28, 50, 60, 65, 100 and 180mm Canon macro lenses, as well as the Sigma 150. And apart from the 50mm, they all have all been used this year.
A long macro with IS is interesting to me, but not €2500 interesting! For that amount of money I’ll raise the shutter speed a bit and buy all the denoising softwares :)
I wish Canon would give us more of such pocketable and affordable lenses, with matching bodies.
So if you're happy with the EF non-L version, keep using it! IQ gains are most likely marginal and pricing for newer lenses is crazy compared to the price/performance ratio of your current lens.
Maybe something like that?
Or some sort of motorized stacking?
At first, I thought the reviewers were overstating that problem, so I rented it.
I have the EF 100L and really love that lens, so I was shocked when I rented the RF to test and found that the focus shift on aperture change really did have real-world consequences for me, which ended up ruining 20-25% of my shots. I don't normally focus stack, so for me, having that consistent, reliable focal plane matters a lot.
- Same (or better) optical quality as the EF 180 mm
- 1:1 magnification
- Fast AF
- Compatible with RF extenders (for increased working distance with dragonflies, butterflies and other insects)
- Sufficient number of aperture blades for a round opening with good bokeh
- Image stabilization
- Internal focusing (like the EF 180mm)
- Focus limiter for close up focus range i.e. from closest focus distance to +/- 1 meter
- F 2.8
- Removable tripod collar
- Weight: equivalent to, or lighter than, the EF 180mm
And please NO:I haz receipts.
Though you did rock an EOS-M and 22mm That was a fun combo.
Alternative facts!
I had no joy from its death, though I thought I would. :P