Close Menu

    A new wide angle Z lens is coming after the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z

    By 43 Comments Canon Lens Rumors 2 Mins Read

    Canon's next Z lens will be the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM, and we've provided image evidence of its existence. We expect it to be announced in early Q4 of this year just in time for the EOS R1 release.

    There will be a third Z lens announced in early Q1 of 2025. We have been told that it will be a different wide angle focal range than anything in the current lineup.

    The source wasn't 100% sure about the focal length, but suggested it will be an RF 12-24mm f/2.8L IS USM Z. I'm not sure about the focal length here, I think it would need to be a bit longer. They probably have to keep it f/2.8 to be consistent across the series.

    The size will be interesting, as it looks like the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z and RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z are very similar, but it's hard to tell from the picture.

    That's a lot of wide angle zoom lenses in the lineup, we already have the RF 10-20mm f/4L STM, RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM and the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM. I'm sure Canon sells a lot of these types of lenses and adding another one will do just fine. We'll have 3 70-200L lenses very soon and the EF lineup had four of them available at one point.

    We're going to have have a new “holy trinity” with this Z series of L zoom lenses.

    Canon does charge too much for the PZ-E2 and PZ-E2B PowerZoom adapters and they aren't being well received by the people that have purchased them. So it'll be interesting how well received this whole “Z” thing is going to be. I'm sure a lot of third parties could make a better zoom adapter for a lot less money.

    When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.

    Go to discussion...

    43 comments

    2. A 12-24 2.8 would be nice.
      The GM is superb and nice to see we might finally get a RF clean distortion free wide 2.8 for low light.
      I agree, a RF 12-24 /2.8 would be a photojournalists f2.8 dream.
      • 0
    3. Yeah ! Those zoom adapters are expensive and I only hear good reviews when Canon sends the product to them . I have the 24-105 F2.8 lens and is very smooth for focusing and zooming . I would assume the 70-200 power Zoom will be the same .
      • 0
    4. Forget the R1, they need to get these lenses out for the C400.

      I see a lot of confusion in the comments from photographers about these lenses, but for videographers they are truly astonishing. Sure, some people might complain about the weight, but actual cinema lenses are much heavier and with far fewer features. Nothing compares to these Z lenses at this price point for R series cameras.

      Regarding the servo zoom, this is the exact same piece of kit that came with the 18-80mm CN-E lens except that it is now easily detachable. If people are trying to use it without a 20 pin zoom rocker then they are using it wrong. The base model is pointless unless there is some sort of remote control kit that allows it to be controlled in the future without a 20 pin port. The zoom does appear to be slower that would be desired for crash zooms, but that might either be a power issue or due to the fact that these z lenses have a problem with distortion correction with crash zooms.

      Anyway, Canon really needs to release these Z lenses sooner rather than later.
      • 0
    5. SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!

      12-24 f/2.8, if the sharpness and vignetting is decently managed, would be in my bag before I even saw the price. We're approaching solar maximum for Aurora shooting, and I'd like no lens more than an ultra wide/fast zoom that could slot into a trinity, and ASAP.
      • 0
    8. I have not learnt the importance of these Z lenses YET. Let\'s see if they interest me later.I am talking about the \'power zoom\' aspect of it. (f2.8 is welcome on the 24-105)
      • 0
    9. The source is solid (70-200 Z all the way back in september), but not always bang on with focal lengths..... and that's ok.

      A 12-24 would be nice, I had a lot of fun recently with a rented 10-20... but I just have a pretentious love for 2.8 zooms.
      • 0
    11. The other question is -- will they use the same chassis as the 24-105Z and 70-200Z?
      If you look at the Sony GM, it's got some length but its very bulbous in its width so I would assume they might only be able to aim for a similar balanced weight if the Z line is primarily meant for video use.
      • 0
    12. A 12-24 2.8 would be nice.
      The GM is superb and nice to see we might finally get a RF clean distortion free wide 2.8 for low light.
      I would also love to see a lens like this. Hopefully they manage the availability of these new lenses a bit better as for the RF 200-800 ...
      • 0
    14. If we finally have overlap between the middle and long zoom (24-105, 70-200) I\'m curious why everyone would prefer NO overlap on the wide end? 12-24 or similar seems much more popular than 14-35. I\'ve shot a lot of 14mm in the 90s and like really wide-angle shots, and I know nothing about video, but it seems like overlap would be more useful more often than an extra 2mm? Note power-zoom is useless if you you need to go from wider than 24 to narrower than 24, unless you have some overlap, and 24-35 is actually a very considerable amount...
      • 0
    15. If we finally have overlap between the middle and long zoom (24-105, 70-200) I\'m curious why everyone would prefer NO overlap on the wide end? 12-24 or similar seems much more popular than 14-35. I\'ve shot a lot of 14mm in the 90s and like really wide-angle shots, and I know nothing about video, but it seems like overlap would be more useful more often than an extra 2mm? Note power-zoom is useless if you you need to go from wider than 24 to narrower than 24, unless you have some overlap, and 24-35 is actually a very considerable amount...
      I think it's that 12mm vs. 14mm is more important to people than the long end of the UWA zoom. Personally, I think the RF 14-35/4 is a great lens, and the fact that it edges into the normal range at 35mm means it's useful as a 'walkaround' lens whereas a 12-24 would not be (for me). But 24mm is pretty wide, and practically speaking when I want wide I want WIDE. For that reason, since getting the RF 10-20/4, I have not taken the 14-35/4 on any trips – the combination of the 10-20/4 with the 24-105/4 is better for my use.
      • 0
    17. Wow that's a crowded lineup, with zooms starting at 10, 14, 15, and now 12 mm. Makes me wonder about the business case. But I'm sure canon knows best. I think an ASTRO oriented 12 or 14 mm f/1.4 may be better received.
      • 0
    18. Wow that's a crowded lineup, with zooms starting at 10, 14, 15, and now 12 mm. Makes me wonder about the business case. But I'm sure canon knows best. I think an ASTRO oriented 12 or 14 mm f/1.4 may be better received.
      How many zooms start at 24mm?

      Regardless, as a Z series lens the UWA zoom would apparently be part of an f/2.8 trinity aimed at hybrid shooters. If the 24-105/2.8 is the benchmark, both the 70-200/2.8 Z and this rumored UWA Z will be excellent.
      • 0

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment