Canon announced the RF 10-20mm f/4L IS STM this week. While we knew such a lens was coming, the announcement time was a surprise, which does add a bit of fun to new gear. We don't believe Canon is done with new lenses in 2023.

We have been told that Canon will likely announce at least two new RF-S lenses and another RF L lens before the end of 2023. There seems to be some announcements coming from other manufacturers in November, so Canon make be part of that round of new products.

We weren't told any specifics about the new lenses, but we'd wager an RF-S ultra-wide zoom will be in the cards. Our updated lens roadmap from this week may shed some light on what to expect.

Go to discussion...

84 comments

  1. so 1 lens in Oct, 2~3 lens in Nov?

    And according to SAR, the mount will be available(but not totally open) to SigTam, so there should be at least 1 lens a month from Dec23 to 2024
    • 0
  2. During 2020, 2021 and 2022 Canon has released exactly 7 lenses each year, as timely as a clock (only in 2019 they released just 6, plus the 4 initial RF lenses in 2018).

    There are already 5 lenses released this year, so I'd expect only a couple more: the RF-S 11-22 and the RF 200-500.

    This almost completes this site roadmap early leaked from Canon (I think it there won't be ever a RF-500) except for the 3 fast primes and the 2 tilt-shift, just the most suitable lenses to accompany next year the R1, R5 II and R5S launch.

    I also hope they'll release a high quality RF 20-70 IS F4L to complement the F4 trinity zoom.
    • 0
  3. I think it there won't be ever a RF-500
    I disagree.
    A 200-500 would cost so much more than an RF 500.
    That would leave a gaping hole in Canon's lineup.
    Same goes for 300 f/2.8.
    • 0
  4. There are already 5 lenses released this year, so I'd expect only a couple more: the RF-S 11-22 and the RF 200-500.
    Hopefully the RF-S ultrawide will include some small improvement such as 10 mm at the wide end, and not be a simple port from EF-M to RF-S. But either way it's very overdue so perhaps that will arrive this quarter.

    I'd be surprised to see the 200-500 before a major new body is announced to accompany it, and the R1 and the R5 Mark II are both expected next year, not this.
    • 0
  5. I disagree.
    A 200-500 would cost so much more than an RF 500.
    That would leave a gaping hole in Canon's lineup.
    Same goes for 300 f/2.8.
    The 300mm f/2.8 has been publicly replaced with the RF 100-300mm f/2.8



    Even though I don’t want it, I’m looking forward for the RF 35mm L. You 35mm guys need it
    • 0
  6. if the 35L don't get announced soon, I will not just switch to another camera brand, but I will quit photography all toegether and start something new, like painting
    Better yet, quit the internet! :LOL: [joking, to be clear]

    I know I've said this before, but the EF 35/1.4L II is one of the more recent EF releases, and is really an excellent lens. I would not be surprised to see an updated RF 24/1.4L before the 35L is brought to RF. Either way, Canon knows how many of each lens they've sold, so they'll probably bring first the one that more people will buy.

    I previously owned the EF 35/1.4L MkI, which I chose over the 24/1.4L after shooting a 16-35/2.8 II fixed at 24mm then 35mm for a couple of days each. I found myself preferring the narrower FoV and usually cropping in on the shots from 24mm. However, since I have the 28-70/2 I have no real interest in either a 35L or 24L prime. That lens is a big beast, but it's like a bag full of primes for my use cases.
    • 0
  7. we'd wager an RF-S ultra-wide zoom will be in the cards.
    Is the RF 10-20/4 IS L the ultrawide zoom for APSC?
    Recently, Canon told APSC users to simply use their full-frame lenses.
    • 0
  8. I know I've said this before, but the EF 35/1.4L II is one of the more recent EF releases, and is really an excellent lens. I would not be surprised to see an updated RF 24/1.4L before the 35L is brought to RF. Either way, Canon knows how many of each lens they've sold, so they'll probably bring first the one that more people will buy.
    I've been on a family trip recently and I shot many photos in dimly lit restaurants with the RF 50 1.2 ... and I still had to crank up the ISO at 3200 or 6400. I know I know modern AI NR is great, but, call me old-fashioned, I still prefer shooting at the lowest ISO possible. In some occasions during that trip I wished I had a fast 35mm since my daughter was playing with her friend and 50mm was too tight.
    Long-winded way of saying that there are situations where 1.2 v 1.4 would matter.... to me.

    But, while I still would love for Canon to cater to my wishes and release the 35 1.2 next month, I think I will stop repeating myself on this forum. It is obvious that Canon does not listen to me (the horror :ROFLMAO: ), so I will sulk in silence
    What I will do is what I have always been doing: I will vote with my wallet. RF 35 1.2 will be a buy, RF 35 1.4 will not be
    • 0
  9. During 2020, 2021 and 2022 Canon has released exactly 7 lenses each year, as timely as a clock (only in 2019 they released just 6, plus the 4 initial RF lenses in 2018).

    Don't forget the two tele-converters are also counted as "lenses"
    • 0
  10. I know I've said this before, but the EF 35/1.4L II is one of the more recent EF releases, and is really an excellent lens.
    By that logic, the EF 16-35 III 2.8, EF 24-105 II 4.0, EF 70-200 III 2.8, EF 70-200 II 4.0 were all released after the EF 35 and they too were more recent excellent EF lenses, yet they were remade into RF with a higher, faster priority.

    If that was the case, they could easily do what they did with the 400 and 600 by simply adding a permanent adaptor.
    • 0
  11. I am switching to Nikon. Canon is only stuff I’ve ever used. Love canon but they just don’t have “middle ground” lenses for wildlife photographers. I shoot only birds and I’m looking for something in between the 600 f4 and the 100-500 7.1. I know it’s asking a lot but I feel Nikon has a number of options in between. I pre ordered the 600mm PF 6.3. Goodbye Canon! No hard feelings! Thank you for making wonderful products through the years
    • 0
  12. Is the RF 10-20/4 IS L the ultrawide zoom for APSC?
    Recently, Canon told APSC users to simply use their full-frame lenses.
    Certainly not. It's been 17 months since APS-C R cameras launched, and there are three RF-S lenses. The fourth EF-M lens was announced 2 years after the system launched. The RF-S UWA zoom will be along at some point, my guess is that it will be the next crop lens announced but time will tell.

    Patience.gif
    • 0
  13. By that logic, the EF 16-35 III 2.8, EF 24-105 II 4.0, EF 70-200 III 2.8, EF 70-200 II 4.0 were all released after the EF 35 and they too were more recent excellent EF lenses, yet they were remade into RF with a higher, faster priority.
    Indeed. We also got a consumer level UWA prime (16/2.8) and zoom (15-30/4.5-6.3), those had no precedent in the EF lineup (unless you count the >30 year old 20/2.8). What does that tell you about Canon's perspective on the priority of the fast, wide L primes?

    If that was the case, they could easily do what they did with the 400 and 600 by simply adding a permanent adaptor.
    There's a significant difference between bolting on an adapter that adds 5-7% to the length and <3% to the weight of a lens and doing that when it adds 25% to the length and 15% to the weight.
    • 0
  14. I am switching to Nikon. Canon is only stuff I’ve ever used. Love canon but they just don’t have “middle ground” lenses for wildlife photographers. I shoot only birds and I’m looking for something in between the 600 f4 and the 100-500 7.1. I know it’s asking a lot but I feel Nikon has a number of options in between. I pre ordered the 600mm PF 6.3. Goodbye Canon! No hard feelings! Thank you for making wonderful products through the years
    Nikon has great lenses, and excellent cameras. By many accounts, their new Z mount lenses are doing far better at utilizing the shorter flange distance to create better new lenses than Canon. I tried switching a few years ago, but at that time their AF and FPS were well below par, especially for birds in flight. If I were just starting out today, I might very well choose Nikon...except, I just don't like their color. Seems very "metallic" or "artificial" to me. Perhaps just because I am used to both Canon and Olympus color, which I find much more pleasing. Took me a while to adjust to their opposite rotation direction of focus and zoom rings and mount, as well. But all that aside, the lenses that they are coming out with for birds and wildlife look absolutely amazing.
    • 0
  15. There's a significant difference between bolting on an adapter that adds 5-7% to the length and <3% to the weight of a lens and doing that when it adds 25% to the length and 15% to the weight.
    Hence the reason why using an adapted EF lens is not a viable option and most of the community is eagerly and patiently waiting for an RF 35 1.2 to be released.
    • 0

Leave a comment

Please log in to your forum account to comment