How about a serious but light power zoom lens that can be controlled from an R6V and/or R50V? Consider what an XF605 camcorder lens can do. The MILCs have a long way to go to catch up.

amorse said:

I'd love a fast ultra wide zoom - like a 12-24 f/2. That would be excellent for a lot of my work when in the back country and keep me from adding another lens to an already hefty kit.

Click to expand...

What would be your use for such a lens ? Astrophoto ?

I'd love a fast ultra wide zoom - like a 12-24 f/2. That would be excellent for a lot of my work when in the back country and keep me from adding another lens to an already hefty kit.

I hope the second ‘world’s first’ is a photo-oriented lens, 70-180/2 or better yet a 600/4 with some innovative TC built in. But I wonder if it will be another esoteric VR-type lens. Ugh.

Canon Rumors said:

maybe Canon finally has some epic RF-S lenses in the pipeline

Click to expand...

Yeah…not gonna hold my breath waiting for that. Maybe an RF-S 20-40mm f/5-7.1. So much epic-er than the current kit lens.

I'd love to see a matched set of 24-70 f/2 and 70-180 f/2. Why stop at 180? Because it would still be compatible with 95 mm filters. Otherwise, 200 would be fine. I realize that you could use a rear filter gel setup but for the purposes of such a lens, being able to swap out filters and dial in a polarizing filter would be most useful.

HMC11 said:

Your list is 'interesting', here are some questions:
a. Sony has a global shutter camera - so what? the IQ is compromised.
b. Sony has lenses that Canon do not - the reverse is also true, Canon has the 100-500L, fisheye, 200-800 etc
c. Sony has a lightweight/compact FF option, so does Canon, the R8 is highly functional for photography with IQ practically the same as the R6II
d. Sony has 3rd party lens support (in case the first party drops the ball) - I am glad that there is little worry that Canon's first party lens support would drop the ball.

I am sure others would have things to say about the rest of the claims on your list.

Click to expand...

I am not interested in those lists, I am just interested in the lens in my hands.

These days street work with the RF45 1.2 on the R5 II.

There is no time to think about those stupid discussions.

zardoz said:

Canon are getting fairly smashed by Sony on several fronts, so they really need to compete.

• They have some better performing prime lenses (24 GM, 35 GM, 50 1.2 GM) available for less than the L VCM variants - although the 35GM does exhibit a little more CA.
• They have lighter versions of staple zooms (16-35 GM II, 24-70 GM II, 28-70 f/2 GM) and a few primes (like the 300 2.8 GM)
• They have a high resolution pro camera body (granted; the R1 is a completely different system to the A1 II)
• They have a camera with a global shutter
• They have better low light performance, relative to product tier (backed up by photons to photos, in addition to my own experience)
• They have lenses that Canon don't have (50-150 f/2, and a rumoured 16-28 coming, and their new 100-400 f/4.5 GM)
• They don't rely on digital geometric correction anywhere near as much.
• They have a lightweight/compact full-frame option without significant feature compromise.
• Their sensors, in my testing, do not exhibit vertical bloom when using mechanical shutter.
• Their macro works with a 2x TC, delivering 2.8x with AF.
• Third party lens support!! (in case the first party drops the ball).

Click to expand...

Your list is 'interesting', here are some questions:
a. Sony has a global shutter camera - so what? the IQ is compromised.
b. Sony has lenses that Canon do not - the reverse is also true, Canon has the 100-500L, fisheye, 200-800 etc
c. Sony has a lightweight/compact FF option, so does Canon, the R8 is highly functional for photography with IQ practically the same as the R6II
d. Sony has 3rd party lens support (in case the first party drops the ball) - I am glad that there is little worry that Canon's first party lens support would drop the ball.

I am sure others would have things to say about the rest of the claims on your list.

@zajicekpavel said:

i dont throw it away

R10 + 100-400 + 1.4 TC

I don't know why Canon is chasing megapixels...

View attachment 230143

Click to expand...

You've convincingly demonstrated it's not the camera, but the photographer!

scyrene said:

There's at least one other possibility, that they believe they can sell more lenses like this, or to put it another way, their actual target market prefers lightness over other concerns.

Click to expand...

Why is it so hard for you to just accept that some randos on the internet understand the camera market and what it wants much better than Canon has or ever will.

Day 5

Anthophora quadrimaculata is the Four-banded Flower Bee

Canon RF 100 macro + R7

F5
1/3200
ISO 2000

(I want to take photos like this in the future)

Rceres said:

Another zoom? I’m sure it will be optically excellent, and I understand why so many photographers are excited about it.

Personally, my credit card and I will be sitting on the sidelines waiting for Canon’s next generation of stills-first halo primes.

The RF 135mm f/1.8L showed what Canon can do when the design goal is maximum image quality, wide aperture, and excellent handling. I’d be far more excited by a new RF 100mm f/1.4L portrait lens, a redesigned RF 50mm or 85mm f/1.2L II, or a new fast wide-angle prime.

Canon already has a pretty strong RF lineup and I am glad they are challenging Sony with new F2.0 zooms. What I hope they don’t lose sight of is the aspirational role halo primes play in defining the system and inspiring photographers. I’d hate to see Canon cede that part of the market—or the high-resolution bodies needed to fully exploit it—to Sony and medium format.

Just my two cents.

Click to expand...

Canon are getting fairly smashed by Sony on several fronts, so they really need to compete.

• They have some better performing prime lenses (24 GM, 35 GM, 50 1.2 GM) available for less than the L VCM variants - although the 35GM does exhibit a little more CA.
• They have lighter versions of staple zooms (16-35 GM II, 24-70 GM II, 28-70 f/2 GM) and a few primes (like the 300 2.8 GM)
• They have a high resolution pro camera body (granted; the R1 is a completely different system to the A1 II)
• They have a camera with a global shutter
• They have better low light performance, relative to product tier (backed up by photons to photos, in addition to my own experience)
• They have lenses that Canon don't have (50-150 f/2, and a rumoured 16-28 coming, and their new 100-400 f/4.5 GM)
• They don't rely on digital geometric correction anywhere near as much.
• They have a lightweight/compact full-frame option without significant feature compromise.
• Their sensors, in my testing, do not exhibit vertical bloom when using mechanical shutter.
• Their macro works with a 2x TC, delivering 2.8x with AF.
• Third party lens support!! (in case the first party drops the ball).

I'm unsure if there was intense pressure from the market to fill a video segment really quickly with the VCM primes, or if Sony managed to beat Canon to every punch with their patent acumen. We know it's possible, and we know Canon can do it, but there are some clear gaps in Canon's product offering.

We know Canon do respect and cater for their pro sports community - the 100-300 f/2.8L is heavy but is a far more usable lens than the 300 2.8 where the only compromise seems to be price. vs the EF II. Their new RF 70-200 Z lens is so good that with a 2x TC, it still outperforms the RF 100-500L. Canon Professional Services have been fantastic for me (and honestly have been a key reason why I keep shooting Canon). Their RF 85L? Stellar. Commands every dollar of the price they ask.

Honestly, I'd love a Sony 28-70 f/2 GM that I can bolt onto a Canon body, but I am aching for a decent 35mm prime with the same performance of the RF 85L. The flare control of the 85L alone has kept the 28-70 f/2L in the bag several times in favour of a 35 (EF II) +85 combo. I want more lenses like that lens.

The RF 135L is amazing, with my main gripes being the flare in high contrast situations (which is why I passed on it for my esports and bar images) but the bokeh is to die for.

Do you recall how hard it was for Canon to make a 50mm prime you could shoot with wide open? Their EF 50 1.0L was a halo lens designed for film. The 50 1.2L was hot garbage wide open. They arguably never made it work, and then introduced the RF 50 1.2L proving they could get the job done all along. The 50 1.4 VCM is actually a very decent lens, but the bokeh and rendering on the 1.2 makes it worth the dollars for still imaging.

The rumoured weight makes this feel like a 28-70 f/2 IS with a bonus "extended" 4mm on the wide end, or a 24-70 f/2.8 IS with an "extended' f/2 aperture i.e. the extra feature is there if you desperately need it, but like the extension ISO modes, you wouldn't want to make a habit out of it.

zardoz said:

either Canon are unable to innovate and get on top of Sony again, or they have lost touch with their target market

Click to expand...

There's at least one other possibility, that they believe they can sell more lenses like this, or to put it another way, their actual target market prefers lightness over other concerns.

Digital correction is a deal breaker, and why I have kept away from the VCM lenses except to solve specific problems (the 35 VCM was a bit of a mistake, though, and I have no 20 or 24mm f/1.4 options that are accurate). The 28-70 f/2 already requires some correction, but I usually turn it off and can get away with it for events etc to get better low light performance. Sony can seemingly match or even exceed the geometric performance of the existing 28-70 f/2L.

If I' at ISO 12800 on a Canon mirrorless body and process with lightroom, LR doesn't have the accurate lens profiles to correct, nor the sensor profile to manage the noise properly, and boosting by any amount in the corners becomes VERY noisy -and on top of that, you get stretching of noise artifacts, leading to banding - best case, or further enhancement of noise. If you shoot during the day at ISO 100, I'd have very little - if any - concerns, as there should still be plenty of adjustment latitude in terms of vignetting, but the distortion profile needs to be accurate.

I own both the Sony 35 GM and Canon 35 VCM lenses; the Sony bests Canon's 35 VCM for geometry.

I really hope Canon don't compromise on optical design just to get a lighter lens. I'd prefer a lighter 28-70 without IS vs an optically poorer 24-70 f/2 with IS. Sony have proven you can do the former, so either Canon are unable to innovate and get on top of Sony again, or they have lost touch with their target market). If they get the geometry right, I'll be getting on the waiting list the day the announcement is out.

My other gripe with the current Canon 28-70 f/2L? The front element has a very soft coating on it. There are numerous posts on forums from people who cleaned their lens and accidentally scraped entire sections of coating off. It was an AU$1200+ repair when I had mine done, and I expect it to be more costly now and has been the only lens that's done this out of probably 30+ L series lenses I have owned. Serviceability matters in professional situations.

masterpix said:

Well, in this case, the "holy trio" will be 24-70, 70-200, 200-800... and maybe incliude 50/85 for portraits and low light even though F2/2.8 is as good

Just time will tell

Click to expand...

My understanding of a "trinity" was three lenses that share the same aperture and quality built, but differ in focal length in a way that they complement each other. Therefore, the 200-800mm doesn't really qualify as part of a trinity because it has a much higher and variable f-number and no L designation..In case of the f2 zooms, my guess would be:

16-24mm F2 --> yet to be released or even only rumored.
24-70mm F2
70-135/150/180mm F2 --> whatever Canon decides on.

Concering the UWA zoom: Canon could give users the option to sacrifice one stop for starting at a 1mm wider focal length
(14-35mm F4 zoom, 15-35mm f2.8 zoom, 16-24?mm F2 zoom)

Sony is apparently going 16-24mm, 28-70mm and 50-150mm with the f2 trinity. The 50-150mm does sound intriguing to me as a stand alone lens, but not in a trinity package. Considering a trinity, I'm some users would prefer the lens starting at 70mm and extending its reach beyond 150mm.

I also wonder if a 20-70mm F2.8 - if it is ever made - will impact the UWA 2.8 zoom. Would Canon try to make a 10-20mm F2.8 or 12-24mm f2.8? If the standard goes down to 20mm, there's "no need" to go up to 35mm with the UWA zoom because there would a great amount of overlap and fewer mm gained by a UWA zoom. I don't think such a lens would arrive within the next 2-4 years, but it is still an interesting thought.

i dont throw it away

R10 + 100-400 + 1.4 TC

I don't know why Canon is chasing megapixels...

You sometimes don't know what you have shot! A Marsh Harrier was flying far to far away, but I pointed the RF 200-800mm anyway. A tiny crop form the centre then showed it was flying with a catch.

Well, in this case, the "holy trio" will be 24-70, 70-200, 200-800... and maybe incliude 50/85 for portraits and low light even though F2/2.8 is as good

Just time will tell

Czardoom said:

Are you illiterate or just stupid? Ever used an MFT camera? Apparently not.

Click to expand...

Yep, someone definitely has an inferiority complex. Ad hominem arguments almost always the result of feelings of inferiority.

wsmith96 said:

I'm sure it will be optically awesome.

Click to expand...

I agree, at least after (required) correction of the distortion at the wide end.

I'd like to see how much weight they can squeeze out of a lens like this. I'm sure it will be optically awesome.

But but... Canon needs to release those nice lenses faster...its so damn slow again. And many lenses are still not on the horizon :'(!

Golden-fronted Woodpecker with a palm fruit, seen while birding in Belize, April, 2026.

R5MkII RF200-800mm

How does that compare to Lightroom's Denoise?

neuroanatomist said:

Thanks! DxO PhotoLab, using the default options for DeepPrime XD3 so the 'work' is just one click for NR.

Click to expand...

Scarlet Tiger Moth (R5ii + RF 200-800mm).

Today I wanted to take pictures of ladybugs..but not like this
R7+ Canon RF 100 mm f/2,8 L