Latest activity

blackcoffee17 · Mar 6, 2026

Distinctly Average said:
I have never been a fan of long macro lenses. I have owned the 180mm and never got on with it. I can see why people like long focal lengths but I much prefer the 60-100mm range. Much lighter and easier to manoeuvre around in tight locations. So for me a 60mm on a crop body has been my most used lens, closely followed by the MPE-65 also on crop bodies. I much prefer a crop body for macro. It is probably also why the OM has become so popular with macro shooters.

A long macro is much better for moving subjects like insects and animals.

m4ndr4ke · Mar 6, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Well, it's definitely a fun lens... Whether that justifies keeping it or selling it for profit is, of course, your call.

Nah, work comes first

I'm happy with my 28 and 45 or 50 1.8 for personal stuff. My fun with photography doesn't need red rings

I'll play around with this for a few days, maybe this weekend, and then I'll make a decision but, most likely, I'll stick with the plan and sell it. I don't think this would add much to my work, It seems to be just too wide.

neuroanatomist · Mar 6, 2026

m4ndr4ke said:
I have handled this lens before, it’s not like I’m looking at 10mm for the first time, but I never took it on an assignment, this is the first time I have it at home, which obviously is a little different. So far, I’m seeing perspectives of my home that I had never seen, and that’s fun, but it’s not work.

Well, it's definitely a fun lens... Whether that justifies keeping it or selling it for profit is, of course, your call.

AcaPixus · Mar 6, 2026

Probably fine to use AI to make some illustrations, but I am not a fan of AI inventing new lenses like the "180" mm lens labelled both 100 and 109 mm for this article - particularly since it is a photography site, not an AI site.

m4ndr4ke · Mar 6, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Personally, I love the RF 10-20/4. I had the EF 11-24/4 and often left it at home because of the size/weight...the 10-20/4 is far more carry-friendly and means I don't have to skip taking some other lens as I often did with the EF 11-24/4.

However, I can't see it having much utility for your use case. Unlike you, I shoot landscapes (and serious architecture, but for that I'm typically using a TS-E lens). The only times I've had people in shots with the EF 11-24/4 or the RF 10-20/4 are a limited number of situations where I wanted to capture people and space and needed to be close to the subject(s), or indoor shots of large groups in small spaces. Examples are my kids in a prison cell at the Eastern State Penitentiary or a shot of ~40 employees inside the company cafeteria (because we needed the shot that day and it was pouring outside).

Sounds like you understood my doubts, thanks for replying

I have handled this lens before, it’s not like I’m looking at 10mm for the first time, but I never took it on an assignment, this is the first time I have it at home, which obviously is a little different. So far, I’m seeing perspectives of my home that I had never seen, and that’s fun, but it’s not work.

I can imagine some criative uses for this lens, such as:
— Group shots of people interacting with the camera (the kind we usually see with fish-eye lenses);
— Extreme-wide views of rooms like wedding venues, concert halls or halls;
— Extreme-wide views of concerts from the pit (though many concerts I photograph do not have a pit, because often it’s classical music);
— Someone walking a room and me using the wider angle to make the room huge and the subject miniscule

However, I believe 16mm could be enough in most of these scenarios and, to be honest, I don’t shoot at 16mm that often, its use constitutes less than 10% of my photography.

I’ve had situations, at weddings, where the 16mm could not autofocus due to low light (usually at the dance floor, when lights are dimmed). I suppose it would be a lot worse with this 10-20 (I’m talking One Shot AF).

I bought the lens for the price, and because I know I can profit from it. Now that I have it in my possession, I’m just trying to make sure I won’t regret selling it, because definitely I’ll never see this price again.

homebodyMacro2 · Mar 6, 2026

AlanF said:
Sources of the rumours?

CR made a post referencing it: https://www.canonrumors.com/what-we-expect-canon-to-announce-in-the-coming-months/

Honestly a nice internal zoom with a VCM would be great imo.

My post here was referring to that article:

homebodyMacro2 said:
Just wish-casting, I hope this 300-600L, if we get it, is not too much higher than the ballpark of $7k. Only have so much budget for it, and at least from this topic it seems like a number of people feel similarly.

Personally I think it makes more sense to have a longer L option that's not the 100-300L with a 2x teleconverter selling at ~$11k. A $7k-ish Canon 300-600 f/5.6 L VCM with internal zoom would probably be a great competitor to the huge $6600 Sigma 300-600 f/4. The Sigma seems to have made some waves, though I can't say I have the sales numbers. An ~$11k 300-600 f/5.6 would be a lot less appealing to me at least lol.

becceric · Mar 6, 2026

After all of the articles on rumored lenses to be, you are really holding me captive with this!
I may camp outside Canon headquarters in anticipation for the release date.
I need to change my user name to Roby200MM5X!

Noreaster · Mar 6, 2026

I use a Laowa 85 on my RP a lot and I love it. I just bought the canon RP 100 macro and on my R5 I feel like I am carrying a brick.
It is nice to carry something super lightweight. It is a nice break from carrying a 200-800 all day.

Distinctly Average · Mar 6, 2026

I have never been a fan of long macro lenses. I have owned the 180mm and never got on with it. I can see why people like long focal lengths but I much prefer the 60-100mm range. Much lighter and easier to manoeuvre around in tight locations. So for me a 60mm on a crop body has been my most used lens, closely followed by the MPE-65 also on crop bodies. I much prefer a crop body for macro. It is probably also why the OM has become so popular with macro shooters.

neuroanatomist · Mar 6, 2026

m4ndr4ke said:
What are your thoughts on this lens and its predecessor, the EF 11-24mm f/4?
If you photograph events, do you use the wider end of your lens for anything specifically?
Again, no astro, no landscaping, no serious architecture.

Personally, I love the RF 10-20/4. I had the EF 11-24/4 and often left it at home because of the size/weight...the 10-20/4 is far more carry-friendly and means I don't have to skip taking some other lens as I often did with the EF 11-24/4.

However, I can't see it having much utility for your use case. Unlike you, I shoot landscapes (and serious architecture, but for that I'm typically using a TS-E lens). The only times I've had people in shots with the EF 11-24/4 or the RF 10-20/4 are a limited number of situations where I wanted to capture people and space and needed to be close to the subject(s), or indoor shots of large groups in small spaces. Examples are my kids in a prison cell at the Eastern State Penitentiary or a shot of ~40 employees inside the company cafeteria (because we needed the shot that day and it was pouring outside).

john1970 · Mar 6, 2026

This would actually be a lens that I would consider purchasing. Wait and see.

jim · Mar 6, 2026

I use the MP-E 65 and the EF-S 35mm f/2.8 macro on an R7 for moth photography. Both have their advantages/disadvantages but I'm tired of swapping lenses (often in the dark) and the absurd working distances. I tried the RF 100mm macro but it is a beast and hardly better than its smaller EF counterparts. I would welcome a fixed 150-200mm macro that goes to 2x life size, takes the 1.4/2x converters and keeps the macro flash adapter on the front. And don't even think about adding an SA control! A full-frame equivalent of the EF-S 60mm macro going to 2x life size would be welcome in my stable.

EricN · Mar 6, 2026

In macro, if it's a prime, "magnification ratio" will extend the front element enough that using it as a normal focus ring becomes impossible (as with mp-e 65)? However, the rumor mentioned autofocus... if it's more than a rumor it should be very impressive.

JonS · Mar 6, 2026

P-visie said:
A RF 200mm f4 macro lens would be great for my "needs". Support for the EF 180mm macro ends in 2027 so if Canon releases this lens somewhere between now and 12 months .....

....it would get my money too....

m4ndr4ke · Mar 6, 2026

So, today I found myself an open box 10-20mm for a little over 1000€. Obviously, I brought it.

The first idea is selling if for profit, but I still plan to try it out for a few days. The price was low enough that even MPB offers triple digits on profit, so I can easily get rid of it, but first things first

I don't shoot landscapes, I don't do astrophotography, I don't shoot architecture. Not going to.

I mainly photograph news (not sports) and events, including a few weddings, so it's mostly people and, sometimes, I include stuff like empty rooms, wide views of gatherings or rooms filled with people, and wide views of buildings. A few music concerts too.

To be honest, the 16mm f/2.8 has been enough, and it's one stop faster. I never had wider than that, and never really felt the need.
F/4 on the 10-20mm is not impressive. I'll photograph in whatever conditions I'll have to, so it may be dark with moving subjects - or not.

What are your thoughts on this lens and its predecessor, the EF 11-24mm f/4?
If you photograph events, do you use the wider end of your lens for anything specifically?
Again, no astro, no landscaping, no serious architecture.

GMCPhotographics · Mar 6, 2026

mb66energy said:
A step width I always liked and own in the old EF versions - the rest can be done be feet (mostly). But now a little bit spoiled by using 24-105 and 100-400 !

Use case scenario is always king. No two photographers share the same need or photographic burden. As a wedding photographer, I always preferred a 16mm / 35mm / 85mm. But that was just what I liked, others differ. One of my 2nd photographers like the 24mm / 50mm / 100mm option. The biggest issue was the troublesome EF 50mm f1.2 L....but in the new RF world....that's a forgotten headache. Canon finally made a world class 50mm f1.2 and then added the amazing 50mm f1.4 VCM to the options list. Then the rather unusual RF 45mm f1.2. We are truely spoilt for choice these days. In the world of zooms, there's lots of ways to split your three lens choices. 10-20mm, 24-105mm, 100-500mm. Or keep it all f2.8 with a 15-35mm, 24-105mm and 100-300mm. All superlative options.

dolina · Mar 6, 2026

el peso said:
Buy Sigma, what a problem?

No RF mount!

AlanF · Mar 6, 2026

john1970 said:
Latest rumors are that the lens will be a constant f5.6 with VCM design. Rumored time line is sometime in 2026. Was hoping for a spring 2026 announcement, but I am not sure on this one.

Sources of the rumours?

P-visie · Mar 6, 2026

A RF 200mm f4 macro lens would be great for my "needs". Support for the EF 180mm macro ends in 2027 so if Canon releases this lens somewhere between now and 12 months

.....

john1970 · Mar 6, 2026

Latest rumors are that the lens will be a constant f5.6 with VCM design. Rumored time line is sometime in 2026. Was hoping for a spring 2026 announcement, but I am not sure on this one.

Uneternal · Mar 6, 2026

It would be nice if we finally get a successor of the EF 17-55mm 2.8. If it was below f/2.0 that would be a total game changer.

roby17269 · Mar 6, 2026

m4ndr4ke said:
They were twins, you couldn't tell them apart unless you read the lettering

View attachment 228271

I could see myself considering a lower end 100 to 135mm lens, but not a L variant. That, or MAYBE an upgrade to the 85mm f/2 in the same philosophy as the 45mm f/1.2 (not that fast, but internal focusing and no macro).

True that - but I am a bit of a lens geek (like almost everyone here

) so I do tend to get close and personal with lenses...
I haven't seen many in the wild at all, but some of the few I have seen I did approach (friendly photographers) and they were 85's. I do think that 85mm is a more "classic" focal length and I'd be surprised if sales figures were comparable between the 2 lenses. But I may also be totally wrong.
Just had a look and on eBay the number of 85 1.8 on sale is roughly double of the number of 100 2 on sale, so take that FWIW.

I guess the assumption is indeed that if the 100 1.4 will materialize, it will be an L lens, which makes it a difficult proposition in my mind, slotted between the 85 1.4 VCM and the 135 1.8

roby17269 · Mar 6, 2026

el peso said:
Of course, it’s definitely a subjective thing. The purchase perspective matters too — whether you’re buying from scratch or swapping/upgrading existing gear. I used to own the EF 85mm f/1.4L and liked it, but eventually sold it after getting the original RF 70–200mm f/2.8L. Still, I always had the CY Zeiss Planar 100mm f/2 in the back of my mind. I’ve tried the EF 100mm f/2 as well, but its character left me indifferent. I’m considering the RF 85mm f/1.4L, though I’d probably prefer an RF 100mm f/1.4L instead.

On the fact that it is highly subjective, we agree to agree

I am so in love with my RF 85 1.2, and the fact that the 45mp of my R5 allow for decent croppability, that I would not be swayed by a 100 1.4

Now, if it was a 100 1.2, THAT would be different

... for reasons.

But I guess I've spent so much on Hasselblad recently that it's good if my cards get some much needed respite

mattrobo · Mar 6, 2026

neuroanatomist said:
Sigh. Because physics. Wide and standard lens designs are limited by the image circle diameter, telephoto designs are not. There is no point in a telephoto lens ‘for crop cameras’ since such a lens would work fine on FF. That’s why there are no such lenses.

Look at the Oly/OM 150-400mm, for example. It’s for m4/3 (2x crop) but it’s about the same size as the Canon 100-500 (and if OM made a FF camera, the lens would work on it).

As for wide lenses not making money, I really don’t get why some people seem to think they know better than Canon what lenses people will buy. I mean, Canon has led the ILC market for over two decades and dominates it today…but you know more about what lenses they need to make? LOL. You get to decide what lenses you want to buy, but Canon doesn’t care what you personally want.

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics