Latest activity

Exploreshootshare · Jun 12, 2026

m4ndr4ke said:
While a 24-70mm f/2 would be a great lens, I doubt dropping the f/2.8 24-70mm variant would be a good idea.

Many users are fine with f/2.8 zooms and are not looking for higher specifications, but would appreciate a lighter yet still pro 24-70mm f/2.8.

Sony did it (695g), Nikon did it (675g), and Canon has a 900 grams lens that is considering replacing with a heavier option?

Make a new f/2 standard zoom lens, but make a f/2.8 zoom as well. Both lenses have their targets.

I agree, a new light weight 24-70mm F2.8 would make sense. Drop IS and pushed the weight below 650gr, improve the mfd and Canon would have a winner. Even it competes with the assumed morphed lens.

neuroanatomist said:
I suspect that if Canon launches a 24-70/2 VCM, the 24-70/2.8 would remain in the lineup as a 'current' lens.

That´s probably the route Canon would logically take, but I still believe a newer and lighter version would be greatly welcome. Maybe not in the near future, but in a few years.

I'm personally much more interested in a Canon RF 20-70 2.8L IS.

Keep it the same weight as the 24-70 2.8L IS, and make the corners a touch sharper.

This would make a great couple of options:

RF 20-70mm f2.8 L with 650 gr
RF 24-70mm F2 L with less than 900gr

Canon could release the F2 lens first and check if the market still "demands" a new F2.8 version and if so, they´ll release it as a 20-70mm F2.8 (oh, heck, lets dream and make it 20-80mm F2.8)

neuroanatomist · Jun 12, 2026

MayerMP said:
I know.

Ok. Why did you ask why Canon doesn't make something that they do, in fact, make...if you knew about it before you asked the question? That was rhetorical, no need to answer.

@zajicekpavel · Jun 12, 2026

Marbled White - Melanargia galathea
(He didn't open it for me and flew away)

Exploreshootshare · Jun 12, 2026

A RF 24-70mm F2 L with the weight of the current RF 24-70mm F2.8 L would be a sure purchase for me, maybe even a "preorder", depending on the price. Bring it on!

MayerMP · Jun 12, 2026

I know.

AlanF · Jun 12, 2026

Maximilian said:
… and you‘ll get nuts when you try DIF with it+TC. Much too slow AF.
I‘ve stopped trying after some attempts.
Naked 100-400 is good enough for DIF.
I did prove that in the past, several times.

Tomorrow, the weather should be good enough for tests of TC+100-500.
l‘ll report.

I wouldn't go nuts because I would never try it! I need a wide field of view for anything in flight and a 2xTC slows down AF too much.

Click · Jun 12, 2026

@zajicekpavel said:
I'll write about the photos I took today... and the technical problems I need help with in the next post.

Very nice series. Well done!

@zajicekpavel · Jun 12, 2026

the one on the left was successful..

neuroanatomist · Jun 12, 2026

MayerMP said:
Why don't I they build something better than kit lenses for those of us who can't spend thousands?

https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/rf28-70mm-f2-8-is-stm

MayerMP · Jun 12, 2026

Why don't I they build something better than kit lenses for those of us who can't spend thousands?

neuroanatomist · Jun 12, 2026

Bob Howland said:
I would have preferred a new 24-70 f/2.8 L, 10% smaller and 25% lighter than the old one.

Canon math: 10% smaller + 25% lighter = 40% more expensive.

Bob Howland · Jun 12, 2026

I would have preferred a new 24-70 f/2.8 L, 10% smaller and 25% lighter than the old one.

@zajicekpavel · Jun 12, 2026

Day 1

@zajicekpavel · Jun 12, 2026

Photos of flying insects only here.

I want to get into this photography (I started today)

Advice and experiences welcome!

Your inspiring photos too.

Oceventphotos · Jun 12, 2026

I'm personally much more interested in a Canon RF 20-70 2.8L IS.

Keep it the same weight as the 24-70 2.8L IS, and make the corners a touch sharper.

neuroanatomist · Jun 12, 2026

blackcoffee17 said:
The current 28-70 is 1430g and doesn't have IS. Making it 24mm would add extra weight. The 24-70 is 900g. If they can make the 24-70 F2 1000g or less it's possible to replace both with one lens but that seems a bit extreme weight saving.

As you pointed out before you edited your post (and as CRguy suggested), Sony managed to make a much, much lighter 28-70/2. So I'd say it is certainly possible, especially since we know that Canon will rely on digital correction of the wide end in their design.

blackcoffee17 · Jun 12, 2026

The current 28-70 is 1430g and doesn't have IS. Making it 24mm would add extra weight. The 24-70 is 900g. If they can make the 24-70 F2 1000g or less it's possible to replace both with one lens but that seems a bit extreme weight saving.

neuroanatomist · Jun 12, 2026

m4ndr4ke said:
While a 24-70mm f/2 would be a great lens, I doubt dropping the f/2.8 24-70mm variant would be a good idea.

I suspect that if Canon launches a 24-70/2 VCM, the 24-70/2.8 would remain in the lineup as a 'current' lens.

m4ndr4ke · Jun 12, 2026

While a 24-70mm f/2 would be a great lens, I doubt dropping the f/2.8 24-70mm variant would be a good idea.

Many users are fine with f/2.8 zooms and are not looking for higher specifications, but would appreciate a lighter yet still pro 24-70mm f/2.8.

Sony did it (695g), Nikon did it (675g), and Canon has a 900 grams lens that is considering replacing with a heavier option?

Make a new f/2 standard zoom lens, but make a f/2.8 zoom as well. Both lenses have their targets.

AlanF · Jun 12, 2026

Maximilian said:
First of all thank you for the compliments.
Background info for you:
Right now, I'm mainly concerned with the sharpness when using the 2x TC.
I had a copy that was either a lemon or I just didn't know how to use it properly.
The photos prove the opposite, at least at close range.
And I still need to test the TC with the 100-500. That lens might have an issue... let's hope not so

But I can understand your comment and taste:
The black forehead and the almost black background in combination with the brightly illuminated compound eyes give a high contrast.
This is how it would look like, if I'd raise the shadows and reduce the contrast. IMO too much PP and it starts too look flat. But YMMV.

View attachment 230049

You were focussing on the lenses of the of the eyes and that's what made your first version a much better photograph, it contrasted and emphasized them just like have a narrow depth of field brings out a subject.

Tom R5R7 · Jun 12, 2026

AccipiterQ said:
I was hoping for an announcement like this....I still have my EF 24-70 2.8ii, wouldn't mind upgrading.

That EF 24-70 f/2.8 II is a pretty spectacular lens in its own right. Any upgrade would be, in my mind, akin to going from an A- to an A in terms of IQ.

AlanF · Jun 12, 2026

@Maximilian the RF100-400mm is performing very well with the 2xTC here. I haven't used it myself because it's not nearly as good as the RF 100-500m with the the 2xTC at long distances. have checked it out carefully today at close to the minimum focal distance and it is very similar in IQ to the 2xTC on the 100-500mm, and much lighter and more convenient to use. I am posting some close up insect shots with it.

BroderLund · Jun 12, 2026

The question is also, will Canon come with an answer to the Sony 50-150mm F2?

Latest activity

Latest activity

Filter

Forum statistics

Gallery statistics