Canon Looking at Superzooms Again?

[Richard CR]

The Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM Lens wasn’t a well loved lens. As a matter of fact, there were probably more “why’s” than “ohhhh” when it was announced. However, there is a use case for this lens, when you need a lens that will prop up your tank, and be able to go from […]

See full article...

 

[tog]

"The original EF lenses that came out for this use case, all started at 28mm."

Except for the original EF35-350...

 

[sturm3n]

I’m definitely interested in an L-series superzoom, but if Canon is listening: please consider going back to the drawing board and creating a 20-200 like Sigma did. The extra width is a huge value-add! Or, better yet, let Sigma (and others) sell on the full-frame RF mount!

 

[Pixel]

Constant aperture. I hate this crap.

 

[Brown]

Constant aperture. I hate this crap.

You're not getting it in a superzoom.

 

[mxwphoto]

24-400 sounds really appealing, especially if modern day optics can now make it sharp enough. Never got the EF as it just wasn't sharp for my needs. Great to have for kid outdoor sports and travel. Ultimate Swiss army knife of lenses.

 

[Richard CR]

Constant aperture. I hate this crap.

do you want antigravity plating to go along with that?

 

[Richard CR]

"The original EF lenses that came out for this use case, all started at 28mm."

Except for the original EF35-350...

i burned that one from my memory.

 

[P-visie]

do you want antigravity plating to go along with that?

Yes please, anything to make lenses like these a bit lighter to carry .

 

[DhlcadR6]

Am I the odd one out thinking Canon should make a RF 24-300L that's small(-ish)&light to be EF28-300L sucessor while also competes with Sigma 20-200. And make a cheaper RF24-180 f2.8-f4fixed f3.5 STM to be a better variant of Tamron 24-20028-200 & RF24-240USM.

 

[mimbu]

Constant aperture. I hate this crap.

If you want constant aperture, shoot in aperture priority at f5.6 or f6.3, whatever the lens' slowest max aperture is. Problem solved.

You're not going to get a 24-400/4 that isn't both huge and $10k+.

 

[Bob Howland]

Every time this subject comes up, I'm reminded of the Olympus/OM Systems 12-100 f/4 lens.

 

[sturm3n]

Every time this subject comes up, I'm reminded of the Olympus/OM Systems 12-100 f/4 lens.

That’s a 24-200mm f/8 full-frame-equivalent. Most full frame superzooms are faster than that. I know my RF 24-200mm is…

 

[Bob Howland]

That’s a 24-200mm f/8 full-frame-equivalent. Most full frame superzooms are faster than that. I know my RF 24-200mm is…

Here we go again!

 

[Exploreshootshare]

For years, I kind of despised superzoom lenses, but in recent years I have the feeling the quality has increased significantly although they still are and always be a compromise. With the rise of quality and the need to travel with less lenses, I am actively researching superzoom lenses. RF mount is lacking a great option, because the 24-240mm is kind of subpar imho. Sigma 20-200mm looks really great. I´d be all in for such a lens. If Canon can come up with lens with reasonable weight, I´d be all in. Even if I might have to get rid of my beloved 70-200mm F4 L.

 

[roby17269]

For years, I kind of despised superzoom lenses, but in recent years I have the feeling the quality has increased significantly although they still are and always be a compromise. With the rise of quality and the need to travel with less lenses, I am actively researching superzoom lenses. RF mount is lacking a great option, because the 24-240mm is kind of subpar imho. Sigma 20-200mm looks really great. I´d be all in for such a lens. If Canon can come up with lens with reasonable weight, I´d be all in. Even if I might have to get rid of my beloved 70-200mm F4 L.

I agree that the 24-240 is not great. I bought one and after a while I stopped using it and sold it. When I wrote of that experience on dpreview I was attacked by a few people who were calling the 24-240 a n "L-quality zoom without the L price"

 

[LSXPhotog]

One of the greatest photographers and mentors I ever had the privilege of working with would shoot two week long events each year and only bring ONE lens to do it (mostly) and it was the EF 28-300L. I couldn’t believe it. I always thought that lens was junk, yet one of the best photographers in the world (legitimately) swore by it. I ended up buying the RF 24-240 as he suggested and let me tell you, people need to know this lens is VERY very good. It certainly has problems, but sharpness and versatility are not something it struggles with at all. Now that he has retired, I’m the one shooting these week long events and am shooting 4 or more of them a year and it’s the main lens I use.

I’ve shot countless lead images and covers using the RF 24-240mm and I would be very interested in an L-series variant if they were able to balance the size/weight with performance. It’s just a reminder that there is really a time/place/purpose for every lens…well almost every lens. LOL

 

[snapshot]

I agree that the 24-240 is not great. I bought one and after a while I stopped using it and sold it. When I wrote of that experience on dpreview I was attacked by a few people who were calling the 24-240 a n "L-quality zoom without the L price"

Certainly not L-quality but it is carryable and versatile, the pictures are not worse than the tamron 28-300 F/6.3. at one point in my life i carried the 28-70 L f/2.8 and the 100-400 LIS on my hikes. got great pics. that is no longer in play, i like the one lens for the day concept.

 

[roby17269]

Certainly not L-quality but it is carryable and versatile, the pictures are not worse than the tamron 28-300 F/6.3. at one point in my life i carried the 28-70 L f/2.8 and the 100-400 LIS on my hikes. got great pics. that is no longer in play, i like the one lens for the day concept.

I agree it is super versatile and it is useful in a large number of circumstances... but it was soft at 240mm, at least my copy was, and, as any other zoom I have used, the 2 extremes are the most used focal lengths.
Ultimately I am not saying that it was unusable, just that its downsides trumped its upsides for me.

 

[Jaysheldon]

Years ago I ran into an event photographer at a telecommunications conference I was covering as a reporter. His standard lens was the EF28-300L on his 1D, which was useful for taking shots from the front row of speakers on the stage (Me, by contrast, had my 30D and an EF-S 17-85. Maybe I had my EF70-200 F4. He let me use his lens on my camera (taking pity on me.) Loved the extra reach. This was an annual conference so I'd see him once a year and show off my latest 60D and a 7DII.