Here’s the full list of gear Canon will announce on September 5

[fullstop]

A filter in the adapter can be used with multiple lenses of varying front diameter. One could have one CPL that works on 72, 77, and 82mm etc front elements without having to own multiple sizes of CPLs or mess with step up/down rings that interfere with lens hoods. Same for NDs. As a video shooter this would really streamline switching lenses in the field. Basically for the same reason the cinema bodies have internal NDs.

What would be really cool would be if the ND in the adapter is a variable ND.

exactly.

 

[dkangel]

+1. I'm not saying this is what we're getting, but the jury remains out until we see this damn thing.

We could bolt EF right on these new bodies.

But it could just be an A7 / Z sort of offering with a thin mount + adaptor but Canon just made the adaptors sexy.

- A

I am going to differ. Unless it is truly an adapter for EF to RF mount of which I am hoping against there is only 1 logical conclusion - an mount to match RF to EOS-M cameras. It doesn't make sense the other way (crop lenses on ff bodies). I hope I am right

 

[ahsanford]

Doesn't catch on fire or cause rabies

Dammit. We always overlook hydrophobia and spontaneous combustion. Good get.

I design products for a living, and now I want to write the above as a design input for everything I make. I might get some pushback from Quality on needing to order a family of rabid raccoons and some napalm for V&V, though.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

A filter in the adapter can be used with multiple lenses of varying front diameter. One could have one CPL that works on 72, 77, and 82mm etc front elements without having to own multiple sizes of CPLs or mess with step up/down rings that interfere with lens hoods. Same for NDs. As a video shooter this would really streamline switching lenses in the field. Basically for the same reason the cinema bodies have internal NDs.

What would be really cool would be if the ND in the adapter is a variable ND.

I get the convenience angle completely, but does this not mean that choosing to use the feature (instead of front-filtering) means that you are voluntarily walking away from weather sealing?

- A

 

[ahsanford]

I haven't seen it mentioned yet...but assuming the mount allows a recessed R lens, but also accepts EF lens, should it not also be able to accept EF-S lens? 15-85 on FF?

Just thinking out loud...

CB

No reason why it shouldn't without a mirror back there. The firmware/metering/etc. will have to downshift into crop mode to work properly (you don't want blacked out corners messing with metering), but yes, it should work.

I asked this question previously about an EF to [new mount] adaptor: the answer from the team here was if EF works, so should EF-S.

- A

 

[Ozarker]

There's the new 50mm!!!

 

[Famateur]

So here's my question: if these new adaptors indeed have filters in the back, don't we still need to front-filter most of our lenses anyway just for weather-sealing? If so, why bother with this filtered adaptor idea?

- A

Great question!

I wonder what the solution will be...

 

[ahsanford]

There's the new 50mm!!!

Hold your tongue, my good man.

You talk like it's the only one we're going to get. A pox on that idea.

- A

 

[bks54]

From Nokishita on Twitter (translated): The names of Canon RF lenses other than 50 mm were confirmed by "RF 35 mm F 1.8 Macro IS STM" "RF 28 - 70 mm F 2 L USM" "RF 24 - 105 mm F 4 L IS USM

 

[ahsanford]

CR Guy, can you confirm the form of the source here? Some folks are claiming a lens roadmap was outed today, while others make it sound an ordering form surfaced.

Can you settle which one it was?

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Oh snap. The good ship IBIS might have just taken a knife in the ribs:



We knew the macro had IS, but the lack of it on the 24-105 was a pretty clear tell IBIS was on the camera.

IS is on the 24-105 now. Ruh roh.

- A

 

[bks54]

From Nokishita on Twitter (translated): The names of Canon RF lenses other than 50 mm were confirmed by "RF 35 mm F 1.8 Macro IS STM" "RF 28 - 70 mm F 2 L USM" "RF 24 - 105 mm F 4 L IS USM

So maybe this indicates no IBIS.

 

[ahsanford]

The M on the 35mm is apparently confirm as Macro now. Same tweet.

STM as well. That'll be a (relatively) inexpensive lens, $500-ish one would think.

- A

 

[BillB]

With zero slow/small lenses to avail itself of this small opportunity.

I'm not saying that's proof it will be full EF, but it seems odd to launch a 'small' body with a slate of big glass like this. Surely you launch a 'small' platform with a pancake, a 35 f/2.8, a special 'designed to be small' zoom (i.e. 24-50 f/variable), etc. None of those are on offer here.

- A

Sometime, Canon may come up with its version of small, but I don't think this is the time. f2.0 normal zooms and f1.2 normal lenses are headed in another direction, or so it seems to me.

 

[knight427]

Oh snap. The good ship IBIS might have just taken a knife in the ribs:

View attachment 180013

We knew the macro had IS, but the lack of it on the 24-105 was a pretty clear tell IBIS was on the camera.

IS is on the 24-105 now. Ruh roh.

- A

Crap, I better audit my requirements document:

$2k launch price point (but I'll probably wait to either buy used, refurb or wait for holiday sales in 2019)
Sensor is clearly better than 6D2, but doesn't have to match 5D4
Doesn't catch on fire or cause rabies

Nope, I'm still good.

 

[neuroanatomist]

i'd prefer a 20-85/2.8 as a matter of fact. 28? not interested.

No doubt the first of many ways in which Canon's FF MILC system will fail to meet your expectations.

 

[Flyingskiguy]

I get the convenience angle completely, but does this not mean that choosing to use the feature (instead of front-filtering) means that you are voluntarily walking away from weather sealing?

- A

Again, it's really no different than the cinema bodies with internal NDs. You can still put a clear filter over the front element, and many people do - not just for weather sealing, but to protect from damage. It's not really an either/or scenario.

 

[arbitrage]

Is there a chance that the "name may be different" for the 600/4 IS III may point to it actually being the 600 f/4 DO we've all been waiting for?? Come on Canon...don't do this to me...I just sold off all my Canon bodies...I just ordered a 500PF.....do I now have to repurchase a 1DX2 and the 600DO.....aaaarrrrggghhhh

 

[Kit.]

We knew the macro had IS, but the lack of it on the 24-105 was a pretty clear tell IBIS was on the camera.

IS is on the 24-105 now. Ruh roh.

105 is probably too long to compensate with just IBIS.

 

[Hector1970]

Canon are certainly making us curious. I don't think it will blow us away but hopefully its a pretty decent camera.
Its an important camera for Canon.
If its not received well I think it will dent alot of confidence in them.
Hopefully they've taken the time to make something a photographer would enjoy using and take advantage of some of mirrorless's benefits.
The whole mount thing seems a bit strange.
If its optimised for EF and adapts to suit mirrorless lens it will be interesting how does that work and does it work well.
I'd be in the market for a mirrorless FF camera but it would need to be tempting.