Canon RF lens specifications

28-70 is 3.15 pounds?
The weight saving idea went out the window.
The lens might need to be that big to be f/2, but it kind of misses the mark for the first go round of releases.
A compact f/2.8 might have been more appropriate.

Don't worry they will announce 24-70 2.8 RF

This lens is about making a statement. First to make a 28-70 F2 and we have so many capable lens makers nowaday.

Wedding photographers would love this lens especially if it's $2000-2500.
 
Upvote 0
Don't worry they will announce 24-70 2.8 RF

This lens is about making a statement. First to make a 28-70 F2 and we have so many capable lens makers nowaday.

Wedding photographers would love this lens especially if it's $2000-2500.


No doubt it will have a following and is most likely a very nice piece of glass.

I would have thought the majority of shooters that would jump on the mirrorless would be those welcoming the lighter weight.

In the end there is only one statement that really does count for Canon. They release it annually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Sep 22, 2016
177
66
The 24-105 was first L lens on my first FF camera (the 5D MKII), and I really ended up using and liking that zoom range a lot. Looking back at old photos, I'm still amazed at how great it is (my copy at least), except for very wide shots. And I'm going to do this combo again with the R and the RF 24-105, be up and running, and see how things go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

tron

CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,222
1,616
Right, so the RF 35/1.8 IS a touch lighter than the EF 35/2 IS, and RF 24-105/4L IS is a bit lighter than the EF 24-105/4L IS II (although a fraction heavier than the EF 24-105/4L IS) ... and the RF 28-70/2L and RF 50 1.2L are fairly heavy lenses. Unsurprising for their specs given they are all FF lenses (and what we've seen other brands), but again it has me questioning whether FF mirrorless really has much of a weight or size advantage over DSLR ... and assuming it doesn't, what the big deal is about FF mirrorless.

I understand mirrorless may offer some other benefits over DSLR, but DSLR offers some benefits of FF mirrorless too (depending on what features you value, eg I am yet to see an EVF I like as much as an OVF although I realise others prefer EVF).

I will be interested to hear more about the EOS R and the RF lenses as information becomes available, but at this point personally I'm not feeling a likely buyer for the EOS R (at least any time soon).
Very very true. Add to the DSLR benefits that their sensors gather much less dust due to mirror presence.
 
Upvote 0

tron

CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,222
1,616
The 24-105 was first L lens on my first FF camera (the 5D MKII), and I really ended up using and liking that zoom range a lot. Looking back at old photos, I'm still amazed at how great it is (my copy at least), except for very wide shots. And I'm going to do this combo again with the R and the RF 24-105, be up and running, and see how things go.
Keep in mind that since there is no size advantage between the R 24-105 and your 24-105 version 1 the only advantage is due to smaller camera only.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
803
1,637
Comparing the weight of the 5D4 with a 24-70mm II against the EOS R with the new 28-70mm...

View attachment 180063

Maybe Canon's idea is that, since the body is lighter but has similar sized grip, you can get away with a heavier lens as the net total is only 400g heavier, rather than 800g heavier.

Still, as a photojournalist I say bring on the EF mount version. I was considering getting the 35mm f/1.4L II next, as night breaking news can be too dark for the 24-70, but here's a lens that would let me keep my most-used parts of the range and still be a stop brighter. Needless to say, 28mm is still wider than being stuck with a 35.. Plus photojournalists and sports photogs carry supertelephotos around all day, this will ultimately be a light lens in comparison.

But now this all just messes up my lens plans. Can't decide if my next camera will be a R series or the next installment of the 1D series, in which case my EF lenses will get another ~6 years of use out of them, unless they go all A9 on us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
28-70... 3 pounds for a lens that will go on a tiny camera with a skinny grip? How are you expected to grab the camera with one hand? The EF 24-70 -2.8 II is half the weight and it is heavy already. I have the unbalanced problem with the Sony A7r iii and the 24-70 being too heavy for the body and it's only 2 pounds!
 
Upvote 0

goldenhusky

CR Pro
Dec 2, 2016
440
257
EOS R specs are out too. Sounds nothing like typical Canon... Well at least so far. look at the AF points it is crazy....

Canon "EOS R" spec sheet released
Canon 'EOS R' spec sheet has been posted on overseas news websites.
EOS R

specification sheet
Number of effective pixels: 30.3 million pixels (Total number of pixels: 31.7 million pixels)
Image type: JPEG, RAW (14 bit), C-RAW
Dual pixel RAW support
EVF: organic EL, 0.71 times
AF point (when cross key is selected): 5,655 points
Distance measurement range: EV - 6 to 18 (23 ° C at room temperature · ISO 100 with F1.2 lens)
ISO sensitivity: 100 to 40000 (extended ISO: 50, 51200, 102400)
Shutter speed: 1/8000 to 30 seconds, valve
Continuous shooting performance: Up to 8 frames per second (at servo AF: up to 5 frames / sec)
Video: 4K30p, full HD 60p, HD 120p
Rear liquid crystal: 3.15 type 2.1 million dots touch panel
Battery: LP - E 6 N / LP - E 6 (LP - E 6 can not charge the camera USB)
Recording medium: SD / SDHC / SDXC card
Size: 135.8 x 98.3 x 84.4 mm
Weight: 660 g (including battery / memory card) · 580 g (body only)
 
Upvote 0