Well, well, well… could this be Canon’s lens roadmap for 2021? [CR2]

[Mr Majestyk]

Most of those lenses will cost a bomb. The 135 f/1.4L will be $3K and at least weigh 1.6kg, 10-24 f/4L will be $3K+, 35 f/1.2L $2.5K, other than the rubbisly slow 100-400 the only affordable lenses will be the 14-35 f/4L IS, 100 f/2.8 macro and 24 f/1.8 macro. Also no DO lenses.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

Where's the 300 f/2.8 ???

Come on the 100-400 is screaming out for your money.

 

[SnowMiku]

The diabolical irony of it. Canon builds a lens for a camera that doesn't exist...

Doesn't exist at this stage, they still haven't replaced the 7D Mark II yet You can say the R5 replaced it, but that's a bit too expensive for a lot of crop users.

 

[H. Jones]

It took 5 pages of comments before somebody mentioned a new 1200mm lens. Not that I'll likely ever buy one (unless my embroidery business reeaaaallllyyyy takes off, but like, damn. I wanted the old one. Now I want the new one.

My photographic interests are odd. I only want to photograph things that are either very far away or very very small.

I can't see myself ever buying one... But... As a platinum Canon Professional Services member.. the 1200 would be one of the first lenses on my list to evaluate from CPS. That will be awesome. Definitely a lens I'll "evaluate" both times Canon allows me to

I think I'm more likely to get an RF 400mm F/2.8 some point down the road, since it's a 400 2.8, 560 f/4, and 800 f/5.6, which makes it the best value and most flexible for the money.

 

[analoggrotto]

I want some pancakes even if I have to play basketball with Prince to get them.

 

[Jethro]

For the 14 (!) lenses being 'announced' in 2021, is it also possible that a bunch of these could be 'development' announcements, with a shipping date a couple more years on? That looks like a medium term roadmap to me. If the current strategy is that current EF lenses are (at least) as good adapted to RF, then what would have been the old EF lens replacement roadmap is replaced by a map for RF lenses replacing their EF equivalents. And assuming the updated RF lenses are better (small, lighter, access to the RF IBIS interactions with in-lens IS) then that is another encouragement to people to shift from DSLRs to R bodies.

Surely the only new EF lenses we ever see will be ones already developed and maybe waiting in the wings for release.

 

[rontele7]

I got the R5 I ordered on the release day. I got the second one I ordered 2 days later. There's certainly been a second shipment.

Nope, that’s still the first faulty R5 batch.

Canon clearly stopped shipping R5’s because of technical or production issues.

 

[rontele7]

These rumored lenses won’t be released until 2022 at the earliest. And more than likely not until 2023.

Canon is having MASSIVE production issues; their flagship camera hasn’t shipped new units for 3 months, so any new lenses are going to be years delayed.

Don’t get your hopes up!

 

[GrunRad]

Does this signal the end of EF lenses for the DSLR?

It does.

 

[Dragon]

I was expecting at least one EF-M lens

I think this was the R lens report. M lives in a different dimension. If there is an M5 II/M7, then there will likely be a few bits of glass to go along with it and I hope that is the case. I love the portability of my M5. OTOH, the R5 is an amazing piece of work and with the market being where it is, resources are bound to be limited.

 

[Dragon]

These rumored lenses won’t be released until 2022 at the earliest. And more than likely not until 2023.

Canon is having MASSIVE production issues; their flagship camera hasn’t shipped new units for 3 months, so any new lenses are going to be years delayed.

Don’t get your hopes up!

Your data is old. I got my R5 a couple of weeks ago. The order book was huge and 5 series are not made in a Taiwan megafactory.

 

[Dragon]

What would be valid reasons to upgrade for those who already have something similar or even better like EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, instead of using an adaptor ?

Hard to to much better optically, but the valid reason you seek will be about AF. The EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is fast, but the cheapie RF 24-240 is WAY faster when strapped on an R5. RFL glass will be even more impressive.

 

[harleylunar]

is the Canon RF 10-24mm f/4L USM the fish eye that we keep hearing about??

 

[Traveler]

Well, well, well... good news bad news.
I’m glad canon doesn’t do a “copy paste” of their EF roadmap. Almost each of the RF lenses has new features to it.
Bad news is that they’ll probably keep the price tags just slightly below Sony’s – no more $100 nifty fifty etc. At least we still have the option of adapting the EF versions.
———
I’ve been waiting for a 16-35 f/4 and the 14mm wide end sounds great! But I’m pretty sure the filter thread won’t be 77mm :/
I don’t like using the EF-RF adapter but I also don’t like using more sets of filters...

The 100-400 sounds like a great replacement of my EF 70-300 as long as it doesn’t cost double the money and isn’t bigger.

 

[Danglin52]

From a wildlife shooter perspective, I am not blown away. Unless Canon has significantly reduced size, weight, and price on the 400-1000 lenses, I don't see a significant advantage of RF lenses in IQ vs purchasing or using existing EF glass (other than adaptors). I have been in GTNP/YNP for the last two weeks shooting the R5/R6 and 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L IS II / RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 L IS. While the extra lighter weight and 100mm additional reach is great, the image RF lens is only marginally better optically than the 100-400 II. The RF + 1.4x Extender requires zoom out to 300mm before adding the extender and the 420mm - 700mm is fantastic, but loosing the lower end of the zoom range is a significant issue if the wildlife is constantly changing the distance. You wither have to have a second body with the 100-400 II (which I did) or repeatedly having to add/remove the extender is going loose shots. I am currently using the R5 + 1.4x +100-500 for a 420-700mm with the R6 + 100-400 II to cover the lower range. The real solution hear would be switchable extender per the Canon patent, but you would still have to extend the lens before you could engage the extender.

If you already own the 100-400 II, I would consider how I use the lens and if I regularly need more than 560mm (EF lens + extender).

I would be blown away if Canon could provide prosumer options that meet or exceed the IQ and capabilities of the PF 500, Sony 200-600, and Sigma 150-600 AT comparable aperture ranges. I do not consider the DO f11 lenses a solution within 2 hours after sunrise and 2 hours before sunset. I tried the 800mm f11 and did not like the limits imposed by the narrow aperture and the DOF. I heave heard folks say at those ranges it is a narrow DOF, but compare the bokeh to a f4 or f5.6 L lens. I would have been very happy with an RF version of the 400 f4 IS DO II, 500 f4 IS DO and 600 f5.6 IS DO if priced similar to the 400 f4 DO II with the longer lenses.

David

 

[Joules]

I would have been very happy with an RF version of the 400 f4 IS DO II, 500 f4 IS DO and 600 f5.6 IS DO if priced similar to the 400 f4 DO II with the longer lenses.

But... There is a 500 4.0 and 600 5.6 on this list of expected lenses? Only a 400 4.0 is missing, and given the huge number of lenses on this list, not all options can be expected to be served right away.

Are you disappointed that DO isn't mentioned explicitly? I believe if it can contribute to a reduction in size or weight, they will simply incorporate it into future lenses without including DO in the name. See the 800 and 600 mm f/11 for an indication of this. Sure, the DO is mentioned heavily in the marketing material, but it is not something special enough to explicitly put it into the title. Just speculation of course.

The other option is that they can deal with the size and optical requirements better without incorporating DO and therefore just don't put it in. But I personally find the first theory more likely.

 

[StandardLumen]

Wow, if all of these lenses and an R1 come out in 2021 Canon's mirrorless lineup is going to be incredibly formidable.

 

[mclaren777]

I was really hoping for either a 14-28mm f/2 or a 70-135mm f/2 so this road map is disappointing to me.

If the 135mm had been f/2 with IS, I might have gotten it. Perhaps I'll borrow this f1.4 version when it comes out.

 

[Tamerlane]

so does this mean the 14-21 f1.4L is not coming?

Is the ultimate astro lens coming? Another RF 14-21mm f/1.4L USM mention [CR2]

I have been told to expect a "world's first" wide-angle zoom lens from Canon in the next few months, the official announcement date and shipping date are unk

www.canonrumors.com

 

[Joules]

so does this mean the 14-21 f1.4L is not coming?

Is the ultimate astro lens coming? Another RF 14-21mm f/1.4L USM mention [CR2]

I have been told to expect a "world's first" wide-angle zoom lens from Canon in the next few months, the official announcement date and shipping date are unk

www.canonrumors.com

This is just the Roadmap for a single year. The extremely niche lenses like f/2.0 and f/1.4 zooms may well materialize only after the less specialized sections of the lens portfolio have been filled out.