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

[YuengLinger]

IS on the 135mm would be very nice, but I guess I could live without it. I'd prefer with IS though.

I understand. But since I still have a cherished 135 f/2 in excellent condition, I will try to live with what I got!

 

[vangelismm]

A 100-400mm with f/7.1 at the long end can't be right.

What, no IS on the RF 135mm???

24mm at 1.8 rather than 1.4, but 35mm goes to 1.2?

Might be a reliable source in general, but some of these specifics seem off

You are missing the point with the 24mm and 35mm.
This 24mm is not a L lens.

 

[Deleted member 68328]

you can’t use grads either but that hasn’t stopped the EF-R adapter with filter being very popular.

Sure, but I think the RF 15-35mm + Laowa 9 or 11mm is then a better to combo for me. The RF 15-35mm allows to shoot wide already + filter + IS on top of IBIS + f/2.8 rather than f/4. And if absolutely necessary, I can pull the Laowa to über wide. Seems a better combo than a RF 10-24 that lacks all these extra features. Just my opinion.

 

[Eowhiskass]

Ts-r lenses? make a tilt shift adapter for eos r! why not?

 

[Antono Refa]

I posted on another thread recently how I think their model line should break down:

1) Halo lenses: things no store will stock, may not even be available for order, but officially exist. My examples were:

35/1.0, 50/0.7, 135/1.0, 1200/5.6

A 50mm f/0.7 would write Zeiss' slogans for them, e.g. "and Canon comes 2nd, only 50 years behind!"

 

[Eowhiskass]

How about 135/2.8, Canon?! I need it)

 

[Joel C]

OH. MY. GERD.

 

[BeenThere]

Ts-r lenses? make a tilt shift adapter for eos r! why not?

Adapted to which medium format lenses?

 

[rontele7]

Ordered my R5 from B&H on Sept 15th, got it delivered this week. Just shot with it last night!

How is that possible? I preordered from B&H in early July and haven’t received mine yet.

I don’t think you are being honest; the first batch is all that has shipped. Thousands of us that pre ordered haven’t even heard an update yet!

 

[keithcooper]

Ts-r lenses? make a tilt shift adapter for eos r! why not?

The current TS-E lenses work fine with the plain and filter ef->rf adapter
If you want a tilt/shift adapter for EF lenses there is the slight issue that the image circle of most EF lenses is too small for much movement, that and quite a few EF lenses have baffles/stops that would additionally hinder movements.
Presumably you wanted a t/s adapter like the Hassellad HTS1.5 - this works well but for the 1.5x teleconverter which may be inconvenient

Working with the Hasselblad H6D-50C and HTS adapter

Short review of working with the Hasselblad H6D-50C 50MP Medium format camera using the XCD28mm lens and HTS adapter for tilt and shift

www.northlight-images.co.uk

Yes, one of these for RF mount would be interesting - as well as the two TS-R lenses

 

[keithcooper]

Adapted to which medium format lenses?

Well, the Fotodiox TLT-ROKR already works well on R cameras with Mamiya M645 lenses - I use it with an RP and this was from my recent testing of the R5 with tilt/shift lenses (Mamiya 35mm/3.5 f/11 R5 shifted upwards)
Canon could do an RF equivalent to the HTS1.5 I mentioned earlier.

 

[SteB1]

As a nature photographer the lenses I don't see yet are a longer macro lens, the EF 180mm f3.5 L is very long in the tooth and some lighter and more affordable long lenses. Yes, there's the 100-500mm, but it is a bit expensive, not that fast, and might not appeal to every nature photographer. I am thinking along the lines of RF versions of the 300mm f4 and 400mm f5.6. There's also not any equivalent of the Sony 200-600mm and Nikon 500mm f5.6 PF, which are both the type of lens that a photographer might join or stay in a system for. There's no doubt the 100-500mm is an excellent lens, but these two other lenses have got abilities and characteristics that no Canon lens has. Canon doesn't have to copy them, but at least learn why they are very popular lenses with wildlife and bird photographers, and address that sector in the market.

 

[zim]

Well, the Fotodiox TLT-ROKR already works well on R cameras with Mamiya M645 lenses - I use it with an RP and this was from my recent testing of the R5 with tilt/shift lenses (Mamiya 35mm/3.5 f/11 R5 shifted upwards)
Canon could do an RF equivalent to the HTS1.5 I mentioned earlier.
View attachment 193266

Didn't work to well that building is all over the place

 

[analoggrotto]

Canon TS-R 24mm f/3.5L with autofocus is the holy grail in photography in my opinion. Wow!!

Indeed, Canon always had a knack for pushing the boundaries to deliver a tool that can help take previously less possible shots.

 

[[email protected]]

Wow!

Agree and why not they are no 1, be interesting to see what Sony does now, Nikon will keep podding away which is alright.

 

[Chig]

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

Have you tried the R5 with the EF100-400 and 2x extender , or even 1.4x and 2x stacked ?

 

[Ian K]

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

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

There’s no fault. Their capability was announced before they even shipped. They’ve already said they won’t be changing them.

 

[Bahrd]

I'm even wondering how you even do that when you tilt the focal plane.

Is it different from a "normal" focusing at a sloped object?

 

[dilbert]

it will be interesting to watch the rollout of RF lenses and observe the impact it has on the prices of EF lenses in the used market. I wonder if buying an EF lens today is still considered an "investment." Sure, EF lenses can still be used on RF cameras with an adapter, but the RF lenses thus far are smaller, lighter and producing better images but they're also more expensive. Time to grab some popcorn and watch (although that bucket of popcorn might go stale over the next year as I slowly eat it bit by bit with the lenses that drop...)

 

[Danglin52]

Have you tried the R5 with the EF100-400 and 2x extender , or even 1.4x and 2x stacked ?

I had the R6 + 100-400 II and the IQ was as good or better than on my 1dxII based on a quick look on the laptop. Absolutely no difference I can feel in from operation on a 1dx II although I feel the R6 AF is better.