There will be “a lot” of new RF mount lenses from Canon between now and March 2024

[roby17269]

If Canon doesn\'t come out with a light RF L 35mm 1.4 lens this year then I\'m selling all my Canon gear. I\'m hoping it\'s not a 1.2 either. It\'s a pain to shoot with the 1.2 primes for fun because they\'re so heavy and I will never buy their crap 1.8 stm motor primes.

Well, I won't threaten to leave Canon if they do not release a 35 1.2L this year... because I won't in any case.

I want it to be 1.2 and great like the RF L 50 and 85 and 135. Notice I wrote "want". I can live without a 35mm if I have to. Regardless of the max aperture.

I think that they need it to be 1.2 to entice the owners of the EF 35 1.4L to jump to the new lens.

I am just speculating. I have no hard market data nor insights in what Canon will actually do when.

 

[Loswr]

The RF28mm launch was weird, I preordered it immediately at the #2 photo store in .nl and missed out on the first batch. But before they started shipping the first batch the #4 store had it in stock, next day delivery. So I had it a few days before we left, yay!

Nice. I had decided not to preorder it because the ship date listed at the announcement was after our planned departure for Italy. However, when CR posted an in-stock notice for Adorama on June 23, I ordered immediately. UPS delivered it a couple of days later than Adorama indicated when I placed the order, but the lens arrived literally one hour before we left for the airport. I took a test shot, then stuck it in the bag for the trip. It's a great little lens especially on the R8 (and makes a nice body cap for the R3, as the EF 40/2.8 did for the 1D X).

 

[Loswr]

I think that they need it to be 1.2 to entice the owners of the EF 35 1.4L to jump to the new lens.

I suspect that's true. The EF 50/1.2L and EF 85/1.2L II had an old optical design (some say 'dreamy look' wide open, others just say 'soft'...personally, I'm in the latter group and usually shot the 85/1.2L II at around f/2). The RF lenses are bigger and heavier but optically excellent wide open. The EF 35/1.4L II is optically excellent, much improved over the MkI especially with the BR element (blue goo) to reduce the CA. It's also relatively recent. Canon will likely do something to justify upgrading and the increased cost for the 35/1.4L, and an f/1.2 aperture meets the need for an otherwise excellent lens.

People complain about the high cost of the new lenses, I'm not sure why they think it's reasonable to expect something for nothing. Canon does charge more for the RF L-series lenses than their EF counterparts, but the RF versions typically offer something better – wider focal range for UWA lenses, lighter/smaller for the 70-200 zooms, better IQ for the 50/85 primes, etc. In the few cases where the RF version offers nothing over the EF lens except native compatibility (24-105/4L, 400/2.8, 600/4), the launch price of the RF lens was identical to the launch price of the EF lens (which actually means the RF versions are cheaper if you take inflation into account).

 

[blackcoffee17]

I wish Canon was a little bolder and made a 14-50 F4 instead if 14-35.

 

[AJ]

This could be good news provided they are able to produce product and it is somewhat affordable.

That's funny!

 

[bbasiaga]

I might like a 24mm L if its good for Astro. But at >$2k I'll probably pass. Even though I'd also find use for indoor low light purposes, the cost will just be too high given the RF line's recent history. But I don't 'need' it, just want it.

-Brian

 

[Deleted member 393539]

There has been a lot of discussion about Canon’s RF lineup and certain areas that are in dire need of being addressed. We have been talking to a few people about what Canon has in store for lens announcements over the next 6 months, and we have been told more than once to expect “a

See full article...

Is the 70-135mm zoom lens still talked about? Or has Canon scraped their plans about this lens?
Thanks.

 

[Del Paso]

Is the 70-135mm zoom lens still talked about? Or has Canon scraped their plans about this lens?
Thanks.

Would be an interesting new lens, especially with a close-focusing option and OIS.
And f2,8 or f2 !
Be patient, my wanting heart.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Let me just say that, with all the EF lens being around for so many years, buying now a brand new EF lens wouldn't be a great purchase from a cost/benefits point of view...on the used market you find them for 50% to 80% less, and there would be even more sold by people when RF gaps will be closed.

Example (it's not a RF gap, but I can compare as I acquired it exactly 12 months ago), buying an EF 24-70 f2.8 II today is 2.140€ price list on canon website, and between 1.500€ and 1800€ buying from any reputable retail shop.

I paid for it 610€ shipped (in summer you make super good deals on open auctions on eBay!)...so I would not fear reduction of catalogues, out of stock etc, EF lenses will be available for years, or decades, pretty everywhere on used market. Of course they would not get serviced after a certain period (in Europe, if I recall correctly, spare parts must be available at least up to 10 years after discontinuing a product), but if they discontinue the 24-70 today, the service will stop at the same time, regardless if it was bought used or new.
So I wouldn't personally worry about EF discontinuation, I would just consider all EF's as entirely discontinued starting from the day of the last lens was presented, which is 2018 according to Camera Museum.

...new lenses?! C'mon, let's get me my RF 50 f1.4 and finally make me happy ahah! (...sadly, having just sold the 50 Art for the 40 Art, if they really present it, which I'm sure will NOT happen, I'm not going to buy it...and so they probably will really present it, just to slap me in the face!)

This is assuming that price depreciation is linear and directly dependant on age and a newer version being available. The current price of some of the top their EF glass isn't going to be this low going forwards. Once EF lenses are no longer going to be available, then the quality stuff's prices will rise. The RF lenses are ridiculously over priced. Sure, there are great, but we are paying a premium for the exclusivity of the RF mount. Canon are selling less gear than before, but making a far higher profit with their lenses than previously. Canon will have to re-evaluate their pricing model once the likes of Tamron and Sigma enter the RF lens market. Tamron is making some really interesting lenses for other Mirrorless mounts. The new 70-180mm f2.8 is tiny, light and quite spectacularly sharp. It's less than half the price of the RF version.

 

[John Wilde]

Canon has previously stated that their goal is to release 7-8 new RF lens models per year, so more are definitely on the way.

 

[AJ]

I might like a 24mm L if its good for Astro.

-Brian

EF 24/1.4 mk2 had brutal coma/astigmatism abberations. See for example https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3391473
Maybe Canon will put some focus on coma/astigmatism correction this time around? Seems unlikely, though.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

What magnification ratios do you tend to work at?

It depends on what I'm shooting. If it's fungi, then it's usually around 1:1. Other stuff, a lot further back.

 

[christianf]

How about a 17-55 f2.8 rf-s please!

 

[Canon Rumors]

How about a 17-55 f2.8 rf-s please!

I definitely think such a lens needs to exist for RF-S shooters.

The EF-S 17-55 sold very well and when I rented gear, stock was always depleted. We had 10-12 copies of it. The only nuisance was continually having to take them apart and get the dust out (appearances for the next customer). I suspect that won't be a problem with an RF-S version.

 

[AJ]

This one would surprise me. I would bet on a slow UWA zoom, e.g. a mount-changed EF-M 11-22mm.

... if we're lucky. But, Canon may tell APSC users to just mount a full-frame 11-24 and shoot to their heart's content.
Quote: “As you know, the RF mount can be used with both full-frame and APS-C cameras, and all lenses are suitable. Some of these full-frame lenses can be attached on top of APS-C cameras, so you can attach an existing full-frame lens to your APS-C camera and enjoy shooting scenes to your heart’s content,” the Canon executives said. (source: https://petapixel.com/2023/08/18/canon-has-no-plans-to-ever-release-lens-roadmaps/)

 

[Walrus]

I definitely think such a lens needs to exist for RF-S shooters.

The EF-S 17-55 sold very well and when I rented gear, stock was always depleted. We had 10-12 copies of it. The only nuisance was continually having to take them apart and get the dust out (appearances for the next customer). I suspect that won't be a problem with an RF-S version.

What about reliability, as you say you was in a rental? I had a copy (in 2013) that had IS failure; looking online at the time I saw many complaints about the IS failure, and I asked Canon to repair it for free (bringing proofs of all the online complaints), but in the end I had to pay for the entire work. I then sold it.

Still today I see many exemplars on eBay with the note "good optics, good AF, but IS is partially/entirely broken, with IS switch off the lens works fine", so I never had the guts to buy a second copy, fearing another IS failure. Did you experience any issues with it?

 

[christianf]

I have had mine for over 15 years and bought it used on eBay. I had it for service for zoom damper being loose but no other issues.

 

[christianf]

I definitely think such a lens needs to exist for RF-S shooters.

The EF-S 17-55 sold very well and when I rented gear, stock was always depleted. We had 10-12 copies of it. The only nuisance was continually having to take them apart and get the dust out (appearances for the next customer). I suspect that won't be a problem with an RF-S version.

I agree about dust getting inside. Hope is a L series but that is probably a pipe dream.

 

[Loswr]

How about a 17-55 f2.8 rf-s please!

As explained in a parallel thread, the RF 24-105/4 on an R8 will deliver better overall performance in a lighter package than your 7DII + EF-S 17-55/2.8, and for not much more money.

 

[Talys]

I think that some of us, myself included, may sometimes prematurely ring the death knell of EF lens production. The RF bodies and lenses have been so good to me that I really can't imagine myself buying another piece of EF. However, there are some great EF bodies that are available very cheaply now. I know someone who recently obtained a 6D2 with a 24-70/4 in great condition, their previous camera being a Rebel. The first thing they did? They went and bought a 50/1.8 and 100 L for the macro.

They're mostly taking product photos for their own website, but have a passing interest in other photography. They didn't have a clue what RF is, and they're perfectly happy with their set-up. There are probably a lot of people like this, and for the foreseeable future, I think they'll keep buying EF lenses. While you can get fantastic deals for used lenses, often, amazon is just so convenient. While I think that there is a whole lot that Canon has done right with RF, I don't think there's anything at all wrong with EF. If you're goal-oriented, and you want a camera system that can do a specific job, you probably won't go wrong with EF, even though Canon won't release any new EF products.

For myself, I'm sure my race to a 60 megapixel global shutter supercamera and a bag of holy grail lenses and a shelves full of lighting gizmos will make me very happy but improve my photography very marginally