I got the RP just to get the 28-70. Incredible lens. But I will hold off on buying any other RP lens until a real camera comes to match those lenses. And please Canon, don't skimp on video features and IBIS!
Upvote
0
As far as macro is concerned Canon themselves have some uniques macros- MP-E 65, Ef-M 28mm. Apart from these there are 2 Venus Laowa lenses 60mm and 100mm macros. few Tilt shift Macros from Schnieder and hartblei along with Canon's own Tilt shift macros. So there nothing new Canon can do that they or others havent dont before.
As far as macro is concerned Canon themselves have some uniques macros- MP-E 65, Ef-M 28mm. Apart from these there are 2 Venus Laowa lenses 60mm and 100mm macros. few Tilt shift Macros from Schnieder and hartblei along with Canon's own Tilt shift macros. So there nothing new Canon can do that they or others havent dont before.
wow this is getting expensive.
24
50
85
135
That’s what about 10k right there?
You'd need to change the laws of physics to do that.
You'd need to change the laws of physics to do that, too.
Something light-field like, maybe a macro with an automatic focus-stacking mode? Plus automatic align and merge in camera?For Venus Optics I'd mention the 24mm probe or the 15mm UWA before the 60mm.Anyway, what I think you're getting at is:
I can't think of many things left that aren't technicalities, from the top of my head:
- 5x magnification: already done
- IS: already done
- Tilt/Shift: Already done
- Builtin lights: already done
- 1:1 in 15mm-180mm: already done
- Probe: already done
- Autofocus for >1.2x magnification
- Drop-in filters
- Something light-field like
- front element not being parallel to sensor (think prism, not tilt)
- Apodization
I agree that it's a lower priority, but I'll argue against dead as well. To me, the existence of the RP shows that Canon is still interested in providing products for its enthusiast customers. Once they have the major L glass gaps covered, I'd be shocked if they didn't start rolling out the non-L glass lineup.Agreed. Maybe not dead but pretty much low priority. The whole MILC/FF movement by the big boys is to sell a bit fewer but far more profitable higher end equipment that smartphones cannot immediately threaten. Canon somewhat went rogue with the low-cost RP body but I don't expect much give on the lenses and so far it's showing.
To me the RF lens lineup is too much L and too much upmarket.
The lenses are all great, lovely and desireable - if you've got the money.
But when Canon wants to gain market share they should also introduce more lenses like the RF 35 or even smaller and less expensive.
For Venus Optics I'd mention the 24mm probe or the 15mm UWA before the 60mm.Anyway, what I think you're getting at is:
I can't think of many things left that aren't technicalities, from the top of my head:
- 5x magnification: already done
- IS: already done
- Tilt/Shift: Already done
- Builtin lights: already done
- 1:1 in 15mm-180mm: already done
- Probe: already done
- Autofocus for >1.2x magnification
- Drop-in filters
- Something light-field like
- front element not being parallel to sensor (think prism, not tilt)
- Apodization
Sure. And if I was going to buy an EOS R or RP body that 24-105 would come with it.The prices will probably come down to similar levels when Sigma, Tamron, etc. jump on board. To be fair though, the 24-105 is good and well priced.
TS-E 24-100mm f/4 Macro (with EF mount) would be nice.
I wonder how short the RF 24/1.4 will be. Definitely not a pancake, but still... is it a good match to RP?
High magnification and still deep DOF if desired? Wouldn't that be sweet.
To me the RF lens lineup is too much L and too much upmarket.
The lenses are all great, lovely and desireable - if you've got the money.
But when Canon wants to gain market share they should also introduce more lenses like the RF 35 or even smaller and less expensive - now and not in 2, 3 years.