What’s a “realistic” lens that you’d like to see Canon make?

tron

CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,222
1,616
How about a Canon RF 600mm f5.6 DO IS [Mk 1] for $7,399?
Or are you talking more like the old but super sharp and fast focusing EF 400mm f5.6?
You are 1 hour and 1 minute late :cool:


Now can you lower the price a little ? (or more?) please? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Upvote 0
I would like to see some lenses like these:

RF 15-35mm f4 IS (a light carry around lens)
RF 24-70mm f4 IS (as light as possible)
RF 70-200mm f4 IS (as light as possible)

RF 14mm f1,4 (f1,2 or f1,8 would be fine as well) with as little vignetting as possible

200mm f4 IS MACRO (180mm or more and IS)

500mm f5,6 DO IS (as sharp and light as possible)
500mm or 600 f4 DO IS

RF 18 or 20mm f2,8
Tilt-Shift with AF when in neutral position (I don't know how possible this is, especially if it doesn't have heavy vignetting - maybe someone who has more technical knowledge can explain what it would take to create a 20mm 2.8 TS lens)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
RF 70-200 2.8. That'll give me a "reasonably" priced long lens that does the job and I'll still have a 70-200. Win-win.
Sadly, it appears that the 70-200 won't fit. I know. I know. I didn't believe it either.
 
Upvote 0

twoheadedboy

EOS R5
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
318
458
Sturtevant, WI
Ultrawide f/4 zoom...come on guys, want to replace my 16 - 35 on an adapter
28mm f/1.4 IS or f/1.2...I am just not a fan of fixed 24mm or 35mm, 28mm is perfect for my mind's eye
50mm f/1.4 IS...the f/1.2 is superb but a bit overkill for me at this focal length.
85mm f/1.4 IS...I love my EF, but adapter...
How about that 70 - 135 f/2...would be even better if it was macro
The ultrawidest, biggest aperture rectilinear lens you can make under $10k. If that's 14mm f/1.4 or 13mm f/4 or 10mm f/5.6 or whatever it is down in there and it's sharp, I'm about it. Even better if it takes screw-on filters in the front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,360
1,231
I own the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 for astro. It's great! but it's a DSLR lens, and Sigma makes it for the Nikon F mount, which means they had to design their optics around a very small opening with a big flange distance. That's a big deal for fast, super-wide lenses, which benefit the most from the wide openings and short flange distances of modern mirrorless mounts. Canon could certainly make a 14mm lens one stop faster for their R mount. No doubt it would be huge, but so is the Sigma, and it's always on a tripod, anyway. BTW, the vignetting isn't ever a real-world problem for me... We've been testing the Canon 24-240 RF which has serious vignetting and distortion at 24mm, but the camera and Lightroom both automatically correct for it in post, which means you never see any problem with your images. I am fine with that.
Hi Tony,
First off, thank you for running your YouTube channel.
Let me provide some Perspective on 14/1.8 vs 14/1.2 subject.
As we are well aware, an elevated vignetting levels on RF mount are associated with a shorter mount flange distance. A longer lenses are less affected as there is no requirement for light to be bent at extreme angles. As we all aware. Ticked.
with shorter focal lengths, bending light to reach extreme corners and micro lens position is becoming an issue.
Yes, 2-3 stops of vignetting is an unfortunate reality however is manageable.
However, at 14mm and F1.2 vignetting levels may reach some unmanageable levels. 6 stops or even more
Bulbous front 105mm front element is given. at least. It’s a 2kg lens.
Another issue I guarantee to be a problem for Astro in some serious level or commatic aberrations in corners and ugly shaped stars in result.
theoretically, such a lens can exist. commercially it would have to be an expensive, specialty lens.
 
Upvote 0

derpderp

Pixel Peeper
Jan 31, 2020
161
201
Canon is the only remaining mainstream lens manufacturer without a reasonable 50mm lens that belongs to the 21st century, which is quite astonishingly ridiculous when you think about it (even Pentax has got one). All of their 50s bar the €2300 RF 1.2 are either yet another version of the decades old double gauss or barely evolved from it, with all that entails in regards to IQ (ie they're terrible by 2020 standards), and all of them with appalling AF.
Personally I'd like Canon to chase a level of ambition as high as Nikon tried (and not fully successfully so) to reach with the 50mm 1.8 Z, without IS (as IBIS is coming and I'd rather have Canon put it all in IQ), and without the Nikon's issues with onion rings / manufacturing problems, and I'd happily pay between €450 and €700 for it, but I'm rather expecting Canon to target a lower level of ambition with such specs unfortunately.
I would have thought such a reasonable, practical lens likely to end up in lots of hands and as a result quite a bit more likely to produce interesting pictures, a priority, at least more so than lenses designed to enable Canon's marketing department to trumpet the size of Canon's engineering appendage, but what do I know ?

Just buy the RF 50mm F1.2. Stop complaining about the price, its cheap enough.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0