A Canon RF 16-28mm f/2L USM is coming [CR1]

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
573
545
So... The new 70-200 2.8. What if... What if it was to the RF mount that the 70-200 f/4 IS is to the EF mount. And the real "pro" 70-200 is an F/2 IS. Hence why canon took the "bold' step to make the new RF 70-200 a collapsible/ compact design.
A very interesting theory, hope you are right! This would be a really new (F.2) trinity. :love:
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,335
320
So... The new 70-200 2.8. What if... What if it was to the RF mount that the 70-200 f/4 IS is to the EF mount. And the real "pro" 70-200 is an F/2 IS. Hence why canon took the "bold' step to make the new RF 70-200 a collapsible/ compact design.
even if such a lens was made collapsible, 105mm front element will result in way to large and heavy lens. It is a pretty safe bet that Canon will not venture into that territory. Canon likes safe betting.
 
Last edited:

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,335
320
Based on current RF pricing this won't be worth the asking (imho).

For those excited about it for landscape use, why are we shooting landscapes at F2?
i can see PJs using this lens wide open for a wide crowd shots in a poor light situation whilst having Canon RF 28-70 / 2.0 attached to a second body...
Dance floor, etc. i would certainly be keen to obtain such a lens ... 2020 will be an expensive year... :)
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,626
746
Southeastern USA
I'd have to do weight training before I'd consider buying this new trinity.
It will be interesting the weight of this lens.
As I've said before I don't see the attraction of a 16-28MM F2 Zoom unless its great for Astro.
It all depends on the type of photography that you do.
I'm sure there will be buyers for it or Canon wouldn't design and sell it.
Yikes! You are right--the combined weight in a backpack will be tough to swim with!
 

kraats

EOS 80D
Oct 9, 2011
115
19
Warning to all Canonistas: expensive year ahead!;)
I will wait and see. I do not need a small body with heavy lenses. Maybe one wide angle zoom with f2 would be nice. The current 16-35 III is already very good and I am pleased with it ..... Canon is just showing its muscles with crazy heavy and expensive lenses ..... when it comes to mirrorless I am not sure if fullframe is the way to go. I think APC is. I like the philosophy of Fuji in this regard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fox40phil

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,626
746
Southeastern USA
I will wait and see. I do not need a small body with heavy lenses. Maybe one wide angle zoom with f2 would be nice. The current 16-35 III is already very good and I am pleased with it ..... Canon is just showing its muscles with crazy heavy and expensive lenses ..... when it comes to mirrorless I am not sure if fullframe is the way to go. I think APC is. I like the philosophy of Fuji in this regard.
Or it could be the geniuses in marketing and engineering got together and said, "Once the camera is too big to keep in a pocket, who cares? Make the lenses as big as they need to be for ultimate IQ! The sky is the limit!"
 

Photo Hack

Hi there
Apr 8, 2019
113
149
I will wait and see. I do not need a small body with heavy lenses. Maybe one wide angle zoom with f2 would be nice. The current 16-35 III is already very good and I am pleased with it ..... Canon is just showing its muscles with crazy heavy and expensive lenses ..... when it comes to mirrorless I am not sure if fullframe is the way to go. I think APC is. I like the philosophy of Fuji in this regard.
Or it could be the geniuses in marketing and engineering got together and said, "Once the camera is too big to keep in a pocket, who cares? Make the lenses as big as they need to be for ultimate IQ! The sky is the limit!"
It’s too bad we don’t have sales stats on all Canon’s lenses. With every lens announcement or rumor, some people won’t understand the need for that particular lens. Don’t worry, there’s a need for that lens and Canon knows it.

The needs (and wants) of photographers, like many professions, hobbies, etc., are diverse. Think about how many bodies and lenses are out there from all manufacturers over all time. You have settled on less than probably a half of a half percent of the offerings and only really care about that tiny segment of the market. Well, everyone else is doing the same and goal of a good company is to find a niche and capitalize on the perceived need.

You’re probably right when it comes to the L lenses and full frame. I’m sure there will be a crop sensor and small primes in the future and for those really concerned with size and weight, there’s M.
 

DBounce

I'm New Here
May 3, 2016
9
15
This trinity is probably going to tip the scale at somewhere north of 10lbs... that's pretty dam heavy if you are actually carrying it as a regular part of your kit. Add in the "Pro" body and it might become rather unpleasant rather quickly.
I thought the promise of mirrorless was smaller, faster, higher quality glass?
 
  • Like
Reactions: kraats

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,626
746
Southeastern USA
My point about lens size is that Canon has apparently decided there is no immediate benefit to designing for compactness and light weight. In other words, from Canon's point of view, once a photographer has decided to go "pro grade," or once a customer has decided that a phone isn't good enough and is then willing to carry expensive gear, just design for excellent IQ at wide-apertures and be free of portability constraints.

The lack of in-lens IS would be a puzzle if there were no hope of IBIS.

I'm not passing judgment on Canon for making big lenses. I'm looking forward to getting the rf 50mm 1.2L when a suitable body is released.

But considering the focal lengths, we certainly are seeing some historically large and heavy lenses for the 35mm format camera. Imagine the photographer in the attached (found at discoverdigitalphotography.com) photo with the upcoming RF trinity!



185371
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nitram