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

Ozarker

Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,933
4,336
The Ozarks
Agree about the versatility, just saying I find a 24-70 more versatile than a 28-70. YMMV. I do think the difference between 70mm f/2.8 and 70mm f/2 is subtle at best in terms of DoF, which is why I have an 85/1.4.
I have to agree. 24-70 is more versatile, in my opinion. However, I'd still love to have an RF 28-70mm f/2L just because. Weight and size are irrelevant to me. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
That's weird. Your camera body has a moving mirror assembly and a moving shutter, your lenses have moving focus groups and (likely) moving IS groups, but you are only afraid of the moving sensor?
It is weird, right...but Canon has been perfecting the flappy mirror for multiple decades-not saying that mirrors boxes don't fail. That being said, no one can contest that less moving parts usually results in less points of failure. I guess my doubt stems from the Sonys and Nikons that whos IBIS systems have experience growing pains. My friends who have A7-line cameras have not experienced any problems so I guess that's a good sign. My only question/request is if one could turn OFF IBIS or if when Canon implements it, one has the option to turn it off, much like IS enabled lenses...yes, Kit way more moving parts. :)

I also was reluctant to try DPAF until I used it on a C300ii with an 85/1.2L at f/1.2. I haven't totally written off IBIS, I'm just reluctant to adopt.
 
Upvote 0
L lenses are pro lenses by definition.
The 100-400mm MII is as good a lens as is made (Even primes) in durability, and optical quality. It extends and is NOT a collector of dust, well sealed. I have had mine for several years now and no dust with heavy use in desert environments etc.
There are the you tube arm chair commentators and real users.
I really get tired of those who have never used a lens, especially in tough environments, making any comment except for click bait you tube videos.
PS I also have it out in wet weather and no problems either.
I just got my 100-400Lii last week and it's been a joy to use on the 5Div and EOS R. I've only owned constant aperture lenses until the 100-400Lii, which was my biggest turn-off with it until I used it. It might even replace my 70-200/2.8L IS.


Answer: Extending Barrel L-series lenses; not a concern.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
583
571
122
Williamsport, PA
I just got my 100-400Lii last week and it's been a joy to use on the 5Div and EOS R. I've only owned constant aperture lenses until the 100-400Lii, which was my biggest turn-off with it until I used it. It might even replace my 70-200/2.8L IS.


Answer: Extending Barrel L-series lenses; not a concern.

I found it's ability to focus to about 3' at 400mm makes it an excellent near macro lens in the field for small flowers and insects.
A very versatile lens with twice the reach as the 70-200.
 
  • 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
Which definition is that?

I'm sure you already know this, but...given that there is nothing better to talk about and the great lens length debate seems to have abated for the time being – "L" lenses are "Luxury" according to Canon's EF Lens promotional book. If there are any standards for what is required of an "L" lens, only Canon knows those standards. And, they aren't particularly consistent in their designation. Perhaps "L" for Luxury sounds better than "E" for expensive?
 
Upvote 0
Mar 2, 2012
3,187
543
I'm sure you already know this, but...given that there is nothing better to talk about and the great lens length debate seems to have abated for the time being – "L" lenses are "Luxury" according to Canon's EF Lens promotional book. If there are any standards for what is required of an "L" lens, only Canon knows those standards. And, they aren't particularly consistent in their designation. Perhaps "L" for Luxury sounds better than "E" for expensive?
Yes I had luxury in mind when writing my post and even something about professionals typically choosing utility over luxury, but I thought better of it ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
583
571
122
Williamsport, PA
I'm sure you already know this, but...given that there is nothing better to talk about and the great lens length debate seems to have abated for the time being – "L" lenses are "Luxury" according to Canon's EF Lens promotional book. If there are any standards for what is required of an "L" lens, only Canon knows those standards. And, they aren't particularly consistent in their designation. Perhaps "L" for Luxury sounds better than "E" for expensive?

Ken Rockwell says the L stands for "Expensive as L"
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Dec 25, 2012
750
376
I had a (sealed) Milvus 100 which collected dust in not very dusty conditions. That and reports like that from degos convinced me not to get another lens that extends.
I have had several lenses that extend and many that don't and I have had no issues WRT dust. I live in a very dusty desert and even shoot at a beach and have no problems.
 
Upvote 0
Mar 20, 2015
428
372
I have had several lenses that extend and many that don't and I have had no issues WRT dust. I live in a very dusty desert and even shoot at a beach and have no problems.

You are very fortunate.

Every extending lens has to permit air to enter and exit, it couldn't operate otherwise ( unless it had some enormous ratchet gearing to push against internal pressure ). Unlike a fixed-length internal-zooming lens which can be fully sealed with gaskets.

And once air is flowing, so is the dust.

When using my 100-400 II I try to remember to wipe-down the extended barrel before retracting it, but usually in the heat of the moment I don't have time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Feb 7, 2019
411
478
UK
L lenses are pro lenses by definition.
The 100-400mm MII is as good a lens as is made (Even primes) in durability, and optical quality. It extends and is NOT a collector of dust, well sealed. I have had mine for several years now and no dust with heavy use in desert environments etc.
There are the you tube arm chair commentators and real users.
I really get tired of those who have never used a lens, especially in tough environments, making any comment except for click bait you tube videos.
PS I also have it out in wet weather and no problems either.

My 100-400 ii has some dust! No loss of IQ though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

YuengLinger

Print the ones you love.
CR Pro
Dec 20, 2012
3,751
2,269
USA
I feel I'm one of the few who DO NOT want IBIS. Am I alone in this? My concern is durability. My 5D Mark IV has gone through the gamut of production hell from the Arctic Circle to the hot sands of the desert to the hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico. The idea of a moving sensor with the bangs and bumps of production work concerns me. I have no doubt that Canon will produce a solid product but the solid build of the 1Dxii, 5Div, and even EOSR have proven themselves to me sans IBIS.
Do you have any data to support your fear of a feature that could improve image quality for many photographers?

I think there were photographers who had the same fear auto focus. And digital cameras!

Just wait a generation to see how well IBIS does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Sep 17, 2014
1,038
1,395
It is weird, right...but Canon has been perfecting the flappy mirror for multiple decades-not saying that mirrors boxes don't fail. That being said, no one can contest that less moving parts usually results in less points of failure. I guess my doubt stems from the Sonys and Nikons that whos IBIS systems have experience growing pains. My friends who have A7-line cameras have not experienced any problems so I guess that's a good sign. My only question/request is if one could turn OFF IBIS or if when Canon implements it, one has the option to turn it off, much like IS enabled lenses...yes, Kit way more moving parts. :)

I also was reluctant to try DPAF until I used it on a C300ii with an 85/1.2L at f/1.2. I haven't totally written off IBIS, I'm just reluctant to adopt.


I also worry about the moving parts and possible failures / misalignment. But don't hear many IBIS failures in other systems so maybe not such a big issue. Also a body is replaced faster than a lens which can have the same IS failure.

Would be nice to have finally global shutters everywhere and get rid of that mechanical shutter.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,099
12,863
You are very fortunate.

Every extending lens has to permit air to enter and exit, it couldn't operate otherwise ( unless it had some enormous ratchet gearing to push against internal pressure ). Unlike a fixed-length internal-zooming lens which can be fully sealed with gaskets.

And once air is flowing, so is the dust.

When using my 100-400 II I try to remember to wipe-down the extended barrel before retracting it, but usually in the heat of the moment I don't have time.
Some people see rain, and run around like Chicken Little screaming that the sky is falling.

Some people obsess over a tiny dust speck in their lens. Almost as if it’s the apocalypse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,360
1,231
Upvote 0