A pair of 24-70mm f/2.8L IS lenses coming in 2019? [CR2]

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D Mark IV
Jan 28, 2015
2,565
208
Irving, Texas
#41
Yes true. And perhaps weather sealing too? Still, from an IQ point of view I’m just not excited about the RF 50L at his point. It seems very good of course, but I’m not seeing anything which makes me think it’s better than what is already available for EF ... and it’s not like the RF 50L is small, light and cheap.
Might be true. The fact is, though, that most high end modern lenses are all very good as far as IQ. This is what I imagine, anyway. I've only used Canon and then also had a Tamron 15-30 that was good all the way around. I'm not too averse to manual focus (I have about 40 MF lenses), but AF done right is so much easier for me. My eyesight is pretty bad. :)

I actually prefer the heavy lenses. They just feel right for me. As I get older I think it is important to work a little harder too. :) The 28-70 f/2 is really the only thing exciting to me in R at this time. Like you, I'm waiting to see. Hoping for a better camera body before I could consider adding mirrorless. I know it is a pipe dream, but hoping they also do a longer f/2 zoom.
 
Last edited:
Jul 14, 2018
59
23
#42
A 24x70 II class lens released in RF, with or without IS, paired with the next R release and it being 50mp plus, together this equals an instant Pre-order for me.

Waiting on the future.
It's an important lens formula to have in native FFM mount for people considering committing to the EOS R (and whatever other bodies are to come). Certainly to me. I'd expect this as a bundled lens with the next (semi-pro) offering.
 
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
150
#43
I hope the RF zooms are substantially smaller and lighter than the EF versions.
I'd rather have an RF 16-35 f/4L than an f/2.8L purely based on size and weight.
yes, me too. but Canon will first do f/2.8 lenses. at least as big and more expensive than the EF ones. they want and need to establish R mount as fully "pro-grade" future Canon system ... as quickly as possible.

ofc they also need to launch at least one "pro-grade" EOS R camera- or more than one body (1. stills high speed, 2. stills hi-rez, 3. high specs video) - asap.

so i see little chance for a EF mount 24-70/2.8 L IS - unless they launch it as "final new EF lens release" along with a 1DX III for 2020 Olympics in Tokyo. But it would slow down adoption of EOS R system as "new standard" ...

Canon needs to build critical mass fast in the mirrorless FF market, they dont go for #2 or #3 slot behind Sony and Nikon.

Nikon has the same challenge. Bring a D6 and/or a Z9? Launch mor legacy F-mount lenses or not?

Interesting transitional times. Luckily as an amateur i can sit back and watch how things unfold, before i decide on my next imaging gear system. definitely no rush to buy.
 
Last edited:
Apr 1, 2016
113
14
#44
Sounds good!

Now Canon needs to release a pair of balls too and bring us a pro R camera :D

btw, as a pro you could sit back and wait it out too; that's what I am doing. Shooting the 5D4 for two years now and it would be economically unwise to already replace them. I won't make an extra buck doing that. Once the write off of these camera's is complete, in 2 or 3 years or so, I'll replace them and then I see what's a good system to use.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
1,893
142
Vancouver, BC
#45
I hope the RF zooms are substantially smaller and lighter than the EF versions.
I'd rather have an RF 16-35 f/4L than an f/2.8L purely based on size and weight.
yes, me too. but Canon will first do f/2.8 lenses. at least as big and more expensive than the EF ones. they want and need to establish R mount as fully "pro-grade" future Canon system ... as quickly as possible.
If you guys are hoping that Canon will make f/4 RF lenses, I'm 100% certain they will, and probably pretty quickly. I too would like this, because there are many focal lengths that I prefer a slower, lighter lens. I fear that f/4 RF's will still be quite pricey compared to EF f/4's. I mean, just look at Sony G lenses -- they are often much more expensive than EF equivalents, especially when looking at street prices.

On the other hand, if the hope is that RF f/4 or f/2.8's are going to be much smaller and lighter than EF equivalents, I think you're going to be disappointed, because there are no free rides.

Almost all of the weight and size determined by the optics and the desired durability of the lens (ie plastic EFS lens will weigh a lot less, because it's plastic). Canon can improve the optics with better glass, better coatings, better processes, whatever... but unless they have a new optical formula that produces as good an image with less glass that takes up less space, a smaller, lighter lens just isn't going to happen. And if there were such a formula, it could be used in EF as well, unless it absolutely needed a shorter FFD.

As we see with Sony and the RF's so far, from wide angle to general purpose/portraiture FL lenses, there's a tiny bit of size to be saved on the length, but not the barrel diameter, and nothing worth speaking of to be saved on the weight. As you get to telephoto focal lengths, there's nothing to be gained at all.

The mount isn't sorcery, so unless people are willing to compromise on something, like the quality of the image, or unless there is new materials science applied, like a lighter alloy, I suspect RF lenses will basically look and feel like newer, jazzier versions of EF lenses.
 
Likes: FramerMCB
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
150
#46
There are not only GM and "Zeiss"-labelled lenses for Sony FE. ;)

Likewise there will also be multiple lines of Canon RF lenses, "L" and "non-L":
A. Ultra-premium-L" ... 50/1.2, 28-70/2.0 and the like
B. "Pro-grade-L" - f/2.8 zooms, f/1.4 primes, big whites teles, T/S etc.
C. "Prosumer-L" ... f/4.0 zooms, eg RF 24-105
D. "Prosumer Non-L" ... eg. 24-105/3.5-6.3 "kit" lens, f 1.8-2.8 primes, macro lenses ... eg RF 35/1.8 Pseudo-Macro 1:2

At first Canon will mainly offer big, fast, "premium / ultrahigh margin" RF lenses [see 28-70/2, 50/1.2] to maximize profits by taking easy money from drooling early adopters. :)

Category A and B "L" lenses will be just as big/heavy as EF lenses - if not more due to faster aperture and/or higher IQ targets - and they will definitely be more expensive.

Category C and D will hopefully allow for some size/weight savings in WA to short tele focal lengths over equivalent EF glass. Optical design advantages of well-chosen R-mount parameters are maybe "not magic" but definitely "very real". (y)

I also expect some small or even "pancake" RF lenses ... nice and tiny f/1.8 to f/2.8 primes anywhere from 16mm to 35mm focal lengths and some compact and affordable variable aperture xx - f/5.6 zooms - similar to e.g. EF 24-105/3.5-5.6 or even better a RF 24-120/4-5.6 ... maybe already as "kit lens" for an entry level EOS R body. Those are the RF lenses I am waiting for ... unless I get the kit I want from Sony or Nikon before Canon has got its act together.

If Samyang can make AF lenses like 24/2.8 and 35/2.8 for less-than-optimal Sony FE mount so should Canon for much better-suited R mount ... even with IS added. It is definitely POSSIBLE. Just do it. I'd buy them even at 50% higher price than the Samyangs. :p

 
Last edited:
Likes: Hesbehindyou

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,750
22
#48
24-70 F2.8 would be nice but canon needs to introduce some pro / prosumer R cameras first.

Great glass on a mediocre body is like lipstick on a pig
 
Sep 21, 2018
2
0
#50
The real question is will the RF mount be put on a an upcoming cinema camera. Canon is being really secretive about the entire future of RF.
Curious about this, too. The single most compelling feature of my Cinema EOS over any DSLx is the built in ND. Don't think that 20mm flange distance leaves enough room for that shuffle kind ND from the C100, but only an electronic VND.
 
#51
Curious about this, too. The single most compelling feature of my Cinema EOS over any DSLx is the built in ND. Don't think that 20mm flange distance leaves enough room for that shuffle kind ND from the C100, but only an electronic VND.
I was looking inside my C100 and the ND internals are surprisingly thin. I think they'd be able to fit it in with the 20mm flange. Not having internal NDs would be a complete non-starter for a cinema camera.
 
Likes: Apfelmark
Sep 21, 2018
2
0
#53
I was looking inside my C100 and the ND internals are surprisingly thin. I think they'd be able to fit it in with the 20mm flange. Not having internal NDs would be a complete non-starter for a cinema camera.
The distance of the whole mechanics including the front protective glass to the sensor looks like about 20mm, maybe a bit more. Adding the mount probably exceeds the available distance. Some EF lenses even protrude into the mount, so you can't just consume all that available space with a ND.
Hope we'll see the answer early next year.
 
Sep 19, 2010
1,268
42
Ottawa Ontario
#54
I don't get it. A pro-grade standard zoom that only mounts on a consumer mirrorless body. Everyone is going to give up their one series and 5 series bodies and buy a couple of R bodies, (cause you can't put these on your old camera as a backup) for these couple of lenses. I know Canon is the 800 lb gorilla but this is pushing it.
Obviously you missed the memos plastered over the entire photo world: Canon's future is mirrorless, as clearly evidenced by the R mount 24-70 f/2 and 50 f/1.2
 
Sep 19, 2010
1,268
42
Ottawa Ontario
#55
If you guys are hoping that Canon will make f/4 RF lenses, I'm 100% certain they will, and probably pretty quickly. I too would like this, because there are many focal lengths that I prefer a slower, lighter lens. I fear that f/4 RF's will still be quite pricey compared to EF f/4's. I mean, just look at Sony G lenses -- they are often much more expensive than EF equivalents, especially when looking at street prices.

On the other hand, if the hope is that RF f/4 or f/2.8's are going to be much smaller and lighter than EF equivalents, I think you're going to be disappointed, because there are no free rides.

Almost all of the weight and size determined by the optics and the desired durability of the lens (ie plastic EFS lens will weigh a lot less, because it's plastic). Canon can improve the optics with better glass, better coatings, better processes, whatever... but unless they have a new optical formula that produces as good an image with less glass that takes up less space, a smaller, lighter lens just isn't going to happen. And if there were such a formula, it could be used in EF as well, unless it absolutely needed a shorter FFD.

As we see with Sony and the RF's so far, from wide angle to general purpose/portraiture FL lenses, there's a tiny bit of size to be saved on the length, but not the barrel diameter, and nothing worth speaking of to be saved on the weight. As you get to telephoto focal lengths, there's nothing to be gained at all.

The mount isn't sorcery, so unless people are willing to compromise on something, like the quality of the image, or unless there is new materials science applied, like a lighter alloy, I suspect RF lenses will basically look and feel like newer, jazzier versions of EF lenses.
They will likely be smaller and lighter. Sony's f/4 16-35 is smaller (1" shorter) and lighter (by 100g), and it performs better than the Canon version. That is significant.
 
Likes: fullstop

scyrene

EOS 6D Mark II
Dec 4, 2013
2,262
117
UK
www.flickr.com
#56
Yes true. And perhaps weather sealing too? Still, from an IQ point of view I’m just not excited about the RF 50L at his point. It seems very good of course, but I’m not seeing anything which makes me think it’s better than what is already available for EF ... and it’s not like the RF 50L is small, light and cheap.
Well compared to the Otus aside from adding AF the Canon is also a bit cheaper. Over the Art, I guess the AF is more reliable, and maybe other things like sealing and build quality? Also over both it has 1/3 stop more aperture, although that makes little practical difference. Surely we're pushing the very edge of what's possible at 50mm now - it's good there are several options providing excellent sharpness etc. But expecting the new Canon 50mm to be much better again than these newer lenses (rather than the old 50mm f/1.2 which it seems to trounce) is probably unrealistic.
 
Likes: FramerMCB
Apr 1, 2016
113
14
#58
these lenses are targeted at a higher positioned camera than the one that's about to released, at least that's what I am thinking. A pro version in 2019?
 
Likes: FramerMCB
Sep 5, 2018
2
0
#59
I guess the question is do you go with RF lenses and give up the ND filter adapter, which I'm really looking forward for video shooting?
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
47
17
116
Williamsport, PA
#60
Very exciting. Can't afford the R series yet but am saving to convert to it. I would like the new normal range zoom but unless they really blow things out of the water will keep my 100-400mm MII and other EF lenses. But all in all I am really liking the direction this is going.
 
Likes: FramerMCB