Are these the 7 RF lenses Canon will be announcing in 2020? [CR1]

Usability.

Given that the 18-80 f/2.8 already exists w/speed boosters, what's mind boggling is that Canon didn't just take that internally and produce a knockout lens.

Instead we are getting slow f/7.1 zooms and enormous expensive f/2's. Both have limited usability. That doesn't look like innovation to me.
A speedbooster doesn’t magically make a lens faster, it just optically diffracts the image behind the aperture to make it seem faster. And wider. The f/2.0 lens released so far, and its prospective trinity accompaniments, represent actual innovation and engineering. They’re big because that’s what it takes to gather that kind of light. I’ll take actual optics over parlor tricks any day.
 

PiezoSwitch

I'm New Here
Aug 22, 2019
19
19
50 and 85 with is and stm motors on a budget would be top selling!!! I imagine 200-400$ each. I hope it comes true! Canon is rocking atm...!!! 35mm is already a macro lens and 50mm is also a macro lens. What else to ask really? Holy $hit...
That would truly be delightful. The 35mm is a stellar performer at a great price plus having IS makes it such a useful lens for my shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gzroxas

canonnews

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 27, 2017
543
786
Canada
www.canonnews.com
Since the 35mm IS STM is around 500 and the optical forumula for the 50mm IS STM is very similar I'd expect it around the same price.

These lenses aren't going to be as cheap as their EF counterparts, given the fact that they are new optical designs.
 

Normalnorm

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 25, 2012
594
206
Seems a little boring, given that Canon promised new and inventive lenses along with the R system.

The difference between f/2.8 and f/2 at 135mm isn't massive, and so that lens seems a little fringe.

Why no 17-55mm f/2.8? Why no telephoto lenses faster than f/7.1? Why no L primes smaller than their EF counterparts?

Did we really need a junky 24-105?
 

Normalnorm

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 25, 2012
594
206
Seems a little boring, given that Canon promised new and inventive lenses along with the R system.

The difference between f/2.8 and f/2 at 135mm isn't massive, and so that lens seems a little fringe.

Why no 17-55mm f/2.8? Why no telephoto lenses faster than f/7.1? Why no L primes smaller than their EF counterparts?

Did we really need a junky 24-105?
Scarcely seems boring as the 70-135 f2 is not in anyone else’s line up. As for f2 not being much different then you would not be impressed by the 28-70f2 which in my experience was dramatically better than the 24-70 f2.8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoms

Normalnorm

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 25, 2012
594
206
I completely skipped over the 10-24. As an EF 11-24 owner I would snap that up in a minute. With the promise of the lenses listed here there is scant reason not to dump all my EF lenses and bodies and move entirely to RF.
With the R5 promising substantial improvements over the R I will be selling that also and getting 2 R5 bodies to complete the transition to the new mirrorless paradigm.
 

i_SH

I'm New Here
Aug 31, 2018
21
15
Canon, again, everything for maniacs? :)
When will you release a pair of 16-40 / 4 and 50-200 / 4 lenses for fans?
 

Rule556

I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
Dec 19, 2019
71
73
Seattle
www.flickr.com
Missing:
70-300 4-5.6 STM (not interesting for me)
17-35 4.5-5.6 STM or something similar
I’m a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM owner, and I love it. It’s a fantastic budget travel lens, and it compliments the current 24-105mm f/4L really well in a travel kit. I am upgrading to the RF 24-105 f/4L, and would love an RF version of the 70-300. Depending on the cost and size though, the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM sounds really intriguing for my needs. If it’s still around f/5.6 at 300mm, and it’s $1,000 or less, I’ll be REALLY intrigued.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flip314

joestopper

Rrr...
Feb 4, 2020
168
152
I’m a 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM owner, and I love it. It’s a fantastic budget travel lens, and it compliments the current 24-105mm f/4L really well in a travel kit. I am upgrading to the RF 24-105 f/4L, and would love an RF version of the 70-300. Depending on the cost and size though, the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM sounds really intriguing for my needs. If it’s still around f/5.6 at 300mm, and it’s $1,000 or less, I’ll be REALLY intrigued.
Why would it be any cheaper than the EF 100-400 II ? No way ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules