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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
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: 1 user
Upvote 0
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?
 
Upvote 0
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: 1 user
Upvote 0
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Rule556

I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
Dec 19, 2019
104
107
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: 1 user
Upvote 0

joestopper

Rrr...
Feb 4, 2020
233
212
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: 1 user
Upvote 0
I’d really love to have a small but excellent quality 85 1.8 IS!
Hopefully the missing MACRO designation is some typo - that would be the hammer lens for me combined with the RF 35 MACRO - or we have to wait another year for a RF f/2.0 100 IS Macro ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0