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

[Deleted member 68328]

But there never was a 50mm/1.4L for EF mount.

Alas I'd say...

 

[Act444]

quite opposite. on 5DIV difference between ISO 1600 and ISO 3200 isn't even noticeable, however ISO12800 becoming noisy.. much different to ISO6400

If one values detail and crispness, however - and I do - that middle ISO range is where detail retention really begins to drop off (even if noise levels remain within the acceptable range). By 6400 the image is already close to mush. Thankfully color noise is kept under enough control that 12,800 isn't too much worse.

I'm hoping this new R5 lacks an AA filter...

 

[Ozarker]

I would think this trinity with the new R5 would be a godsend for wedding, event and portrait photography. I am not in that market but release all four ( camera and three lenses) and they will be selling tons of 12-15k kits.

I believe you are right! Just the 28-70 and 70-135 could do it all for me as a portrait shooter. The 28-70 is so darned good it will go down as the second greatest zoom ever produced. The 70-135 will hold the #1 crown. Of course, I am talking on personal terms. I won't give up my RF 85 f/1.2L though.

 

[Trey T]

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?

The EF 135 f/2.8 maybe tack sharp at f/4.0; but perhaps the RF 135 f/2 will be sharp across all aperture size.

Fast lenses are big and expensive to Produce and sell. Since the RP is built similar to a rebel line, the slower lenses wide range zoom can attractive for that segment of users

 

[deleteme]

let's understand what corners Canon had to cut in order to arrive there first.. vignetting levels, distortions, bokeh quality. it is rather tempting...

I doubt any of that will be visible through my tears of joy.

 

[jonebize]

I'm here from the Nikon side. Canon is making all of the right decisions right now. The lenses are ambitious yet practical (35mm f/1.2, 70-135mm f/2.0) . I am planning to move over to Canon when I have the money to move to mirrorless.

 

[RobbieHat]

To sad no real birder lens.... like a 200-500 5.f or 600 6.3f or also 5.6f <3....

really strange setup!

I am hoping for those as well but they are more specialty lenses in my mind. Lots more wedding and event photogs then us birders. I am sure they will get to us eventually. The delay will allow me to see how the new R5 stands up as a wildlife rig or if an ASPC rig comes along. Not holding my breath and will adapt EF big whites as needed in the interim.

 

[deleteme]

If 8+ stops of vignetting are OK to you...

I notice you are very focused on vignetting. While it may be an issue for you, for the vast bulk of images made it is a non-issue.
I use the EF 11-24 on a daily basis in high end architectural applications along with my 17TS-E and vignetting is not a problem.
Actual use of most lenses is not wide open but stopped down where vignetting becomes invisible.
Real world use is where I evaluate lenses and my experience informs me that lenses like the 28-70 f2 used wide open are brilliant, the EF 11-24 is superb and the 17TS-E is a classic high performer.
Canon is the leader in the optical world at the moment. Not Zeiss, not Leica, not Sigma, not Nikon. Each of those manufacturers has a few gems but not the number and momentum that Canon has.

 

[Kit.]

I notice you are very focused on vignetting. While it may be an issue for you, for the vast bulk of images made it is a non-issue.
I use the EF 11-24 on a daily basis in high end architectural applications along with my 17TS-E and vignetting is not a problem.
Actual use of most lenses is not wide open but stopped down where vignetting becomes invisible.

Hmm.

So, I went and checked it.
Then checked again.
Then again.
With the same result.
So, I still don't understand:

Can you please tell me where I can find this front filter thread on my TS-E 17?
Because so far, I haven't managed to see it there.

Have I got a counterfeit lens?
Is it not genuine Canon?

 

[canonmike]

Indeed, but my concern is more that there's nothing on this list that will be cheap enough for some people, including those on this forum, who would like to move into the R ecosystem without spending a lot of money. IS drives up the cost, as I'm sure we all know, and I don't know how valuable it is in a 50mm 1.8 design that should, but is not guaranteed to, come in under $150.

Very much concur with your take on cost. It's sometimes difficult to sit on the side lines, waiting for that excitingly breathtaking new $3000.00 lens to come down to a more reasonable, affordable price point. Even with a price reduction of same to, let's say $2000.00, all many of us can then say is, "Boy that sure is cheap. Now, if I could just find a way to come up with that $2k. And yet, bring it on Canon because many have been waiting for the tech we know you are capable of. Looks like this just might be the year the sleeping Giant awakens and once again, shows everyone they know how to produce exciting photographic gear. Judging by the CR blog posts and YT videos, Canon is going to bring us some great camera bodies to go along with all those exciting new RF lenses. If true, one can only hope that Canon produces enough product to satisfy the anticipated demand. A personal thank you to all those early adopters, who, either with deep pockets or cc's with high limits, make it possible to happen. Without you, we would have no new gear.

 

[Etienne]

What does Canon have against making a 50 f/1.4 ? Even the existing EF version is pre-historic.

 

[deleteme]

Hmm.

So, I went and checked it.
Then checked again.
Then again.
With the same result.
So, I still don't understand:

Can you please tell me where I can find this front filter thread on my TS-E 17?
Because so far, I haven't managed to see it there.

Have I got a counterfeit lens?
Is it not genuine Canon?

Hmmm, let me count the number of 17mm TS lenses are on the market. Oh! Precisely one. Canon’s. Nikon only managed 19mm and it did not become the must have lens for architectural photography.
As for a filter there are solutions if you are not too cheap to buy the systems available.
When someone beats Canon’s solution to UWA TS lenses we can then talk. But the canard of a filter ring on a unique lens is the weakest of possible arguments to be made against it.

 

[Gloads]

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 ?

I was hoping for the rumored unique RF macro lens in this list. 100 f/2 1:1 would be fine with me, but I want tack sharp edges for copy work. IS would be a bonus even with IBIS for handheld macro work, especially IIF (insects in flight).

 

[Daan Stam]

What new big sports camera are you referring to? A 1 series R is not likely to appear before 2021.

the R5 with 12/ 20fps 45MP should be enough to sway some of the sports photographers. epecially at some of the less static sports so they can crop.

 

[Kit.]

Hmmm, let me count the number of 17mm TS lenses are on the market. Oh! Precisely one. Canon’s. Nikon only managed 19mm and it did not become the must have lens for architectural photography.
As for a filter there are solutions if you are not too cheap to buy the systems available.
When someone beats Canon’s solution to UWA TS lenses we can then talk. But the canard of a filter ring on a unique lens is the weakest of possible arguments to be made against it.

Wait, are you seriously fantasizing about a 10mm rectilinear FF lens without a bulbous front element?

 

[Tangent]

To a casual observer that 50mm 1.8 might look like a pancake lens. Likely it will be a rather small lens.

 

[navastronia]

Very much concur with your take on cost. It's sometimes difficult to sit on the side lines, waiting for that excitingly breathtaking new $3000.00 lens to come down to a more reasonable, affordable price point. Even with a price reduction of same to, let's say $2000.00, all many of us can then say is, "Boy that sure is cheap. Now, if I could just find a way to come up with that $2k. And yet, bring it on Canon because many have been waiting for the tech we know you are capable of. Looks like this just might be the year the sleeping Giant awakens and once again, shows everyone they know how to produce exciting photographic gear. Judging by the CR blog posts and YT videos, Canon is going to bring us some great camera bodies to go along with all those exciting new RF lenses. If true, one can only hope that Canon produces enough product to satisfy the anticipated demand. A personal thank you to all those early adopters, who, either with deep pockets or cc's with high limits, make it possible to happen. Without you, we would have no new gear.

Absolutely. And reading this forum, I sometimes lose sight of that one of the appealing things about the EF system, 30+ years in, is that Average Joe photographers, amateurs, and enthusiasts can go and pick up a decent body and a couple of modern zoom lenses and cover the entire focal range from 24 to 400mm (effective). That's how I started 7 years ago. Yes, I know it was on the EF-S APS-C system, and that now we have the M cameras.

I don't read tea leaves and I'm not going to pretend I understand "The Market" the way some people claim to. But, I think there's plenty of room for Canon to make truly affordable glass for the RF ecosystem and have that be the gateway drug to the good stuff. That's what happened to me, after all. I went from knowing nothing, with a t4i and a single kit lens, to planning to drop 20K in the next 5 years to fill out a complete, pro-level R kit. A big part of that was being able to purchase lenses (like the 50 1.8 STM) that worked on both EF-S and EF systems, which let me experiment with the two. This is not possible between M systems and RF systems today.

Long story short: I think it behooves Canon to make some ultra cheap glass to lure new customers into the RF system. It certainly worked on me

 

[EverydayPhotographer]

Until it finally launches, it isn't clear if the 10-24 is FF or APS-C......

Just saying.

Rumor clearly calls it an RF 10-24 f/4.0L. Since the present number of L series APS-C lenses over the entirety of Canon's lineup is hovering right smack-dab on zero, and the current number of R-series APS-C bodies is also at zero, I'd say that it's pretty outlandish at this point to assume that it wold be anything other than a full-frame lens if the rumor holds true.

 

[Maximilian]

If I‘d go into R system I‘d be really fine with all those f/1.8 STM primes for a start

Good move, Canon

 

[davidespinosa]

Here's some discussion of the current EF 11-24 -- kind of amazing:
https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/11-24mm.htm

What does Canon have against making a 50 f/1.4 ? Even the existing EF version is pre-historic.

f1.2 is the new-and-improved f1.4.
f1.8 is the new-and-improved f2.0.
That is, I prefer to keep track relative to the usual full-stop series.