As many as 7 new RF lenses coming in 2019 [CR2]

Aug 23, 2014
5
1
I mostly photograph wildlife and use a Canon 7D II body. My main lens for such use is a Sigma 150mm -600mm Sport. (I do own 5 Canon "L" lenses.) I have been contemplating buying a Canon 600mm F4.0 III, but have delayed the purchase because of uncertainty regarding mirrorless bodies. The 7D II sensor, if full frame, would be greater than 50 MP. So unless Canon can supply a mirrorless body with a full-frame sensor of greater than 50 MP, or else an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless body, I am totally uninterested in the "R" lenses listed. I also use a Sony RX10-IV which has a Zeiss lens that zooms to 600mm at F4.0 (equivalent). Much lighter to lug around, but doesn't get me the 960mm equivalent of the Canon gear. However, if Sony brings out an RX10-V with 800mm equivalent or more and no more than F5.6 equivalent at 800mm and around 22 MP, then I would drop the Canon equipment. As a bonus, the silent shutter of the Sony decreases the anxiety of small birds. I know several other photographers doing similar work who are using the Sony RX10-IV more and carrying the Canon/Nikon gear less. Perhaps not a large market niche, but one that supports the Big Whites (or Blacks). Meanwhile consumer use of rapidly improving smartphones for their photography is also increasing. To date, though, such phones are not useful for wildlife photography. Canon may be trying to protect a market that it has already lost. Perhaps Canon should come out with a smartphone with a fancy camera on it and forget about "R" bodies and lenses. And if they don't upgrade their equipment for wildlife/sports photography, they will also lose this market to cameras like the Sony RX10-IV and its successors.
 

criscokkat

EOS 80D
Sep 26, 2017
187
162
Madison, WI
No multi functional bar, lower EVF, 6D II sensor, no 10 bit 4K or articulate LCD screen - $1500

If they release something like that in 2019, they definitely deserve to get laugh at.
No way they get rid of the articulating screen, it's on everything now. A smaller screen, maybe. I am not sure if they want to change the viewfinder much either, that's something that really comes down in price if used in volume across their lines.

I'm still not convinced that they aren't keeping secret the possibility of a smaller sensor on this camera from leaking. They have been very coy not to ever mention full frame specifically when talking about the RF system overall, they only talk about it in terms of the EOS R camera itself.

The EOS R has been built to auto crop down to EF-S lenses when put on an adapter. There is no reason that couldn't be done directly with other lenses using the R mount either. To differentiate them from EF-M it could be a slightly larger sensor like the APS-H that was used in the 1d cameras as recently as 5 years ago. It doesn't have to be the same size as that one either at a 1.3 crop size - it could be 1.4 and still be called aps-h to differentiate it. The cost savings come from the fact that each silicon wafer produced could produce 40-60 aps-h sized chips versus 20 full frame or 100 aps-C. If an RF-S lens is produced with a smaller circle the existing EOS R full frame could adjust automatically. At most it might need a firmware update that can be done by the end user.
 
Reactions: -pekr-

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,163
2,092
..............It doesn't have to be the same size as that one either at a 1.3 crop size - it could be 1.4 and still be called aps-h to differentiate it. The cost savings come from the fact that each silicon wafer produced could produce 40-60 aps-h sized chips versus 20 full frame or 100 aps-C. If an RF-S lens is produced with a smaller circle the existing EOS R full frame could adjust automatically. At most it might need a firmware update that can be done by the end user.
I don't understand the calculations. A 1.3 - 1.4x crop would have half to ~0.6 x the area of FF and so 20 FF would make ~34-40 of the aps-h, not 40-60, and a 1.6x crop is 1/2.56 the area of FF so 20 FF would give 51 aps-c, not a 100? Have I got something wrong?
 

sid.safari

I'm New Here
Sep 5, 2018
22
23
I mostly photograph wildlife and use a Canon 7D II body. My main lens for such use is a Sigma 150mm -600mm Sport. (I do own 5 Canon "L" lenses.) I have been contemplating buying a Canon 600mm F4.0 III, but have delayed the purchase because of uncertainty regarding mirrorless bodies. The 7D II sensor, if full frame, would be greater than 50 MP. So unless Canon can supply a mirrorless body with a full-frame sensor of greater than 50 MP, or else an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless body, I am totally uninterested in the "R" lenses listed. I also use a Sony RX10-IV which has a Zeiss lens that zooms to 600mm at F4.0 (equivalent). Much lighter to lug around, but doesn't get me the 960mm equivalent of the Canon gear. However, if Sony brings out an RX10-V with 800mm equivalent or more and no more than F5.6 equivalent at 800mm and around 22 MP, then I would drop the Canon equipment. As a bonus, the silent shutter of the Sony decreases the anxiety of small birds. I know several other photographers doing similar work who are using the Sony RX10-IV more and carrying the Canon/Nikon gear less. Perhaps not a large market niche, but one that supports the Big Whites (or Blacks). Meanwhile consumer use of rapidly improving smartphones for their photography is also increasing. To date, though, such phones are not useful for wildlife photography. Canon may be trying to protect a market that it has already lost. Perhaps Canon should come out with a smartphone with a fancy camera on it and forget about "R" bodies and lenses. And if they don't upgrade their equipment for wildlife/sports photography, they will also lose this market to cameras like the Sony RX10-IV and its successors.
No offense mate but you're all over the place. You simply can't compare the Canon 600 f/4 III prime with the Sony RX10-V (600mm). The image quality of both is worlds apart. One is a professional grade lens and the other is ... well it's amateur for lack of a better term. You then state that other photographers are carrying the Sony RX10-V more and the Canon / Nikon less?! Are you actually suggesting that wildlife photographers (bird photographers) are moving away from prime 12k+ glass and their respective pro DSLR systems to a $1700 camera fixed lens system which has terrible ISO and even worse focusing?

I'm not being a Canon fanboy but none of this makes much sense because you aren't comparing apples to apples. I can understand if you say more pro's are going from Canon and Nikon to the Sony A9 + Sony 400 f/2.8 GM with the Sony 1.4x and 2x TC. Perhaps there is an argument there, but the RX10-V is not in the same league as any of the top systems used by wildlife and bird photographers I know. It's not even a viable backup to be honest.

BTW. I'm a wildlife photographer and I'd buy the 600mm f/4 III and pair it with the 7D or 1dx mark II in a heartbeat. You don't need a mirrorless body with the big primes, and while having more MP's is nice anyone who has shot with the big prime and a large MP body knows that you need to increase shutter speed significantly to get pin sharp images (I am speaking during situations when subject is moving). So high MP's in wildlife isn't always ideal. Ideally you want between 22 - 30 MP's with good ISO and a high enough FPS (10 - 20) to capture the critical moment and to get sharp images in low light conditions (when most wildlife photography is done).
 
Last edited:

bhf3737

---
Sep 9, 2015
392
299
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
...
I also use a Sony RX10-IV which has a Zeiss lens that zooms to 600mm at F4.0 (equivalent). Much lighter to lug around, but doesn't get me the 960mm equivalent of the Canon gear. However, if Sony brings out an RX10-V with 800mm equivalent or more and no more than F5.6 equivalent at 800mm and around 22 MP, then I would drop the Canon equipment. As a bonus, the silent shutter of the Sony decreases the anxiety of small birds. I know several other photographers doing similar work who are using the Sony RX10-IV more and carrying the Canon/Nikon gear less. Perhaps not a large market niche, but one that supports the Big Whites (or Blacks). Meanwhile consumer use of rapidly improving smartphones for their photography is also increasing. To date, though, such phones are not useful for wildlife photography. Canon may be trying to protect a market that it has already lost. Perhaps Canon should come out with a smartphone with a fancy camera on it and forget about "R" bodies and lenses. And if they don't upgrade their equipment for wildlife/sports photography, they will also lose this market to cameras like the Sony RX10-IV and its successors.
I tried Sony RX10-IV once in a trip and that was enough for me. It was slow as hell to power up, battery life was very short and it didn't have a charger to start with. The LCD screen was invisible in day light, diffraction was horrible, zoom function was extremely slow, and worst of all, continuous-AF while zooming was disabled!! It was the worst nightmare that I had with any camera so far. May be it is an expensive toy for moms taking picture of kids running around but definitely not a camera for sports and/or wildlife.
 

kaptainkatsu

1DX Mark II
Sep 29, 2015
166
62
I would like to see a 85mm 1.2 or 1.4 and a 35mm 1.2 or 1.4!!

It would be awesome. Probably not interested in 85mm 1.8 as it shouldn't be L lens
The EF 85 1.4 is such an incredible lens, not sure how much better an RF version would be. That lens will probably be one of the later RF lenses since the 85 1.4 was just recently released.
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
347
186
No way they get rid of the articulating screen, it's on everything now. A smaller screen, maybe. I am not sure if they want to change the viewfinder much either, that's something that really comes down in price if used in volume across their lines.

I'm still not convinced that they aren't keeping secret the possibility of a smaller sensor on this camera from leaking. They have been very coy not to ever mention full frame specifically when talking about the RF system overall, they only talk about it in terms of the EOS R camera itself.

The EOS R has been built to auto crop down to EF-S lenses when put on an adapter. There is no reason that couldn't be done directly with other lenses using the R mount either. To differentiate them from EF-M it could be a slightly larger sensor like the APS-H that was used in the 1d cameras as recently as 5 years ago. It doesn't have to be the same size as that one either at a 1.3 crop size - it could be 1.4 and still be called aps-h to differentiate it. The cost savings come from the fact that each silicon wafer produced could produce 40-60 aps-h sized chips versus 20 full frame or 100 aps-C. If an RF-S lens is produced with a smaller circle the existing EOS R full frame could adjust automatically. At most it might need a firmware update that can be done by the end user.
6D II is a FF sensor. It's not smaller sensor. It may not be comparable to 5D IV/EOS R.

Regarding the articulating screen: I have no idea if they will take it out. It's just a suggestion if they want to reduce cost to $1500 price point.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
425
390
I mostly photograph wildlife and use a Canon 7D II body. My main lens for such use is a Sigma 150mm -600mm Sport. (I do own 5 Canon "L" lenses.) I have been contemplating buying a Canon 600mm F4.0 III, but have delayed the purchase because of uncertainty regarding mirrorless bodies. The 7D II sensor, if full frame, would be greater than 50 MP. So unless Canon can supply a mirrorless body with a full-frame sensor of greater than 50 MP, or else an APS-C sensor in a mirrorless body, I am totally uninterested in the "R" lenses listed. I also use a Sony RX10-IV which has a Zeiss lens that zooms to 600mm at F4.0 (equivalent). Much lighter to lug around, but doesn't get me the 960mm equivalent of the Canon gear. However, if Sony brings out an RX10-V with 800mm equivalent or more and no more than F5.6 equivalent at 800mm and around 22 MP, then I would drop the Canon equipment. As a bonus, the silent shutter of the Sony decreases the anxiety of small birds. I know several other photographers doing similar work who are using the Sony RX10-IV more and carrying the Canon/Nikon gear less. Perhaps not a large market niche, but one that supports the Big Whites (or Blacks). Meanwhile consumer use of rapidly improving smartphones for their photography is also increasing. To date, though, such phones are not useful for wildlife photography. Canon may be trying to protect a market that it has already lost. Perhaps Canon should come out with a smartphone with a fancy camera on it and forget about "R" bodies and lenses. And if they don't upgrade their equipment for wildlife/sports photography, they will also lose this market to cameras like the Sony RX10-IV and its successors.
OK, you convinced me.
SO, I'm gonna sell all my Canon and Leica FF equipment and buy a new smartphone, perfect for wildlife pictures!:ROFLMAO::p:mad::sick:o_O
 

criscokkat

EOS 80D
Sep 26, 2017
187
162
Madison, WI
I don't understand the calculations. A 1.3 - 1.4x crop would have half to ~0.6 x the area of FF and so 20 FF would make ~34-40 of the aps-h, not 40-60, and a 1.6x crop is 1/2.56 the area of FF so 20 FF would give 51 aps-c, not a 100? Have I got something wrong?
An old whitepaper from canon I linked at the bottom mentions economics on page 10-11.

This paper actually mentions that aps-c could have up to 200 of them on a wafer, but I think Canon puts more space between each one which is why I remember reading that they were just over the 100 mark (I don't have a link to back up that statement handy). The linked paper asserts that they could get 46 APS-H sensors on the same wafer that could only fit 20 full frame.

My APS-H thoughts were thinking of something a little smaller than the 1d's APS-H and more the size of Sigma's APS-H (528mm² vs 478mm²). An 8 inch wafer theoretically has 129717 mm² to work with, but some of that is lost by space in between chips and layout in regards to fitting rectangles within a circle. The full frame chips are 860 mm² and the canon aps-c chips are 330 mm². Most other brands APS-C are 370mm² so if canon chose something above 400mm² they could probably get away with calling it aps-h.

One big cost saving has already happened - it mentions on that same page that there needs to be 3 separate exposures - Canon's own technology that they sell to large chipmaking companies (Intel, Global Foundaries/AMD, Sony, etc) can now do this step all at once.

http://media.the-digital-picture.com/Information/Canon-Full-Frame-CMOS-White-Paper.pdf


EDIT: I realized I never mentioned WHY I think an aps-H sensor would be something canon would consider -- I think in terms of "small/medium/large" for their camera lineup. EF-m for their small cameras, aps-h on R for their "I want a full sized camera without the full size price" ti/xxd series, and Full Frame for their pro or prosumer oriented cameras. (With some bleed in between, such as a mirrorless 7d like camera)
 
Last edited:
Reactions: AlanF

criscokkat

EOS 80D
Sep 26, 2017
187
162
Madison, WI
...and the yield is much bigger too. 1% total scattered around a wafer of defects might invalidate 2-3 of your 20 chips. That same on an aps-c wafer might only hit 5-6 of the 100.
 
Reactions: AlanF

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,163
2,092
...and the yield is much bigger too. 1% total scattered around a wafer of defects might invalidate 2-3 of your 20 chips. That same on an aps-c wafer might only hit 5-6 of the 100.
Thanks for the explanation - very illuminating.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,163
2,092
I tried Sony RX10-IV once in a trip and that was enough for me. It was slow as hell to power up, battery life was very short and it didn't have a charger to start with. The LCD screen was invisible in day light, diffraction was horrible, zoom function was extremely slow, and worst of all, continuous-AF while zooming was disabled!! It was the worst nightmare that I had with any camera so far. May be it is an expensive toy for moms taking picture of kids running around but definitely not a camera for sports and/or wildlife.
Not what I find. A charger comes with the camera to use via the USB port, I get 300-400 shots per charge, and f/4 precisely matches the diffraction limit at 220mm (= 600mm equivalent) for the pixel size and gives the same equivalent for diffraction as f/6.3 with a 7DII or 5DSR. I don't use the LCD screen for wild-life shots, but use the viewfinder, and find all mirrorless cameras slow to power up. I use one to complement my 5DSR and 5DIV and have got many satisfying shots with it. It does have drawbacks as all cameras do but used correctly is a superb tool. Here is a recent shot shot (cropped), which matches the quality I get with a 100-400mm II on a 5DIV.

DSC06434-DxO_whitefronted_beeeaterCR.jpg
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,184
1,462
Thanks for the explanation - very illuminating.
Yep – it's not the absolute area, but the number of rectangles that can be inscribed within a 300 mm diameter circular wafer of silicon. That disproportionately affects larger sensors, as does an equivalent distribution of lithography artifacts.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,169
375
I know several other photographers doing similar work who are using the Sony RX10-IV more and carrying the Canon/Nikon gear less. .
I think you are getting confused between "I am off for an afternoon walk and the Sony gives me a chance to take a camera in case I see something" and "I am off to photograph peregrine falcons in flight and think the Sony will do whatever the Canon gear can".