D
Deleted member 378875
Guest
that 70-200 looks pretty compact ... quite surprising having read countless comments on this site informing us all that lenses can't be made any smaller due to "physics"
Upvote
0
True, but that the 70mm end...it's very short and looks like it takes up a lot less bag space. ef 70-200 lenses are constant length only because of an fd mount tradition.if the patent is right it's extending and when used at the longest end 240mm... that's longer than the 70-200 2.8 II
It will be more compact but doesn't have stabilization in the lens, if Canon comes out with sensor based stabilization, the two together will work better.yes I thought of that too (added that to my post). That is actually nice since in my shoulder bag there's one lens that stands out in the most literal meaning, and it's the big white one
hopefully the 24-70 is a bit smaller and lighter too; Nikon just announced their 24-70 for the Z and it's very compact!
yes I thought of that too (added that to my post). That is actually nice since in my shoulder bag there's one lens that stands out in the most literal meaning, and it's the big white one
hopefully the 24-70 is a bit smaller and lighter too; Nikon just announced their 24-70 for the Z and it's very compact!
The 24-70/2.8 IS does definitely go under 50mm so I highly doubt it could be made in EF mount exactly like that, where the size of the rear lens element is more restricted by the flange distance.It's a brave design move for the 70-200 f2.8 LIS genre.
The saddest thing here is that Canon has obviously withheld this lens concept / formula back from the ef mount (ie the unspectacular warm over that became the mkIII) and flipped it over to the Rf mount. There's little optical benefits on a mirror less mount over a 35mm mirror box design over 50mm. So this lens could easily have been designed as an EF lens....held back and then modified and ported over to the Rf mount. Same with the 24-70 f2.8 L IS....that could easily have been an Ef mount too. I suspect that Canon have been engineering the marketing of the Rf mount for some time.
I wonder what other treasures Canon have been holding on to.
It will be more compact but doesn't have stabilization in the lens, if Canon comes out with sensor based stabilization, the two together will work better.
I also don't like the folding design on some of their lenses.
The Canon RF 24-70/2.8 has lens-based IS, the Nikon Z 24-70/2.8 is probably lighter and smaller but it uses the sensor stabilization only.what do you mean with not having stabilisation in the lens; it's an IS lens isn't it?
I think that until a Rf 400/2.8 and a 600/f4 is released... and a Eos Rf mount pro camera to match the frame rate of the 1DxII then EF mounts are here for a very long time.I bought my EOS R as a second body, mostly for macro with vintage Leica lenses.
Alas, the introduction of such interesting new lenses made this strategy obsolete...especially the 1,2/85 and the compact 70/200.
Thus, I'll sell the EOS R, will keep waiting for a high MP. EOS R, and my 5 D III will become the second (wildlife!!!!) body. Nothing beats a DSLR for wildlife (my opinion).
I think it’s a great strategy to show people that they are indeed catering to both those crowds.I think that until a Rf 400/2.8 and a 600/f4 is released... and a Eos Rf mount pro camera to match the frame rate of the 1DxII then EF mounts are here for a very long time.
I also find it bewildering that Canon are releasing small and miniature mirror-less camera bodies....but mating them to massive and heavy L Rf lenses. Sure the concept of Mirror-less is to be able to go smaller ala range finder? So where are the small and light pancake prime lenses? 21mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm?
I think that until a Rf 400/2.8 and a 600/f4 is released... and a Eos Rf mount pro camera to match the frame rate of the 1DxII then EF mounts are here for a very long time.
I also find it bewildering that Canon are releasing small and miniature mirror-less camera bodies....but mating them to massive and heavy L Rf lenses. Sure the concept of Mirror-less is to be able to go smaller ala range finder? So where are the small and light pancake prime lenses? 21mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm?
that 70-200 looks pretty compact ... quite surprising having read countless comments on this site informing us all that lenses can't be made any smaller due to "physics"
If some people really don't want a Sony, but they do want a similar approach to photo and video together, which is very different to Canon (even offering Prores Raw video output soon, even in some of their existing DSLRs), they can be quite happy with the Nikon Z system. Same for the L-mount alliance.Totally agree on the subject of EF lenses and DSLRs.
As to miniature RF lenses, they certainly are coming, but it was important for Canon to demonstrate their optical superiority. As we all know that a more professional EOS R is coming, why would somebody consider buying a Nikon Z, if they aren't in the F system? The new lenses are killers.
Canon confirmed future IBIS at the lunch eventLenses like the RF 85mm F1.2 (non-IS) begs for IBIS and truly functional Eye-AF. Come on Canon!