Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS to come before EF version [CR2]

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,629
748
Southeastern USA
Here's what I wrote to open the topic you just linked to:

"If Canon's new FF mirrorless camera does not use the old EF mount, would you continue to buy EF lenses?
Maybe wait a while to see how things play out?
Maybe wait for an adapter to be reviewed and have some time in the field?


Or do you believe a new FF mirrorless with a new mount would in no way affect the current dSLR lineup for many years to come?"

Many posters thoughtfully replied to the questions actually asked and helped me adjust to the transition--and I thanked them.
 
Last edited:

Aaron D

EOS 80D
Jul 21, 2016
144
109
Kansas City
www.aarondougherty.com
Is there no option for intervalometer externally on the R either? External remote control?
I don't think Canon makes one—I've got the one with three pins that fits 5D bodies, but this one looks like a 1/8" earphone socket. They make a simple shutter release that looks like it would fit. And I'm trying to get Canon Camera Connect to work with my phone—I'm stuck on the 5D with no success yet…..
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,166
1,740
Irving, Texas
My sadness knows no bounds. I had the winning Mega Millions ticket and must have left it on the table at the Catfish Buffet restaurant I was eating at in South Carolina. When time for the draw came I couldn't find the ticket. The numbers matched perfectly. I hope the busboy is happy. I was gonna buy a full on R system and a small island full of amazonian women. :cry: Oh! And 5,000 trolls for the Sony Rumors websites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee and nchoh

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,346
325
Doesn't *pro* video make use of tripods, steadicam harnesses and suchlike (forgive me if my terminology is inaccurate), so IS is much less important? I thought it was mainly the enthusiast/low budget indie film-makers/video students who cared about that?
I have only provided a quote from the interview. this is the Canon's take on the subject. I read this as follows: IBIS is considered a PRO level feature in Canon Universe and is therefore reserved for a higher, PRO level body that event shooters and PJ's would use. 5 series camera body level comes to mind.
My takeaway from this interview: the lack of certain features in R was a business decision rather than an inability to deliver a viable technical solution.
 
Last edited:

Jethro

EOS R
Jul 14, 2018
252
126
I have only provided a quote from the interview. this is the Canon's take on the subject. I read this as follows: IBIS is considered a PRO level feature in Canon Universe and is therefore reserved for a higher, PRO level body that event shooters and PJ's would use. 5 series camera body level comes to mind.
My takeaway from this interview: the lack of certain features in R was a business decision rather than an inability to deliver a viable technical solution.
Not sure that was my take - I got the impression that the engineers were given a surprising amount of leeway to experiment with new approaches, but not all of them either (i) worked at all, or (ii) were ready for practical application yet. I suspect IBIS was one of the ones that is still being developed. Canon seems to have an entrenched 'house view' on IBIS (versus in lens), and I suspect that it's going to take some convincing internally (even in an atmosphere of openness to innovation) for them to actually put IBIS into an ILC.

I still think they'll do it, but it may be a while. If there is a lower level FFM coming, maybe they 'trial' it in that? Or even in a DSLR - there seem to be some scheduled for the next 12 months? Hard to believe that they would put a first generation IBIS into their first pro FFM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mirage

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,816
35
This could be Canon's way to signal that ML will be an area of ever increasing importance to them.

The new mount and opportunities that go with it will be very important in the future.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,552
771
Not sure that was my take - I got the impression that the engineers were given a surprising amount of leeway to experiment with new approaches, but not all of them either (i) worked at all, or (ii) were ready for practical application yet. I suspect IBIS was one of the ones that is still being developed. Canon seems to have an entrenched 'house view' on IBIS (versus in lens), and I suspect that it's going to take some convincing internally (even in an atmosphere of openness to innovation) for them to actually put IBIS into an ILC.

I still think they'll do it, but it may be a while. If there is a lower level FFM coming, maybe they 'trial' it in that? Or even in a DSLR - there seem to be some scheduled for the next 12 months? Hard to believe that they would put a first generation IBIS into their first pro FFM.
Here is one recent interview direct quote from Canon. They did a lot of interviews about the R. They can, of course do it, but there are trade offs.


Why is there no in-body image stabilization (IBIS) in the EOS R?


Shoji Kaihara: We had to look at the balance of the entire camera, like the size and other aspects. Based on that, it’s not something we are able to include in the EOS R at this time. We are quite aware that there are pros and cons to that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

mirage

EOS RP
Jul 31, 2018
297
111
Here is one recent interview direct quote from Canon. They did a lot of interviews about the R. They can, of course do it, but there are trade offs.


Why is there no in-body image stabilization (IBIS) in the EOS R?


Shoji Kaihara: We had to look at the balance of the entire camera, like the size and other aspects. Based on that, it’s not something we are able to include in the EOS R at this time. We are quite aware that there are pros and cons to that.
bullsh*t.
enough hollow, air-filled empty space in EOS R body which is bigger than both Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6/Z7 with lower functionality (eg no IBIS). see Roger Cicala's tear down and comments (although i think he is wrong in believing Canon would "never ever" add IBIS).

Canon simply did not have IBIS tech ready in time for EOS R launch (see recent patent), that's all. plus internal resistance. octagenarian board and all ...

i dont expect Canon bringing IBIS in first round of 3 EOS R bodies (low end "R50", EOS R, High-rez "R5").

much more likely to appear in "pro" EOS "1R-X" in spring 2020 .. just in time for Tokyo Olympics.

Next in EOS R Mk. II, but not in lower end models ... for marketing differentiation.

fairly easy to predict future on that one. :)
 

mirage

EOS RP
Jul 31, 2018
297
111
In the current rumor: "We’ve also been told that an EF version of such a lens is also in the works. "
you keep repeating this line. The rumor source also said "but the EF version may never materialize".

I bet there won't be one. Canon wants to entice users customers into R system/RF lenses, not into mirrorslappers/EF any more.
 

davidcl0nel

Canon 5D3, 17 TSE, 35 IS, 100 L, 70-200 2.8 IS II
Jan 11, 2014
135
6
Berlin
www.flickr.com
A 17mm TS-E that uses filters. Front, back—doesn't matter. 19 or 20mm would be close enough.
!
There is a Lee-Adapter ring for that use. It uses the hood mount and you can use normal 100x100 lee filter holder with a little bit than more than half shift. The full shift is only possible with another adapter (wonderpana) which uses 150er Lee filters then.

But yes, a rear filter thread would be much nicer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aaron D

Tom W

EOS RP
Sep 5, 2012
213
147
You have a point here, but consider the market for these Big Whites. Many photographers investing in these lenses will be happier knowing that they will be 100% compatible with EOS R, and some of the updates will include allowing the Big Whites to use all the R features, including that great spread of AF points, even with an extender.

Canon may have determined that building a new Big White from scratch for the RF mount would take too long and cost too much, especially when the EOS R lineup doesn't YET have a body that appeals to somebody who demands 1DX II performance.

So, in short, a Big White update at this point will probably offer some weight reduction and new circuitry to take as much advantage as possible of the RF mount. The interesting question would be, are these the last EF Big White updates?

I don't believe that releasing a few lenses that have been in the pipeline tells us whether Canon has put further EF development on the shelf. The production, engineering, and marketing departments probably hash out this issue on a frequent basis.

For myself, any significant purchase at this point is going to be delayed until the R series has at least become a series. If I needed a legacy EF's focal length(s), I'd go with it only if absolutely necessary and RF didn't offer something comparable. Even if new EF lens prices don't drop, they will seem like a bargain compared to some of the RF offerings!

I have never scolded Canon for deciding to make the transition. I've simply asked questions about purchasing and selling strategies for current EF lens collections with RF being Canon's stated path.
The longer the lens, the less advantage that the short backfocus length of the RF mount will offer. It's not going to bring any optical advantage to redesign any longer telephoto for the RF mount. The only advantage would be no need for the adapter really.

I'm not too concerned about the possibility of making the switch at some point, since Canon has allowed for EF-RF compatibility. And I think that at the wide-normal-short tele range, the advantages of the RF mount will push sales towards the newer lenses that take advantage of it. Like the 50/1.2 and the 28-70 f/2.

Long term, I can see me going the mirrorless route, with a couple of these fantastic lenses, but for now, I have no reason to switch from my 5D4 to the new mirrorless body. Yet...
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
386
344
118
Williamsport, PA
One last thought.
Why bother with EF development and new lenses anyway?
The current line-up is incredible and quality second to none.
The RF mount is most likely the sole future with EF/EFs going away eventually so why not just focus on the RF system and make it the best there is in the world. As EF/EFs migrate to the RF there is no loss of use of the EF/EFs lenses they own so there is no worry of being stuck.
The R series will become professional as we see is getting there with the Sony a9 and Canon can do better.
 

Chris_BC

I'm New Here
Jul 28, 2016
19
11
AZ
What the source is suggesting sounds like a really bad idea from a business standpoint. The compelling cameras have to come first, before the fancy lenses will capture buyer interest and the current EOS R just isn't very compelling. And may I remind all you folks that EF lenses can be used on R bodies but R lenses can't be used on EF bodies?
I'm with you Bob, another horrible and idiotic idea if they are delaying or cancelling any EF lenses. Seems you are one of the few who sees this accurately. I don't know exactly what people in this forum are thinking cheering this on. Among one of the more ridiculous comments right here was "the EF lineup is essentially complete". Really???

What about more L lenses with the "blue goo"?? What about a new 50 mm L so many are looking for? What about a wide prime with much improved MTF such that it can fully resolve the coming 100 MP sensors? What about a real improvement to the walk around 24-105 mm L??

With so many DSLR customers with so many existing EF and EF-S lenses (and the EF-S lens updates have been far more pathetic than in the L realm), it would be quite the gamble to assume so many Canon owners are going to be thrilled with the trendy new mirrorless thing with its new mount. It seems to me it just perfectly cues up a decision point that will result in Canon customers migrating elsewhere. If you need to invest in a new type camera, and new lenses as well to utilize all of the touted benefits of the R system, why not consider all the other brands out there and thus you are more likely to switch?
 
  • Like
Reactions: espressino

Chris_BC

I'm New Here
Jul 28, 2016
19
11
AZ
Canon is going to be churning out more RF lenses than EF, and releasing a pro level mirrorless before long. They obviously know what the capabilities of the higher level camera will be, or they would not be going all in on RF lenses.

I have both a 5D MK IV and a R now, but only EF lenses and they work fine but larger ones are unbalanced, and the grip of the R does not fit as well as the MK IV.

As far as shooting every day ordinary images that do not require some of the higher FPS of the MK IV, and that's nearly 100% for me, the R does a better job of more consistent AF, the images are otherwise virtually identical.

Because of the poorer balance, it is more difficult to avoid motion blurring with the R at the same shutter speed where I have no problem with the 5D MK IV.

I've settled on my old 50mm f/2.5 macro as a normal lens for my R right now, it balances well and is a surprisingly good lens for under $100. I'm waiting for some more RF lenses that interest me, they would have to be something special and reasonably priced for me to give up my EF L lenses that work on both cameras.

If I decide to sell my MK IV, then the EF lenses will go as soon as a comparable RF lens exists.
Thanks for pointing out your real world experience with what I saw as obvious. The smaller size body and grip do not work well with any large L lens. I had the 5D III and then upgraded to the 5DsR, and so far I can carry it around by the grip on hikes and shorter walks (I've never liked the feel of the strap tugging on my neck.) with any of the black Ls and even with the 100-400 mm IS zoom to some extent.

That smaller grip is never going to fit my hand well in any event, and I'm skeptical Canon is going to be able to downsize the big Ls such that they are fully balanced or even partially balanced on the R. It's interesting that you note the effect is such that it even compromises your ability to use the same shutter speeds. This had not occurred to me, but it makes sense.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,552
771
There is a issue at play. The EOS R is new and has few lenses native to it. Canon certainly has big plans for it and we will see more mirrorless bodies for sure. That also means that there is a big effort to get a full lineup of lenses, and there are a limited number of lens design teams in Canon. I expect that 2/3 of them are working on RF designs while the rest are doing EF and M lenses.

A RF lens and a EF lens are not just the same lens with a little modification, they have a totally different optical formula. That likely means that there will not be a RF and EF version using the same basic design.

Fortunately, there are plenty of superb EF lenses, so there is no pressing need for new ones, updates have generally been minor things like tweaking the IS. I certainly do not see a pressing need for a IS version of the 24-70L II, it takes a second or more to lock on, and I often fet a poor image when I close the shutter while the IS is moving. For my telephotos, I have to wait for that first shot because IS is useful at 400mm, but not much at focal lengths less than 100mm.

Even so, if Canon sees a demand, then they will come just as soon as they can find a way to make one that photographers can afford and is light enough to handle.
 

mirage

EOS RP
Jul 31, 2018
297
111
really funny how some folks misread the current situation.

Canon has moved to mirrorfree cameras. Transition will happen fast. There will be no more new EF-S lenses because they have already been fully supplanted by EF-M lineup. There will be no more new EF lenses, but at best a few minor iterations of existing ones to make them fit for use on mirrorfree EOS R line. Typically long teles that don't profit much from shorter FFD mount.

All the attention has shifted to building a compelling RF lens lineup. Canon has no choice, they want to be #1 not only in mirrorfree APS-C, but also for FF. they need to keep ahead of Nikon and catch-up/pass Sony.

Also: long "L" tele lenses are an extreme minority program, despite all the birders in this forum. 99% of Canon customers do not own one and never will. there is no need to design an entire new camera/ lens ecosystem just to please 1% of potential customers. it would make very little sense business-wise. for every 1DX II + 600/4 customer there are literally thousabd others who would like ro get a supercompact, 999 USD "entry level" EOS R model along with some decent, compact and well affordable RF f/4.0 zooms in the most frequently used focal length range. RF 16-35/4, 24-85/4, 50-150/4 zooms would all be selling very well.

For the "big lens, big hands,, big wallets" niche I expect Canon to bring a mirrorfree "1DX III equivalent" EOS R "pro" camera - at the latest in early 2020 ahead of Tokyo Olympics. It will be large-bodied, cost close to 10k (25% more than 1DX II, simply because it is new and hype) and be the perfect camera to attach massive white L 10k+ telelenses. Big chunky body and grip, big battery, maximum performance, EF glass usable via little adapter.

so, where's the problem?
 

Bob Howland

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 25, 2012
443
46
really funny how some folks misread the current situation.

Canon has moved to mirrorfree cameras. Transition will happen fast. There will be no more new EF-S lenses because they have already been fully supplanted by EF-M lineup. There will be no more new EF lenses, but at best a few minor iterations of existing ones to make them fit for use on mirrorfree EOS R line. Typically long teles that don't profit much from shorter FFD mount.

All the attention has shifted to building a compelling RF lens lineup. Canon has no choice, they want to be #1 not only in mirrorfree APS-C, but also for FF. they need to keep ahead of Nikon and catch-up/pass Sony.

Also: long "L" tele lenses are an extreme minority program, despite all the birders in this forum. 99% of Canon customers do not own one and never will. there is no need to design an entire new camera/ lens ecosystem just to please 1% of potential customers. it would make very little sense business-wise. for every 1DX II + 600/4 customer there are literally thousabd others who would like ro get a supercompact, 999 USD "entry level" EOS R model along with some decent, compact and well affordable RF f/4.0 zooms in the most frequently used focal length range. RF 16-35/4, 24-85/4, 50-150/4 zooms would all be selling very well.

For the "big lens, big hands,, big wallets" niche I expect Canon to bring a mirrorfree "1DX III equivalent" EOS R "pro" camera - at the latest in early 2020 ahead of Tokyo Olympics. It will be large-bodied, cost close to 10k (25% more than 1DX II, simply because it is new and hype) and be the perfect camera to attach massive white L 10k+ telelenses. Big chunky body and grip, big battery, maximum performance, EF glass usable via little adapter.

so, where's the problem?
After handling an R body with the 24-105 lens, I find it very unimpressive. I think that the R-system 1DX3-equivalent has to make the 1DX2 look archaic. I'm hoping that, with the elimination of the flopping mirror, 24 FPS full frame will be possible. But that's a specialty camera. The high volume model will be the 5D4 replacement. I might even buy one to replace my 5D3 in a few years.

As for how long the transition will take, since the new lensmount can use old lenses, I think that it will never be complete. But 10 years seems like a good start.

Update: As for the EF-S to M relationship, if what you say is true, then Canon needs to drop the price of their adapter by about 60%. Right now, it's double the cost of the EF to R adapter. They might also introduce an M model that is the current R model with a smaller sensor, an M lens mount and different firmware. Not all of us like the tiny size of the current M models.
 
Last edited: