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

scyrene

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 4, 2013
2,318
152
UK
www.flickr.com
#81
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.
Oh, fair enough.
 

espressino

I'm New Here
Feb 26, 2018
11
0
#82
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?
Exactly. "No new EF lenses in 2019" probably means "no new EF-S lenses" either, and there hasn't been one in 2018. There's never been two consecutive years of no-EF-S release before -- and if -as an APS-C shooter with no intention to invest in full-frame- you have to wait until 2020 for a less-than-likely update or the confirmation that your system is dead then you might as well migrate to Fuji's dedicated APSC system if you need a new camera in the meantime.
(And, unlike AvTvFullstopmirage's claim, while the EOS M system is nice its lens line-up is less complete than the EF-S one.)
 

YuengLinger

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 20, 2012
2,181
176
Southeastern USA
#83
I don't see the problem with Canon moving on from further EF at this point. Initially, I was sad when the RF 50mm f/1.2L was released, as I'm one of the most eager for a new version of the EF 50mm 1.2L.

But now my thinking has changed. If the next mirrorless FF is better than the 5D IV in the way the 5D IV is better than the 5D III, and maybe more so with features not available to dSLR, what's the problem with simply upgrading to the better camera? If the adapter works as well as early hype suggests (which remains to be seen), then it's just another upgrade, and we bring our EF lenses with us. PLUS we get some of the dream lens-updates that haven't materialized for EF. And maybe never will.

Much depends on the truth of the adapter's performance, and maybe even more depends on the performance and experience of using an EVF, which I never have except playing with a friend's Fuji. And much depends on the attraction of the next EOS R body relative to the 5D IV.

The unhappy story would be if the adapter turns out to be flaky or the EVF is hard to live with after the initial "wow factor" wears off. Hopefully the current narrative of a great adapter and EVF is more than just early marketing success!

If Canon has created a new system with a new mount, that works virtually flawlessly with the EF lenses, and can (soon?!?) satisfy dSLR users with the EVF, well, this is rare, amazing story, almost worthy of being called a technological miracle.
 
Last edited:
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
#85
"No new EF lenses in 2019" probably means "no new EF-S lenses" either,
..
while the EOS M system is nice its lens line-up is less complete than the EF-S one.)
why should there be new EF/EF-S lenses all the time? What EF-S lenses are really missing - considering the target group? Most "Rebel" customers will not even buy a second lens beyond the kit zoom. And the limited number of xxD/7D customers who are into birding/wildlife and use APS-C "for reach" are typically using/buying EF tele lenses, which would not be smaller/ lighter/cheaper if they came in EF-S mount.

so, really what is missing in EF-S and EF-M from Canon's business perspective and from majority of customers' view?

Fuji is forced to offer all sorts of fancy, expensive crop lenses because of their (dead wrong!) decision to skip FF entirely. Canon EF-S customers can also use any EF lens natively.

Fuji X users are a tiny minority of folks (5% market share or thereabouts?) willing to "pay FF prices for crop cameras and lenses". i bet there are only a couple hundred people worldwide paying 1300 € for a Fuji XF 56/1.2 CROP lens. folks able and willing to spend that kind of money on a lens are typically smart enough to spend it on FF gear. Or they buy Leica, if they are into maximum "hipster show-off factor". Fuji? no cigar. :)

Fuji X system will suffer the next major blow when Canon launches an "entry level" FF EOS R model at a more affordable price similar to Fuji X-T3 abd when Sony finally brings their next gen A### bodies to market.

A simple EF 85/1.8 or RF 35/1.8 lens gives Canon FF users more photographic potential than any fancy-expensive Fuji XF f/1.2 crop lens on any retro-styled Fuji X crop-sensor body.

Even as a rather Canon critical market observer I must say that Canon got their lens mounts and lens lineups and the transition to mirrorfree very well sorted ... just a few years late. :)

for me not much is missing in EF-M lineup. a compact, moderately fast tele prime eg EF-M 85mm/2.0 IS STM along the lines of the 32/1.4 would be great. And maybe a 50-150 constant f/4.0 zoom ... but might be not feasible within EF-M size limits (max. 58mm filter thread and 61.6mm max. diameter).

So in summary:
* EF-S is done.
* EF is in "maintain during transition" mode.
* EF-M is in "maybe the one or other new lens if 32/1.4 sells reasonably well".
* RF is "full speed ahead".

Makes perfect sense. Canon has competition cornered.

* Sony will be #2 if they soon beef up their APS-C lineup with some "killer" A### bodies - both on "hi end" at usd/€ 1500 (Fuji X-T3, Canon EOS M5 II) and at "low-end" around 500 usd/€ (Canon M50/Fuji X-T100).

* Nikon suffers deservedly and will fall to #3 due to lack of mirrorless APS-C system.

* Fuji locked in at 5% market share due to no affordable crop and no FF mirrorfree system.

* Oly, mFT and Pentax/Ricoh are "walking dead" already.

* Pana/Leica/Sigma L-mount initiative will not get beyond 5% market share at best, due to big size and high prices.

* Too bad, Samsung threw in the towel so quickly, would have liked to have them around offering impressive gear like the NX-1 which just had the bad luck to be ahead of its times by 3 years.
 
Last edited:
Mar 26, 2014
688
37
#86
So in summary:
* EF-S is done.
* EF is in "maintain during transition" mode.
* EF-M is in "maybe the one or other new lens if 32/1.4 sells reasonably well".
* RF is "full speed ahead".

Makes perfect sense. Canon has competition cornered.
Its too early to put EF in the freezer, and Canon will pay for it.

As example, take event photographers. They wouldn't buy EOS/EF, because its dead, but they wouldn't buy EOS-R either, because it isn't up to the task yet. Even if a pro EOS-R came out tomorrow morning, people would wait due to supply issues, get an opportunity to see other people's experience, etc. That double whammy isn't going to do any good for Canon.

I have an EOS 5DmkIII with four L zooms. I'm getting a nice sum of money in a month, and I planned to upgrade the 16-35mm f/2.8L mkII to mkIII. Ain't going to happen now, I'll save the money till EOS-R comes of age - a much better R equivalent is on the way. That sounds like fresh new L lenses losing value on shop's shelves.
 
Likes: espressino
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
#87
Why should one not be able to cover all sorts of events with an EOS R plus RF 24-105 and/or EF 70-200/2.8 and/or RF 50/1.2 and/or one or two fast EF primes of choice?

But I fully agree that Canon in its typical clandestine & arrogant manner is doing itself a disservice by not communicating at all. Why no clear statements, why no clear roadmap?
 
Last edited:

Chris_BC

I'm New Here
Jul 28, 2016
19
11
AZ
#88
why should there be new EF/EF-S lenses all the time? What EF-S lenses are really missing - considering the target group? Most "Rebel" customers will not even buy a second lens beyond the kit zoom. And the limited number of xxD/7D customers who are into birding/wildlife and use APS-C "for reach" are typically using/buying EF tele lenses, which would not be smaller/ lighter/cheaper if they came in EF-S mount.

so, really what is missing in EF-S and EF-M from Canon's business perspective and from majority of customers' view?

Fuji is forced to offer all sorts of fancy, expensive crop lenses because of their (dead wrong!) decision to skip FF entirely. Canon EF-S customers can also use any EF lens natively.

Fuji X users are a tiny minority of folks (5% market share or thereabouts?) willing to "pay FF prices for crop cameras and lenses". i bet there are only a couple hundred people worldwide paying 1300 € for a Fuji XF 56/1.2 CROP lens. folks able and willing to spend that kind of money on a lens are typically smart enough to spend it on FF gear. Or they buy Leica, if they are into maximum "hipster show-off factor". Fuji? no cigar. :)

Fuji X system will suffer the next major blow when Canon launches an "entry level" FF EOS R model at a more affordable price similar to Fuji X-T3 abd when Sony finally brings their next gen A### bodies to market.

A simple EF 85/1.8 or RF 35/1.8 lens gives Canon FF users more photographic potential than any fancy-expensive Fuji XF f/1.2 crop lens on any retro-styled Fuji X crop-sensor body.

Even as a rather Canon critical market observer I must say that Canon got their lens mounts and lens lineups and the transition to mirrorfree very well sorted ... just a few years late. :)

for me not much is missing in EF-M lineup. a compact, moderately fast tele prime eg EF-M 85mm/2.0 IS STM along the lines of the 32/1.4 would be great. And maybe a 50-150 constant f/4.0 zoom ... but might be not feasible within EF-M size limits (max. 58mm filter thread and 61.6mm max. diameter).

So in summary:
* EF-S is done.
* EF is in "maintain during transition" mode.
* EF-M is in "maybe the one or other new lens if 32/1.4 sells reasonably well".
* RF is "full speed ahead".

Makes perfect sense. Canon has competition cornered.

* Sony will be #2 if they soon beef up their APS-C lineup with some "killer" A### bodies - both on "hi end" at usd/€ 1500 (Fuji X-T3, Canon EOS M5 II) and at "low-end" around 500 usd/€ (Canon M50/Fuji X-T100).

* Nikon suffers deservedly and will fall to #3 due to lack of mirrorless APS-C system.

* Fuji locked in at 5% market share due to no affordable crop and no FF mirrorfree system.

* Oly, mFT and Pentax/Ricoh are "walking dead" already.

* Pana/Leica/Sigma L-mount initiative will not get beyond 5% market share at best, due to big size and high prices.

* Too bad, Samsung threw in the towel so quickly, would have liked to have them around offering impressive gear like the NX-1 which just had the bad luck to be ahead of its times by 3 years.

Let's just take one lens to shred your position, the EF-S 15-85mm IS zoom. Super versatile walk around lens for APS-C. How old is that lens? You really think it's delivering adequate optical quality for even 24 MP?? What about the next step in APS-C, which is likely to be 28 to 32 MP?? Even if an APS-C shooter decided to shell out some big bucks to replicate it in an L lens, what do they buy???

We don't even need to get into the rest of your ramblings/musings to know the truth of the old adage of continuous improvement. Canon either continues to improve or they suffer, period. And if current Canon users are not enthralled by the gimmick/fad/trend of mirrorless, they're going to be doubly unhappy. And again, if they have to make a system level switch (or simply decide mirrorless is the way) to get the improvements they seek, Canon probably loses more customers than it gains.
 
Likes: espressino
Mar 26, 2014
688
37
#89
Its too early to put EF in the freezer, and Canon will pay for it.

As example, take event photographers. They wouldn't buy EOS/EF, because its dead, but they wouldn't buy EOS-R either, because it isn't up to the task yet. Even if a pro EOS-R came out tomorrow morning, people would wait due to supply issues, get an opportunity to see other people's experience, etc. That double whammy isn't going to do any good for Canon.

I have an EOS 5DmkIII with four L zooms. I'm getting a nice sum of money in a month, and I planned to upgrade the 16-35mm f/2.8L mkII to mkIII. Ain't going to happen now, I'll save the money till EOS-R comes of age - a much better R equivalent is on the way. That sounds like fresh new L lenses losing value on shop's shelves.
And as if to support what I wrote, a new post by Canon rumors, quoting from Canon's 3rd quarter financials: "Additionally, the successive announcements made by manufacturers, including Canon, of entering the full-frame mirrorless camera market has led to temporary restrained buying of advanced-amateur models. Compared to the same period last year, during which we launched two new models, our sales declined by 22.4% in the third quarter. "

Canon's reasoning is, IMHO, insufficient to explain a 22.4% decline in sales.

Yes, new release help sales. Yes, there's a much discussed trend of sales decreasing. But, no - there aren't that many crop customers who delayed buying equipment just because a FF camera announcement was around the corner. I suspect such a big drop is partially due to FF camera owners being weary of their equipment becoming suddenly obsolete.
 
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
#90
Let's just take one lens to shred your position, the EF-S 15-85mm IS zoom. Super versatile walk around lens for APS-C. How old is that lens? You really think it's delivering adequate optical quality for even 24 MP?
yes. EF-M 18-55 is no Zeiss Otus, but it zooms, has AF, is lighter and more compact and noticeable less expensive. More importantly, it is more versatile, has better build quality and is optically better than the later introduced, "newer" EF-M 15-45.

EF-M 18-55 is an absolutely amazing kit zoom and offers perfect bang for the buck. If you can still find one, highly recommended to any EOS M user. It is (was) the best IQ 18-55/3.5-5.6 crop kit zoom (APS-C) on the market - all brands, all makers. A nuance better than the current incarnation of the EF-S. It does serve a 24 MP sensor "more than adequately" and a 28 MP sensor likely too.

Canon was not willing to deliver "continuous improvement", when they replaced 18-55 with 15-45. yes, the latter is more compact, but main motivation seems to have been production costs a few cents lower per unit.

That's why i bought M50 "body only", without the sub-par 15-45 kit zoom.
 
Last edited:
May 11, 2017
856
95
#91
yes. EF-M 18-55 is no Zeiss Otus, but it zooms, has AF, is lighter abd more compact and ... more versatile, better build quality and optically superior to the later i troduced, "newer" EF-M 15-45. The 18-55 is an absolutely amazing kit zoom and perfect bang for the buck. Highly recommended to any EOS M user, if you can still find one. It is (was) the optically best performing crop "kit zoom" (APS-C) on the market (for f/3.5-5.6 zooms). A nuance better than the current incarnation of the EF-S. It serves a 24MP sensor easily and 28 MP very likely too.

Canon was not willing to deliver "continuous improvement" here, when they replaced 18-55 with 15-45. yes, it is more compact. but main motivation obviously were production cost a few cent lower per unit.

That's why i bought M50 "body only", without the sub-par 15-45 kit zoom.
Your insight into the thinking behind Canon design decisions continues to astonish and amaze. What is guesswork and speculation to some of us is obvious to you.
 
Likes: Chris_BC
Feb 26, 2017
775
8
#92
Antono,

Canon won't put EF in a freezer just yet. that is not what they said. they said: We have to catch up and get ER lenses and R system up to speed in 2019. Massive project underway. We had to allocate all our resources and focus on R system in 2019 (A.M.: sounds like a push to be ready with pro lenses and system for 2020 Olympics to me.)
EF used in Canon pro video systems. They cannot pull the plug on entire line of business just like that.

on unrelated note: I sold my trusty 6D and purchased my second 5D IV body (Mint, slightly used with less than 2000 actuations on it) a week ago for AUD 2,350.00 as a replacement.
I am going to keep the following lenses in my kit until transitioning to Pro mirrorless bodies in late 2019:
1. Canon 24-70/2.8 II L
2. Canon 70-200/2.8 II L
3. Canon 16-35/2.8 III L
4. Canon 35/1.4 II L
5. Canon 100/2.8 L Macro
6. Canon 100-400 II IS L

Sold:
Canon 6D
Canon 85/1.4 IS L

For sale, taking offers: Canon 400/2.8 II IS L (Mint, as new, full kit)



I
And as if to support what I wrote, a new post by Canon rumors, quoting from Canon's 3rd quarter financials: "Additionally, the successive announcements made by manufacturers, including Canon, of entering the full-frame mirrorless camera market has led to temporary restrained buying of advanced-amateur models. Compared to the same period last year, during which we launched two new models, our sales declined by 22.4% in the third quarter. "

Canon's reasoning is, IMHO, insufficient to explain a 22.4% decline in sales.

Yes, new release help sales. Yes, there's a much discussed trend of sales decreasing. But, no - there aren't that many crop customers who delayed buying equipment just because a FF camera announcement was around the corner. I suspect such a big drop is partially due to FF camera owners being weary of their equipment becoming suddenly obsolete.
Its too early to put EF in the freezer, and Canon will pay for it.

As example, take event photographers. They wouldn't buy EOS/EF, because its dead, but they wouldn't buy EOS-R either, because it isn't up to the task yet. Even if a pro EOS-R came out tomorrow morning, people would wait due to supply issues, get an opportunity to see other people's experience, etc. That double whammy isn't going to do any good for Canon.

I have an EOS 5DmkIII with four L zooms. I'm getting a nice sum of money in a month, and I planned to upgrade the 16-35mm f/2.8L mkII to mkIII. Ain't going to happen now, I'll save the money till EOS-R comes of age - a much better R equivalent is on the way. That sounds like fresh new L lenses losing value on shop's shelves.
 
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
#93
Your insight into the thinking behind Canon design decisions continues to astonish and amaze. What is guesswork and speculation to some of us is obvious to you.
following the industry and Canon's moves for a few years gives one a pretty good "feel" for what might be next and how they try to cut corners and squeeze out a little more oligopolist-level profit at every opportunity. Of course, they never say communicate about their plans for further development of their product portfolio and how it may affect/benefit their customers. they just want to take our money and be done with it. That type of corporate behaviour will become increasingly less sustainable. Imaging pro's and amateurs/enthusiasts are not your typical "black box consumer electronics" buyer. They are a bit more interested in what exactly they will get for their hard-earned money and whether its going to be technically obsolete in a few years' time or already tomorrow.

Canon definitely is not doing itself a favor by giving interviews bare of any meaningful content and not clearly communicating direction and next steps for their product lines, all the way to publishing a specific road map when launching an entirely new system.
 

Chris_BC

I'm New Here
Jul 28, 2016
19
11
AZ
#94
yes. EF-M 18-55 is no Zeiss Otus, but it zooms, has AF, is lighter and more compact and noticeable less expensive. More importantly, it is more versatile, has better build quality and is optically better than the later introduced, "newer" EF-M 15-45.

EF-M 18-55 is an absolutely amazing kit zoom and offers perfect bang for the buck. If you can still find one, highly recommended to any EOS M user. It is (was) the best IQ 18-55/3.5-5.6 crop kit zoom (APS-C) on the market - all brands, all makers. A nuance better than the current incarnation of the EF-S. It does serve a 24 MP sensor "more than adequately" and a 28 MP sensor likely too.

Canon was not willing to deliver "continuous improvement", when they replaced 18-55 with 15-45. yes, the latter is more compact, but main motivation seems to have been production costs a few cents lower per unit.

That's why i bought M50 "body only", without the sub-par 15-45 kit zoom.
Good grief. Read the range again on the lens I mentioned. That's 15, as in fifteen, to 85, as in eighty five. 18 on the wide end is no substitute for 15, and 55 on the long end is nowhere near 85.

And that's EF-S for APS-C DSLRs. I did not say anything about the M camera which is also mirrorless (and which I have zero interest in) and thus is not owned by the Canon user group that would be faced with a system shift. You need to grasp that we're talking about owners of Rebels, 40D, 50D, 60D, 70D, 80D, 7D I and II, etc.
 
Likes: espressino
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
#95
ah, yes, my bad then. But i think we may well have seen the last new EF-S lens already. And not many more new EF lenses either, if any. Don't think an EF 24-70/2.8 L IS will ever come. Only RF.

Canon crop DSLR owners have a good number of options going forward. Either stay with DSLRs for one more cycle or go mirrorfree - either APS-C [EOS M / EF-M] or FF [EOS R / RF]. In all scenarios their existing EF and EF-S lenses will keep working. No really big issues.
 
Nov 1, 2012
1,219
12
#97
I'm really hoping EF is not dead yet. I have two needs:

Sports: Currently using 1DX, considering upgrade to 1DX2. If mirrorless wants to beat that, it needs to have same-ish AF tracking at minimum, same low-light performance and 10+fps. Hopefully 12-16fps. Dual cards too. I'd be ok with CF although I understand if it's CF+CFast, or further into future 2x Cfast. Neither of the current mirrorless bodies are not even remotely option for these. Also since I'm keying off on action, the EVF delay needs to be stupid low. I think 1DX shutter lag is 60ms? So if EVF has 30ms delay and the body has shutter lag of 30ms, then it'd be equal to 1DX. And typical day is 3k-5k clicks. 1DX can do it on one battery. If mirrorless takes 400-500 on one battery, that'd mean I need 10 batteries. No-go. (+need good ergonomics to hold with 70-200 for a full day)

Other stuff: Currently using 5D4. Mirrorless needs very good ISO100 performance (dynamic range, sharpness etc), enough pixels and probably no AA if possible. Other specs not as critical.

Yes, someday I'm sure mirrorless will be better than my current cameras. But the current mirrorless Canon offerings are pale comparison. So I don't like the plan to kill new EF lenses and concentrate on RF :(
 

BillB

EOS 80D
May 11, 2017
856
95
#98
I'm really hoping EF is not dead yet. I have two needs:

Sports: Currently using 1DX, considering upgrade to 1DX2. If mirrorless wants to beat that, it needs to have same-ish AF tracking at minimum, same low-light performance and 10+fps. Hopefully 12-16fps. Dual cards too. I'd be ok with CF although I understand if it's CF+CFast, or further into future 2x Cfast. Neither of the current mirrorless bodies are not even remotely option for these. Also since I'm keying off on action, the EVF delay needs to be stupid low. I think 1DX shutter lag is 60ms? So if EVF has 30ms delay and the body has shutter lag of 30ms, then it'd be equal to 1DX. And typical day is 3k-5k clicks. 1DX can do it on one battery. If mirrorless takes 400-500 on one battery, that'd mean I need 10 batteries. No-go. (+need good ergonomics to hold with 70-200 for a full day)

Other stuff: Currently using 5D4. Mirrorless needs very good ISO100 performance (dynamic range, sharpness etc), enough pixels and probably no AA if possible. Other specs not as critical.

Yes, someday I'm sure mirrorless will be better than my current cameras. But the current mirrorless Canon offerings are pale comparison. So I don't like the plan to kill new EF lenses and concentrate on RF :(
There is a lot of speculation about whether Canon will release any new EF lenses and Canon has a plan to release a lot of RF lenses. At worst, Canon DSLR users are going to have to make do with the EF lens designs that are out there now. Not all bad, IMHO.
 
Likes: YuengLinger