Canon working on another f/2 zoom lens for the RF mount [CR1]

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
1,063
150
The only reason why I really want to see f/2 holy trinity is hope that it will somehow push down prices of f/2.8 holy trinity.
It won’t. They are a vastly different tools. How price of a sub compact cars push down prices of delivery pickup tracks? Different purpose and different audience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dominic_siu

jayphotoworks

EOS 80D
Aug 11, 2016
186
56
I would say that todays "trinity" are 11-24mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm or 11-24mm, 24-105mm, 100-400mm
I still think the 11-24mm is a niche range. The 11-24 can't share filters with the 24-70, is a stop slower and can't cover 35mm in a pinch. I still think that the 16-35 range is still well regarded as part of the trinity. It can handle landscapes decently, but it can also cover indoor low-light event work and portraits in a pinch.
 

TAF

EOS RP
Feb 26, 2012
338
27
I'm rooting for a 24-135L f2 IS. The lens would never leave the body...
 

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
1,063
150
I'm rooting for a 24-135L f2 IS. The lens would never leave the body...
correction: an excellent 24-200 /f2.0 lens Would never leave a body for an event shooter. And I would sell my second body ASAP.
And I do not mind the size or the price of the lens that will likely be $4000. It will afford me shooting with a single camera for a weight and cost relief.
But...it has to be excellent. Did I say it has to be excellent?
 

kraats

EOS 80D
Oct 9, 2011
100
15
Not unless one goes crop... especially Micro 4/3. Anyway, these are fast "L" lenses and for full frame. Nobody buys "L" for light weight. Bodies are lighter. Lenses, nope.
Yes, I can imagine mirrorless is great for crop systems. Not so much on full frame.
 

kraats

EOS 80D
Oct 9, 2011
100
15
11-24 is too wide for frequent use, and the front element makes it very hard to use filters - a suitable filter holder will be very bulky. 16-35 is more versatile as a part of the trinity.
I am using the aurora rear filters on the 11-24 mm and they are quite good. Only draw back is that they are hard to change in coastal areas without exposing your sensor too much to wind, spray and sand. The good thing from the new rf system is the adapter with the polarizer and variable nd filter. It makes the use of the 11-24 easier. I am curious to see how that works ....
 

Ladislav

EOS RP
Feb 13, 2013
328
44
37
Czech Republic
It won’t. They are a vastly different tools. How price of a sub compact cars push down prices of delivery pickup tracks? Different purpose and different audience.
Except that they are both pickup trucks. You buy them for the same purpose - to have a job done and here, the bigger truck (f/2) can carry higher load than the cheaper truck (f/2.8).
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
350
198
correction: an excellent 24-200 /f2.0 lens Would never leave a body for an event shooter. And I would sell my second body ASAP.
And I do not mind the size or the price of the lens that will likely be $4000. It will afford me shooting with a single camera for a weight and cost relief.
But...it has to be excellent. Did I say it has to be excellent?
4k price ,malaysian made non L could be possible ,but is it excellent ,could be good at least .
Or no idea maybe it isnt possible make plastic body for 10cm lenses. maybe if some kind of metal supports. no fluorite lenses no hand polished lenses.
Shouldnt they make first 24-200 f4 ,, f2 sounds ambitious
 
Last edited:

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
1,063
150
4k price ,malaysian made non L could be possible ,but is it excellent ,could be good at least .
Or no idea maybe it isnt possible make plastic body for 10cm lenses. maybe if some kind of metal supports. no fluorite lenses no hand polished lenses.
Shouldnt they make first 24-200 f4 ,, f2 sounds ambitious
exactly. :ROFLMAO: it was a joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

Phil

EOS R
Oct 17, 2018
15
8
Yes, please explain how the R is not up to snuff for the RF mount lenses. Very interested in this.
If you can’t figure it out on your own then me explaining it to you still won’t change the fact that you are not capable of understanding. But don’t freak out I’m sure your winning personality is all you need to succeed at life.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,495
1,094
Irving, Texas
If you can’t figure it out on your own then me explaining it to you still won’t change the fact that you are not capable of understanding. But don’t freak out I’m sure your winning personality is all you need to succeed at life.
Translated: "I have nothing. I just said it because I thought it would make me sound smart. Just made it up. Don't really know what I am talking about, at all... so I cannot explain myself. I've never actually seen an R or RF lens. I read reviews and watch YouTube videos. Then I just recycle what I have "learned" through vicarious living as first hand knowledge on internet forums. Somebody asked me what I meant, but even I don't know so I will now accuse the guy asking of being too stupid to understand what I say even if I could possibly explain it to him... even though I can't explain it... because I have no idea what I meant."
 
Last edited:

raptor3x

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2012
549
39
State College, PA
whumber.com
Then I wonder how Canon managed to make the RF 70-200mm f2.8 so tiny :)
Because they went with a telescoping lens body rather than the internal zoom design they've been using for so long. I assume they are confident enough in their current wiper seal technology to go ahead with such a design on a workhorse lens like the 70-200 2.8.
 

ozturert

EOS T7i
Jan 16, 2019
86
68
Because they went with a telescoping lens body rather than the internal zoom design they've been using for so long. I assume they are confident enough in their current wiper seal technology to go ahead with such a design on a workhorse lens like the 70-200 2.8.
They have had an excellent 70-300mm L IS lens for years, as an example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

ozturert

EOS T7i
Jan 16, 2019
86
68
In truth the R isn’t high enough in quality to match these lenses anyway.
Interesting. People have used L lenses for 10s of years on 10s of Canon bodies which are actually inferior to Eos R. Then millions of photographers have been tricked :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark