Consumer RF mount zoom lenses coming in the first half of 2020 [CR2]

Woody

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
1,151
58
I will like to see lightweight and cheap RF 24-70 f/4 and 50 f/1.8 lenses. A lightweight RF 16mm zoom/prime lens will be the icing on the cake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travel_Photographer

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,353
249
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
Is the 35mm RF lens as good as the 22mm EF-M? Because I really want more primes like that for my RF mount.
I think the RF 35mm is much much better compared to the EF-M 22. In EF-M land the first satisfying lens was the 1.4 32mm and I would say the RF 35mm is close in general IQ.
Add the 1:2 closeup/macro capability of the RF 35 and its image stabilization it is a great lens. I have used it only for some hours in the last two weeks - it is a fun lens during use and for its good ... very good overall IQ
 

mpb001

EOS 80D
Sep 10, 2016
102
82
I can see the need for consumer grade RF lenses, but It would be great if Canon added some f4 “L” series lenses to the mix. They have the 24-105 RF. How about something like a 12-24 f4 L? Plus the standard 70-200 f4 L or a 70-300 f4?
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
AFAIK, a pancake's focal length needs to be roughly the flange distance, in this case 18mm. An ultra wide pancake would be welcome.
That doesn't really align with the fact you can get pancake lenses in, at least, 18mm 21mm and 35mm for the Leica M mount that has a 28mm flange distance.
 

Jethro

EOS R
Jul 14, 2018
359
245
I'm still hanging out for an RF macro - and this doesn't give me any joy in that regard ...
 

scottburgess

Canonical Canon
Jun 20, 2013
218
3
"Fixed aperture" brings to mind the old consumer lightweight telephoto mirror lenses, which always had questionable quality. But I've often thought it a design worth revisiting with modern manufacturing technologies. I wonder if they cracked that nut?
 

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
Canon has an 11-24mm f/4L for EF, I doubt an RF equivalent wouldn't be at least as wide.
That lens is the widest non distorting lens made, a technical tour de force, no- compromises pro lens priced at $3000. It’s another one of the reasons I was motivated to switch from Nikon.

An RF lower cost wide zoom would likely be more like the Nikon Z 14-30mm f4 at $1200. Probably using camera tricks to make it perform.

I wonder why the ultra wide primes arent more popular. A 14mm f4 might pair well with a 24-105 Or 35.
 

uri.raz

EOS RP
Jan 5, 2016
213
134
I wonder why the ultra wide primes arent more popular. A 14mm f4 might pair well with a 24-105 Or 35.
The Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L mkII is priced at $2,100. The Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L is priced at $2,700. Considering the $600 difference would get me precious little more, what I get on the wide side, and how I use wide lenses (tripod, static view), I opted for the later.
 

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
The Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L mkII is priced at $2,100. The Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L is priced at $2,700. Considering the $600 difference would get me precious little more, what I get on the wide side, and how I use wide lenses (tripod, static view), I opted for the later.
Amen. The 11-24 is a no-brainer. I suspect they aren't making money on it, but proceeded with it as a way to attract people to the brand (which is exactly what it helped do for me - Since switching from Nikon last month it's part of the trio that offers what Nikon doesn't: Ultrawide 11-24, compact RF 70-200, and ultralight 400mm 2.8).

But remember that you can't mount a RF lens on a conventional camera, and all RF cameras have all the magic corrections. That means you can make a 14mm that gives undistorted results for far less than before. If Nikon can sell the outstanding Z14-30 f4 for $1096, a sharp 14mm prime should be doable for $999. I'm just thrilled to have gotten the 11-24 used for a good price.
 
Last edited:

slclick

135L
Dec 17, 2013
3,893
1,701
"Fixed aperture" brings to mind the old consumer lightweight telephoto mirror lenses, which always had questionable quality. But I've often thought it a design worth revisiting with modern manufacturing technologies. I wonder if they cracked that nut?
It's a common term used for hundreds of lenses, both prime and zoom. Both professional and consumer. I'm not following your logic here. Why you are linking it your mind with those mirrored lenses is beyond me.
 

Shellbo6901

EOS M50
Jan 16, 2015
27
5
I just want to know if i should give in and buy the RF35 or not. Right now I use the EF50 1.4 more than my kit lens because of the weight. I do need a wide RF lens to use for real estate photography but otherwise I don't need anything too "special". Just having 2-4 lenses that work quite well and are autofocus for $400-800 would suffice. Anything else I can just get better at photography and save that $1000-2000 for more important things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aaron D

Dantana

EOS RP
Jan 29, 2013
283
135
Los Angeles, CA
www.flickr.com
It's a common term used for hundreds of lenses, both prime and zoom. Both professional and consumer. I'm not following your logic here. Why you are linking it your mind with those mirrored lenses is beyond me.
I think it's the difference between "fixed maximum aperture" like a 70-200 f4, where you can always open up to f4, and a "fixed aperture" lens that never changes aperture, like those old mirrored lenses.

I can't imagine that's what the OP is about. It has to be fixed maximum aperture.
 

Aaron D

Hey!
Jul 21, 2016
187
161
Kansas City
www.aarondougherty.com
OK, a little off-topic but the lenses I'm hoping for and would buy in a minute are these:

An RF 17mm TSE without the bulbous front. If Canon can get rid of the lens-flare and allow screw-in filters and hood, I'm in.

An RF 28mm. Non-L, f/2 or so. Doesn't have to be an L. Just like the RF 35 would be perfect, no macro or special tricks necessary. If this were an L and an f/1.4 I could be persuaded to buck-up for the added cost.

An RF 50mm f/2 to 1.4 . Again, just like the RF 35 would be perfect. Or an L, even.

An RF 24 TSE. This is not so urgent because the EF is plenty good, though smaller would be nice. My EF is getting a bit tired.
 

cycomachead

I'm New Here
Jan 7, 2012
24
3
I can't wait until I buy some RF L glass -- it all looks amazing, but right now I'm really hoping for some moderate zooms. The R for me, is a second camera to my 5D3, but I do love the weight/capability ratio. Even though I have the EF 24-70 f/4L, I'd probably go for an RF version, though as a second / walk-around type camera I'd like something a little less pricey. The EF adapter works well, but does mess with the balance and handling.

Actually, a 17-55 (full frame range lens) would be perfect me, as I love to be at the wide end, though I'm not aware of anyone making such a lens. I would happily trade some focal length for a wider lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Optics Patent

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
Actually, a 17-55 (full frame range lens) would be perfect me, as I love to be at the wide end, though I'm not aware of anyone making such a lens. I would happily trade some focal length for a wider lens.
I predict wide zooms like you suggest will become more popular. In the mirrorless era, sensors and lenses are so good that we enjoy essentially a surplus of image quality. Imagine your camera is aware of the lighting, and settings to know what kind of IQ you'll get. Now imagine you can have "digital zoom" to extend the range of your 17-55mm to maybe 17-105mm when in daylight, flash, etc. Imagine how your zoom ring position might encode added digital zoom. This is one of my patent pending invention. Now imagine this with prime lenses, so your RF 50 1.2 might be a 50-150 in ideal conditions, yielding sellable and publishable images at the virtual telephoto end, that you were able to compose and focus critically in the viewfinder unlike mere post cropping. Much more pending, including auto-focusing with vintage manual lenses.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,262
1,920
Canada
For a thread about consumer ( NOT L glass ) lenses, this thread sure talks a lot about expensive L glass.

If Canon is going to hit the consumer market with lower cost R bodies, they are going to need a few F5.6 or 6.3 lenses, things like a 24-70 F6.3 or a 70-300 F6.3 ( both variable aperture) lens, or a 50F1.8

if you want small and light, you should be prepared to embrace some slow lenses
 

scottburgess

Canonical Canon
Jun 20, 2013
218
3
It's a common term used for hundreds of lenses, both prime and zoom. Both professional and consumer. I'm not following your logic here. Why you are linking it your mind with those mirrored lenses is beyond me.
Fixed aperture is not the same as fixed maximum aperture. As to whether Dantana is right about the OP being a typo, only the OP'er can say. But the discussion is about consumer lenses and a mirror lens fits both the OP and the thread, which is a hell of a lot better than most of the posts here.