Here’s the full list of gear Canon will announce on September 5

[justaCanonuser]

Who knows? But if you think about it, offering a macro lens in even f/2.8 is ridiculous. No rational shooter uses f/2.8 for their depth of field when using it for close-up shooting. Having f/1.8 is just as useless as f/2.8 for real macro shooting. On the other hand, in the same way the 100L macro makes a decent portrait lens when shot at f/2.8, I would think a 35 macro would be a nice general-purpose lens with an option to shoot at f/1.8.

Of course, I'm not just making guesses, I'm guessing at rumors... so I'm happy to be corrected once anyone knows an actual answer.

I sometimes open my EF 100mm completely to f=2.8 to get an extremely short DoF. This can produce nice effects when shooting flowers/plants, if you want a more artistic, painting-like character. Of course, many macro motifs require an as big as possible DoF (or focus stacking), so in most settings a less fast lens would be all you need.

I personally also think that such a fast wide angle lens isn't anything I'd really need.

 

[memoriaphoto]

If this is true... WOW, if it is not true... @#$&!

Yes, after all this... if it isn't true it will be the biggest anti-climax that I can think of...

 

[neuroanatomist]

WHAAAAAT??????

10 Years of waiting for a proper 50L either 1.2 or 1.4... AND THEN IT WON'T FIT to my 5Ds?????????????

I WILL xxxx YOU Canon!!!!!

Kiss?

 

[ahsanford]

Independent of the naming scheme, I now suspect the EOS R will be closest to a 6-series level. It’s looking more like native EF mount capability and the thicker body that goes with it, which means people bought into FF DSLRs and L-series lenses may have less incentive to upgrade. That suggests a line aimed at EOS M and APS-C DSLR users looking to go FF, and that in turn suggests a $2K body-only price point.

Agree it's 6D flavored, but anything that natively takes EF will still appeal to FF SLR owners. As this forum shows, not everyone who owns wanted a thin mount body.

#1 target for this camera are existing (both crop and FF) Canon SLR owners -- it's far easier to sell us another camera than it is to lure in new users or flip the competition.

- A

 

[justaCanonuser]

WHAAAAAT??????

10 Years of waiting for a proper 50L either 1.2 or 1.4... AND THEN IT WON'T FIT to my 5Ds?????????????

I WILL xxxx YOU Canon!!!!!

Neuroantomist posted the dead crow on the dish exactly for you...

 

[ahsanford]

Who knows? But if you think about it, offering a macro lens in even f/2.8 is ridiculous. No rational shooter uses f/2.8 for their depth of field when using it for close-up shooting. Having f/1.8 is just as useless as f/2.8 for real macro shooting. On the other hand, in the same way the 100L macro makes a decent portrait lens when shot at f/2.8, I would think a 35 macro would be a nice general-purpose lens with an option to shoot at f/1.8.

Of course, I'm not just making guesses, I'm guessing at rumors... so I'm happy to be corrected once anyone knows an actual answer.

+1 always cracks me up when I see someone post a macro shot wide open and a tiny tiny fraction of the shot is in field of focus. I'm almost always stopping down my macro work considerably.

But yes, a bright aperture macro lens doubles as a nice non-macro-distance lens. The 100L is a stellar short tele in that regard.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

if not a full murder.

Remains the best name of a group of a given animal. Nothing else is even close.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

WHAAAAAT??????

10 Years of waiting for a proper 50L either 1.2 or 1.4... AND THEN IT WON'T FIT to my 5Ds?????????????

I WILL xxxx YOU Canon!!!!!

Who said it was proper? It might just be another iffy AF soft-cornered double gauss.

It also might be a pickle jar. We'll see.

- A

 

[mensaf]

These are exciting times for camera nerds.

32mm F1.4/EOS-M is getting snagged. Good chance I'm going to off the last of my l glass once the announcement actually happens and we get a spec sheet. Really interested in low light video performance with this one.

 

[justaCanonuser]

I think Canon introduced the "R" to make all people interested Reasoning about what the hell drove Canon to decide for an R. Causes a lot of stiR and fills thReads like this one. So it is all about maRketing.

 

[slclick]

Who said it was proper? It might just be another iffy AF soft-cornered double gauss.

It also might be a pickle jar. We'll see.

- A

The question begs...will you buy a new body to get the glass you desire if this one checks all the boxes?

 

[gkamadi]

Interesting implications from that list.

The lack of an EF mount adapter strongly suggests the new camera will be able to natively mount EF lenses.

The lack of an IS designation on standard lenses suggests IBIS.

L USM lenses are consistent with a serious, high end offering.

No CR3 tag, so presumably this remains a rumor. If this rumor turns out to be true, there will be plenty of crow to be served on these forms.

It will really be really great if EF lenses would mount natively. This is one thing I was praying for really hard!

 

[dkangel]

The 32mm f/1.4 M lens is a big tell for me. I personally haven't used the M series cameras and frankly thought of them as 'low-end' or 'consumer' cameras. Yes, same APS-C as my 80D But apparently Canon sells a whole lot of them and they're very popular overseas.

But I now can see an evolving strategy for Canon: the M series is the new Rebel, the R series is the new xD. The xxD cameras, APS-C, may not find an equivalent per se in the new line-up -- do we need a mirrorless pro-sumer APS-C camera? So the various M series cameras hit various price points in the consumer market (and maybe a bit above that for more serious hobbyists), and the R series cameras hit various points in the pro market (and made a bit below).

The xD, xxD, and Rebel cameras continue to go forward as long as demand is there; I'd expect Rebels to start to disappear first. I'd expect the 1DXm2 to be around for quite a while until (one day) we see an equivalent R (I'll call it the "1R"). The 5D gives way to a "5R" equivalent, and the 6D gives way to a "6R". The 7D disappears unless Canon wants a high end APS-C mirrorless.

The EF-M to RF adapter then allows a hobbyist with an M-series camera to buy RF glass for the day they move up.

Does that make sense?

I agree with you. I am going to bet that is how it turns out around as evidenced by their release of another M series lens. I think the Canon lines will end up breaking into 2 main lines. The EF-M and the RF/EF series. The rebels, et. al will fall by the wayside eventually as Mirrorless takes over which would make the EF-S line obsolete in 5-10 years time. At least thats what my Magic 8 Ball told me today.

 

[te1973]

Who said it was proper? It might just be another iffy AF soft-cornered double gauss.

It also might be a pickle jar. We'll see.

- A

do not care too much about softness.
focus shift for short distances even with live view focus is killing me
don't think this floating element whatever is still missing in 2018

 

[neuroanatomist]

I agree with you. I am going to bet that is how it turns out around as evidenced by their release of another M series lens. I think the Canon lines will end up breaking into 2 main lines. The EF-M and the RF/EF series. The rebels, et. al will fall by the wayside eventually as Mirrorless takes over which would make the EF-S line obsolete in 5-10 years time. At least thats what my Magic 8 Ball told me today.

 

[freejay]

Well, I don't need dual card slots ( ) and I wouldn't mind using an adapter for EF lenses that much. But if it doesn't have IBIS, I'd have no reason to move away from my mirrorslapper... My hands are a bit shaky at times and I practically can't use unstabilized lenses. So with IBIS a whole new world of lenses would be open to me!

 

[snappy604]

I'm just hoping that after (sometimes impatiently) waiting this release produces a decent FF I can afford .. I was close on the 6d MkII..

Hopefully if it supports EF still, it still supports 3rd party EFs... some of my Sigma Art glass is still decent

 

[freejay]

... I was close on the 6d MkII...

Me too...

 

[freejay]

PS: I think the "M" in the 35 mm lens is just a transferring error where two characters got lost "U" & "S"...

 

[fullstop]

Worried about the initial body just being the EOS R (like EOS M's original body)

^^^this!

Had they called it Canon EOS R1 we'd expect "flagship FF mirrorfree camera" ... but, just like EOS M. 1 letter only seems to stand for "first body for a new mirrorfree mount".

 

[jolyonralph]

+1 always cracks me up when I see someone post a macro shot wide open and a tiny tiny fraction of the shot is in field of focus. I'm almost always stopping down my macro work considerably.

On high magnifications you may be limited to wide open in order to avoid diffraction issues (eg with the MPE-65). I usually use f/2.8 on the MPE-65 combined with stacking.

Having said that, it makes sense for a 35mm f/1.8 macro lens to be 1.8 if you consider that it's probably a great 35mm f/1.8 lens as well. Stop it down for macro. Use it wide open for low light photography.