Patent: Canon RF 10-24mm f/4 and Canon RF 14-28 f/2.0

Gazwas

EOS T7i
Sep 3, 2018
56
15
Its a bit of a contradiction though that patents surface for these big, fast zoom lenses that could only ever really be bulky and heavy. Then in the following days patents surface showing Canon want to shrink FF mirrorless cameras.
Interesting times......
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,089
389
I wonder about size, weight and price. Ok price will skyrocket but size and weight too. And it will probably NOT have iS. Not having anything R but were I to use it I would get the 15-35 2.8L IS. It would be very versatile for the interior shots I sometimes take inside museums and churches (the same for RF 24-70 2.8L IS). And of course it is a very nice landscape lens.

I understand that 14-28 f/2 would make it a terrific astro lens but there is the much cheaper SIgma 14 1.8 Art for that. Now if Canon could concentrate on making a similar lens it could be interesting. That way they could improve on vignetting (and coma). And if Sigma is so big how big would be the UWA f/2 zoom ? (Just wondering).
 
Last edited:

scyrene

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 4, 2013
2,511
395
UK
www.flickr.com
Nobody does know what is coming down the pike so how do we know by buying into the R system Canon will deliver a camera of the calibre of the old 1Ds series (resolution, build quality etc) for example? However, if you do know some inside information please share it with us all.
Is it your contention that they have released these 'pro level' RF lenses and they *won't* then produce high end bodies to go with them? We don't have a roadmap but we can make some pretty robust inferences, even without the rumours, some of which are fairly credible.
 

Gazwas

EOS T7i
Sep 3, 2018
56
15
Is it your contention that they have released these 'pro level' RF lenses and they *won't* then produce high end bodies to go with them? We don't have a roadmap but we can make some pretty robust inferences, even without the rumours, some of which are fairly credible.
The ‘if’ was never in contention and I hope I didn’t ever intentionally suggest that however, the ‘when’.........
 
Last edited: