24-300 to me could be a winner as a travel lens. I guess it'll depend on the size. Hopefully not like the EF 28-300L.
Patent: Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS & RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Can't beat physics, you need glass for that range with that aperture. And it is also an L lens.
So it will be somewhere in between the Sony FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS (slower, less reach, less sharp)
And the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5–5.6L (sharper, more reach and also slightly faster but less wide and not mirrorless)
I will be comfortably over a kilo, that's for sure, maybe 1.2-1.3kg.
In my opinion the 28-300 has only one real downside, and that's the sharpness,
it is just not quite up to the sensors of the newer cameras (in my case a 5DsR).
Well also the contrast could be better.
For me, the 24-300 could be even heavier if it was also f/3.5 or even f/2.8 (we won't get that, i know)
I would not care about 200-400 grams more weight for having more light on the sensor.
Edit: The plus side of the 28-300 is obviously it's flexibility, you don't have to carry around
more than one Lens + Camera to have a huge focal range. No lens changes = no dirt on the sensor
and no time loss when you are in a hurry.
it is just not quite up to the sensors of the newer cameras (in my case a 5DsR).
Well also the contrast could be better.
For me, the 24-300 could be even heavier if it was also f/3.5 or even f/2.8 (we won't get that, i know)
I would not care about 200-400 grams more weight for having more light on the sensor.
Edit: The plus side of the 28-300 is obviously it's flexibility, you don't have to carry around
more than one Lens + Camera to have a huge focal range. No lens changes = no dirt on the sensor
and no time loss when you are in a hurry.
Last edited:
The 24-300 lens should have been introduced with the R camera, instead of the 28-70. It's much more in sync with a camera that is at the 6D level of functionality. The 28-70 could have been introduced with a "EOS-R1" professional model that can do 20 (or 24) full frame images per second.
Fully agree with your point. However, the newest EF lenses (400 and 600) seem to have all the benefits of the RF mount but inside the EF package. I’d imagine that it was built for RF from the ground up but adapted for EF. Two hints that seem to show this to me are that the focus rings are not full time manual but rather motor driven. In addition, the lenses have the same ‘focus motor speed setting’ switches as are available on native RF lenses within the software of the RF body... I’d expect Canon to make this clearer during the announcement of the 300 and the 500 - if this is indeed their plan. We shall have to wait! Are the newest lenses even available at this time?
That bag full of glass will still work for years to come, whatever corporate decisions are made.
Canon spent millions upgrading several EF lenses over the last few years (and still are) knowing perfectly well that they were coming out with a RF Mount system. EF lenses will be around for many many years to come.
Besides, these RF lenses look quite untouchable to the majority market of gear buyers as they are outrageously expensive....
Yeah, I like the look of them but they are mostly very premium products at this point.
Yeah, it's not that I don't love L glass or recognize that they'll continue to function tomorrow. My point was that if/when I bail out of the Canon ecosystem, it's going to suck having to sell off native Canon glass at fire sale prices if I want to switch over to native XXX glass instead. Rational or not, I'm having some buyer's remorse, I suppose.
I would tend think a lighter lens would be more in need of IS... based on my firearms experience. I have the current 24-70mm f/2.8L II and have not had a problem probably due to the shorter focal length. I won't be buying a 24-70 IS if it gets released. I'm happy with what I have. If I had an R body the non stabilized 28-70 would probably be my first lens purchase. However, I am more likely to get a 5D Mark V if one is released.