The 2020 RF lens roadmap, up to 8 new lenses coming in 2020

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,650
464
Germany
With a body like the RP it's now about time to get some "non L" RF lenses, esp. some small FF prime with typical FL lenses like 24, 35, 50 mm or similar.
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,649
245
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I just bought an EOS R... (no RF glass yet) So of course I'm anxiously awaiting some of the earlier announced L glass, particularly the 15-35 2.8. I bought the camera mostly for video and as a travel camera, so I'm looking forward to comparably light and well balanced glass (vs using the EF adapter with EF glass) for video. the 15-35 focal range pretty much negates the 4k crop factor. I've been fiddling with it so far with the 16-35 f 4 and the 35 and 85 1.4 L primes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB
Mar 14, 2012
2,305
193
Maybe smaller?
The RF 35 is smaller, lighter, sharper than its EF 35 f/2 IS counterpart. With the camera market contracting like it is, I don't see much of a market for smaller, slower, cheaper lenses. Many of those users will be using their cell phones. Camera manufacturers are targeting enthusiasts and pros that want high IQ that that means more corrected and larger lenses. Sure, there might be a place for a pancake like 40 f/2.8, but I can't see f/1.8 or f/2 primes from the 24-85mm range being small/uncorrected. More likely, they'll sit near the RF 35 in IQ and size.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,153
390
Well now I need to know what the "look what we can do" lens is! Is it the 14-21 f/1.4? Will it be the widest lens that need a tripod collar?
Lo
I have a feeling that we will see something like that 17-70 lens, as a kit zoom. Perfect for travel, providing it's light and decent. 17 is really wide on FF, and that would be a great plus for interior photography on an RF body.

Otherwise, I see a couple of non-L primes, maybe a 24 and 50 and some additional high-end primes.
Don't know how light a FF 17-70 is going to be, even with 3.5-5.6 variable max aperture. They already have the 24-105, so the choice would be between a little longer or quite a bit wider.
 

cellomaster27

Capture the moment!
Jun 3, 2013
353
51
San Jose - CA
Like a 50mm 1.2 that is bigger and heavier than the EF one, or a 70-200mm 2.8 that is fatter and probably heavier than the EF one? And it'll probably be twice the price as well, to keep the RF tradition alive. Oh how about a 24-105 that's pretty much identical in specs and IQ to the EF II? How's that an advantage?

Canon's RF designers seem to have Sigma Envy and want to show that they too have big manly bits. Meanwhile I'm looking at the EF 35mm IS because it's small and light.
They have an additional control ring that can be set to what you'd like. I think that's huge too, not just a mount thing. Speaking of mount, there are more connections for lens and camera. So you're absolutely wrong about same specs. To the naked eye, the IQ may look identical (ref. 24-105) - but that's because it's already good. :LOL:
And you're talking about weight differences.. i.e. the 70-200. If you compare the canon EF to the Sony G 70-200, the Sony is not lighter by any means - practically the same (Sony is 10 grams lighter compared to the mark ii and the same compared to the mark iii) Mirrorless does NOT mean that the lenses are lighter. Due to flange size, different sizes in lenses and potentially decrease in weight, but not a whole lot else. If you're looking for a dreamy 85mm F1.2, I hope you're not looking for a pancake. I think the M mount exists for people seeking super small, compact, and travel friendly camera system.
 

Lee Jay

EOR R
Sep 22, 2011
2,077
56
How about a crazy look what we can do camera body?
Exactly.

I made a special trip to check out the R, RP, Z6, Z7, A7ii, A7iii, EM10 and EM5 mark II at a Best Buy, and all the EVFs stink badly except the EM5 Mark II. And that one is only marginal.

No way in the world I'd shoot with any of them until someone makes a usable EVF for high-speed moving subjects in difficult light.
 

fabao

I'm New Here
Apr 26, 2019
11
19
The RF 35 is smaller, lighter, sharper than its EF 35 f/2 IS counterpart. With the camera market contracting like it is, I don't see much of a market for smaller, slower, cheaper lenses. Many of those users will be using their cell phones. Camera manufacturers are targeting enthusiasts and pros that want high IQ that that means more corrected and larger lenses. Sure, there might be a place for a pancake like 40 f/2.8, but I can't see f/1.8 or f/2 primes from the 24-85mm range being small/uncorrected. More likely, they'll sit near the RF 35 in IQ and size.
Couldn't agree more. When I want "light", specially when traveling, I use my m43 camera and tiny lenses. Gets the job done really well. When I want the FF "look", low light performance, or when I need to "look professional", I am all for the best quality lenses like the new RF 28-70 f2. Hoping for more lenses like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillB

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,650
464
Germany
The RF 35 is smaller, lighter, sharper than its EF 35 f/2 IS counterpart. With the camera market contracting like it is, I don't see much of a market for smaller, slower, cheaper lenses. Many of those users will be using their cell phones. Camera manufacturers are targeting enthusiasts and pros that want high IQ that that means more corrected and larger lenses. Sure, there might be a place for a pancake like 40 f/2.8, but I can't see f/1.8 or f/2 primes from the 24-85mm range being small/uncorrected. More likely, they'll sit near the RF 35 in IQ and size.
The RF 35 is a great lens and I praised it in other treads before.
And if Canon can‘t or don‘t want to make RF pancakes then at least bring other FLs build like this - soon.
Thanks in advance.
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
Like a 50mm 1.2 that is bigger and heavier than the EF one
And night and day sharper, yes. I sold my EF 50/1.2.

Basically, the old Canon 50/1.8, 1.4, and later 1.2 were good in the early 90s, acceptable in the early 00s, but were falling behind even the trinity zooms this last decade.

Meanwhile Canon's theory seems to be that anyone who'd settle for that level of quality is now just shooting with a smartphone. At least phones couldn't get the EF50/1.2's bokeh.

Canon's not alone: all the makers have abandoned the compact but fuzzy "double-Gauss" designs with far bigger designs: Sony, Nikon, Zeiss with their massive 55mm/1.4 Otus and now Canon's 50/1.2.

If you want smaller lenses, I think at least a couple will be coming (I hope one notch bigger than pancake, but smaller than the 35 IS Mac). Other makes have a bunch too. The Kipon brand from China has manual f/2.4 lenses in I think 24 28 35 50 85 135. I have a Leica 35/1.4 on my R as we speak.
 
  • Like
Reactions: edoorn

domo_p1000

I'm New Here
Aug 22, 2013
9
7
I may be in a worldwide minority of one, but I have always loved my 35-350/3.5-5.6L and now the 28-300/3.5-5.6L... it's like having a comfort blanket! The latter is now 15 years old - I really would like to see something new along those lines.