Two more RF mount lenses could be coming in 2019 [CR2]

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
It amazes me how so many people on this forum have such incredible inside knowledge about the future of DSLRs and the EF mount. They really should send their resumes to Canon because I am sure Canon would love to know what the future holds for cameras. It could save Canon a lot of time and money if they could predict the future with the same certainty as these forum geniuses.
 

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
The 7D2 is the oldest camera in the Canon lineup and is 5 years into a 5 year refresh cycle. The 80D is three years into a 3 year refresh cycle. Normally, both should be updated soon. If they are not, it will be an interesting time for speculation as to why.....
Nikon followed a seven-year refresh cycle with the D500. We can speculate about the refresh cycles followed by both companies, but it is just that: speculation.

Digital is a much more mature product today than it was five years ago and that means a slower pace of development. The only thing that has changed significantly since the introduction of the 7DII that affects image quality is on-chip ADC, and with current technology that seems to mainly impact base ISO, which is not that beneficial for a sports and wildlife camera. The 7DII could benefit from a touch screen, built-in wifi and all f8 focus points, but not so much as to justify a new model. Autofocus could be improved, but it isn't all that different from the autofocus of the 1DxII or the 5DIV, so it needs to leapfrog those bodies in my opinion.

My speculation, and I readily admit it is only speculation, that the decision facing Canon and Nikon both is whether or not the pace of development in mirrorless will be sufficiently advanced to make a mirrorless body that is not simply as good as, but much better than what they can accomplish with a DSLR. I suspect we are at least one generation away from that.
 

blackcoffee17

EOS 80D
Sep 17, 2014
125
97
Yes, but the 7D2 can already do 10FPS with dual digic6... Surely dual Digic8 could do better. Plus, when shooting video the sensor is read 60 times per second.

I suspect that a large part of the speed problem is A/D settling time. When you are shooting stills you are generating 14 bit RAW files, and that means using a 14 bit (or higher) A/D chip. When you shoot video you do not need the same colour depth so you can clock it higher because you are not using the lower precision bits anyway.

(I am going to make up the following numbers to demonstrate the concept)
Lets say you have a 14 Bit A/D chip that is designed to run at 1Mhz. If you run that chip at 2Mhz, you will still get a digital output, but (lets say) the last two bits are now random noise.... but you don't really care because all you really want for video is 8 bits, so the 12 accurate bits are good enough. You might be able to push that same chip to 3 or 4 MHZ and still get your 8 bits of data for the video.

And yes, the mechanical mirror will be part of the reason for the slower frame rate, but just getting rid of it is not enough. If Canon rerally wants a high framerate monster it will take lots of computing power and massively parallel A/D on the sensor itself. I think that it is coming, but I will not hold my breath while
I wait.
Let's not forget the Dual Pixel AF. In a DSLR the AF sensor is separate and i believe the CPU has a much easier job to calculate correct focus distance. In mirrorless there is much more AF data to process. Even the EOS R can do 8 FPS but only 5 or 3 with AF.
 
Reactions: Michael Clark

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
Not all but plenty, especially bird photographers. What should they buy? A 5D4 or 1DX with 600mm F4?
I'm a big fan of the 7D, but I have to admit that the 5DIV is not a bad substitute for birds in flight. It has essentially the same autofocus. Has better high ISO performance. The 30 mp sensor is very forgiving of severe crops. The frame rate is less, but not painfully slow (the biggest problem I find is with the buffer, not the FPS). I actually own all three (7d, 1D and 5D) and find this to be my use case: Sports -- 1Dx II with 5DIV as second body; Birding: 7D II in bright light, 5DIV in early morning and fading afternoon light.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
7,871
1,187
Canada
Let's not forget the Dual Pixel AF. In a DSLR the AF sensor is separate and i believe the CPU has a much easier job to calculate correct focus distance. In mirrorless there is much more AF data to process. Even the EOS R can do 8 FPS but only 5 or 3 with AF.
Yes, anything fast is going to need lots of computing power. The latest Oly has dual quad core chips. It would not surprise me in the least if the 7D or 5D equivalents in the R line had dual 2 core (or 4 core) digic chips, and the iDX equivalent with three of them.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,020
587
Irving, Texas
Not all but plenty, especially bird photographers. What should they buy? A 5D4 or 1DX with 600mm F4?
They buy whatever they want or need. There is no obligation to keep giving a person what they personally want. Saying "all" is silly. Reminds me of my young teen years, "Everybody else was doing it!" The man has a 7D II. Fine camera. However, that doesn't entitle him to a 7D III. Feeling entitled seems to be the fashion these days. Canon has to do whatever Canon has to do to survive "the great contraction".
 
Last edited:

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,365
197
UK
www.flickr.com
The 70-200 looks like it...
Well the length savings in the RF version seem to be down to making it extend when zooming. The EF 70-200s are the size they are partly because they do not extend - it's a matter of personal preference which you consider better, whether you value saving space in your bag versus better sealing - but it seems to have little to do with the mount.
 
Reactions: Michael Clark

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,365
197
UK
www.flickr.com
You would be shooting a t f/11 with a 2xTC. Even on a 24 mpx sensor you would lose considerable resolution - https://www.lenstip.com/540.4-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_AF-S_500_mm_f_5.6E_PF_ED_VR_Image_resolution.html - and you would be upping the iso and increasing the noise to lower IQ even further.
Not quite as bad, but I shoot with the 500 f/4 + 2x extender and stop down to f/10 and it works fine in most situations. Not as good as the 1.4 or bare lens, but worthwhile imo.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
4,750
1,308
Not quite as bad, but I shoot with the 500 f/4 + 2x extender and stop down to f/10 and it works fine in most situations. Not as good as the 1.4 or bare lens, but worthwhile imo.
The 500 f/4 is a spectacular lens. The Nikon 560/5.6 PF is quite good but not in the same league IQ wise.
 
Reactions: scyrene

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
223
20
Well the length savings in the RF version seem to be down to making it extend when zooming. The EF 70-200s are the size they are partly because they do not extend - it's a matter of personal preference which you consider better, whether you value saving space in your bag versus better sealing - but it seems to have little to do with the mount.
The thing that has changed my mind on the extending 70-200 is that the 24-70 is also extending. I put my 24-70 through the same amount of grief that the 70-200 gets, and there's never been an issue, ever. Obviously the 24-70 extends to save room as well, so I don't see why the 70-200 shouldn't. Went from despising the design to wondering why this wasn't how the thing was always made in the first place.

I also wonder if the extending design would protect the lens more from shock--my 70-200 has taken a lot of blows to the lenshood--and that's done a number on the front of the lens barrel, but if it extended, the extended part would just slide back in the zoom as if you pushed-pulled on it.
 

Trey T

EOS T7i
Feb 6, 2019
65
24
Why is Canon so secretive about when they plan to release the next R body? Publishing the type and timeframe shouldn't be a state secret...
It’s just a normal process of a big organization or corporation. If it’s in not in the production phase (eg conceptual or test), it’s not a good idea to release something that’s not good, viable, or sustainable product. The last thing they want is for us or competitors to laugh at their poor execution
 

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
1,977
117
29
34109
www.facebook.com
The focal length and speed of the lenses Canon chooses to release first could be used as an indicator of what lenses will sell the most out of the gate. Any delays on the zooms could be technical or manufacturing process in nature.

If Canon were to maintain a release clip of 8 RF L lenses every 12 months would allow them to replicate the EF lineup in about 4 years.

Will all zooms Canon develops have IS in their future lineup? This of course excludes the 28-70/2.0. With the RF mount having more flexibility to add IS it is entirely possible to put IS into the 8-15 Fisheye and 11-24. Not releasing the non-IS zooms would allow Canon improved economies of scale to just maintain two zoom lens lines rather than the current four.

How small the pancake lens of the RF mount will be. Will it be 23mm in max length like the 40mm STM or will it be 37mm in max length like the Sony 35mm f/2.8

I would not be surprised if the RF equivalent of the TS-E lenses were released after the fast long white primes.
 
Last edited:

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,365
197
UK
www.flickr.com
The thing that has changed my mind on the extending 70-200 is that the 24-70 is also extending. I put my 24-70 through the same amount of grief that the 70-200 gets, and there's never been an issue, ever. Obviously the 24-70 extends to save room as well, so I don't see why the 70-200 shouldn't. Went from despising the design to wondering why this wasn't how the thing was always made in the first place.

I also wonder if the extending design would protect the lens more from shock--my 70-200 has taken a lot of blows to the lenshood--and that's done a number on the front of the lens barrel, but if it extended, the extended part would just slide back in the zoom as if you pushed-pulled on it.
Interesting points! :)