We’ve received the pricing for the new RF lenses

Quackator

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2011
233
45
Really looking forward to the 15-35. Had the Tamron 2.8/15-30 VC for a week and test drove it at the opening gala of a trade fair. Ended up using nothing but the Tammy on 5D MkIV and the Sigma 1.8/135 ART on 1D-X. Had the full case of all the goodies with me, never felt the urge to use anything between those two lenses. Mused about buying the Tammy, when Canon came around with the announcement of the 15-35. Everything the Tammy does, plus some. And more compact, less weight.

Will buy the 15-35 as soon as Canon introduces a tool sized camera. The R would be fine for me, if it had the ergonomics of the 5D MkIV. So anything like the R or above - in a better body shape.

5D Level is enough - a gripped body would be too much.

Sample size of one, of course.
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,648
245
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I'm well aware that none of the EF versions had IS, it's why I've been looking forward to the RF version so much (and I why will probably buy it at any price if I can't wait until the first time a rebate is offered). My point was actually that maybe getting IS for $200 wasn't that bad, even though the RF lens is still more expensive than Sony's (Nikon doesn't have a comparable Z lens since they dropped VR from it)



This pricing implies that the RF 70-200 2.8 will be $700 more than the EF 2.8 IS III currently is. That's a third more. What do you get for that? The size advantage when it's unzoomed? People can't even agree that's a good feature, seems that internal zoom would still be desired by some.
Is it not internal zooming?? I must have missed something.
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,648
245
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
The only one that kills me is the 24-70 IS. I love my EF 24-70 II but I do miss IS on it at times. The 15-35 will be a stellar lens but f/2.8 isn't worth the extra $$$ for me personally.
If I sell my current lens, the RF will net out around $1600. Not bad. The extra stop plus native mounting to the EOS R (more compact) is a great upgrade to work with the 4k crop on the R. That mostly what Im using the R for
 
Dec 6, 2018
111
152
My opinion ... and I use one RF lens, the 50mm 1.2

These lenses will be rather expensive, but they seem better, more advanced, and more complex. Did the EF 70-200mm 2.8 have a 3rd control ring? Not. Is the RF 50mm 1.2 as nice as the Zeiss Milvus I owned? Yes. And with auto focus and a control ring. For pros and people who understand good equipment, the price is okay. Otherwise, there's great EF glass that still adapts and works near perfect. And more less expensive RF glass will come along. So I see no problems, and simply more tools and solutions. First models when I got the RF 50mm last autumn.

Munch_1600.jpg
 

shunsai

EOS RP
Oct 15, 2011
213
105
I'm interested in adding a 70-200-ish lens back into my arsenal, but for now, my money is earmarked for the ≥5D IV level R body. Maybe by the time the body finally appears I'll have enough saved for both (still not likely).
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia
Jul 31, 2019
6
0
so as Canon et al dont like to use conversion rates for the UK market but seem to like 1 pound = 1 dollar. Have been thinking of switching to mirrorless from the Canon 5D MKIII to reduce weight,sizes etc but after reading various articles on the weight of some of the RF lenses and now the pricing it certainly puts me off switching to mirrorless for quite a while
The exchange worth, my 5DMKIV is in my bag, and I don't stop to use the EOS R with the EF lenses.
 

lawny13

EOS M50
Mar 6, 2019
34
43
This is about what I expected for the pricing of these lenses. They are about the same as when the EFs were released.

Bear in mind that canon uses an earlier adopter exploration method. Those who buy early pay the premium then they competitively being down the prices over a year. Not to mention sales.

Before those who want to talk about how Sony compares do and apples to apples comparison... look at Sony release prices not current ones and compare how those prices came down over time.

GM lenses are about the same size as those EF lenses. And since EF adapts seamlessly on the RF mount if you want to save money then adapt. These RF lenses look to be smaller and lighter. And if they are parafocal than in my book they do add value.... but will just wait for the inevitable price cuts. Look at how the R came down in price by almost $300 at certain times.

Choices... good to have them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uri.raz

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,212
773
Yea, photography is an expensive hobby for me, but the money spent on RF glass was instantly worth it. There is no hassle or hours upon hours of testing and calibrating. For me flawless lenses is what I want, because I don’t want to fix things in post, I want to be creative and have fun. RF and the R brought the fun back for me.

An lately I’ve being editing lots of pictures shot with EF-glass, and they just don’t come close.

I wanted perhaps that 70-200, but I was pretty much right about the price so already knew I couldn’t afford it. Doesn’t mean it’s hugely expensive, it just means that I spent my money on the 1.2’s instead.
 

navastronia

5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
204
226
Yea, photography is an expensive hobby for me, but the money spent on RF glass was instantly worth it. There is no hassle or hours upon hours of testing and calibrating. For me flawless lenses is what I want, because I don’t want to fix things in post, I want to be creative and have fun. RF and the R brought the fun back for me.

An lately I’ve being editing lots of pictures shot with EF-glass, and they just don’t come close.

I wanted perhaps that 70-200, but I was pretty much right about the price so already knew I couldn’t afford it. Doesn’t mean it’s hugely expensive, it just means that I spent my money on the 1.2’s instead.
Thanks, you're giving me the worst GAS possible :LOL:
 

edoorn

EOS RP
Apr 1, 2016
234
148
Seems in line with intro prices of the Z 24-70 and Sony 2.8 zooms (or actually maybe cheaper?).

And although sometimes Canon might dissapoint in pure tech specs for camera’s (although in practice they are fine), you know the lenses seldom fail our expectations; these babies could set new standards for pro 2.8 zooms.

Hopefully we’ll hear more about pro R bodies soon, and I do hope we also get to see more smaller and cheaper lens alternatives for those that not need the highest quality glass. Surely other brands might see opportunity there if Canon doesn’t oblige (hopefully Tamron will bring R mount lenses)
 

Diltiazem

Curiosity didn't kill me, yet.
Aug 23, 2014
169
19
Adjusted for inflation the price probably is on par with EF versions. But the landscape has changed. Canon is far behind Sony in FF mirrorless market, so more than inflation should have been considered. Unless Canon comes up with some great FF mirrorless cameras with the reasonable price these lenses will appear expensive.
I am an R user, btw.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,305
301
I wonder if they would still make money if they threw in a Canon RP with the first purchase of one of these lenses :LOL:
I trust that you are onto something here... let me think.. 24-70 is that a an equivalent to a 24-70 f2.8 L II I already own? hmm.. I am getting an EF to RF adapter for that. 28-70/F2 is a different story though. pure gold. no discount expected there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Joaquim

I'm New Here
Aug 20, 2019
17
9
so as Canon et al dont like to use conversion rates for the UK market but seem to like 1 pound = 1 dollar. Have been thinking of switching to mirrorless from the Canon 5D MKIII to reduce weight,sizes etc but after reading various articles on the weight of some of the RF lenses and now the pricing it certainly puts me off switching to mirrorless for quite a while
The only way you can reduce weight is by moving to APS-C and there's only one manufacturer you can do that with currently unless you consider M4/3rds as well. Unfortunately, that's the nature of the beast.
 

Joaquim

I'm New Here
Aug 20, 2019
17
9
I've been on the hunt for a lens that's fast and wide with a filter thread, and right now that looks like the widest lens in that category! I was really close to pulling the trigger on the 16-35 f/2.8L iii, but with this announced I find myself asking myself if and when I'll move over to the R and if I'd regret the decision. I'm just very indecisive haha.
More than indecisive, I think you're sane like most of us brother. It's an expensive undertaking, this moving to mirrorless business, whether within the same brand or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gzroxas and amorse

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,080
1,624
Irving, Texas
That is, the prospective prices on RF glass won't encourage people to move to RF system. Only those who are new to RF and don't have EF glass will be interested.
Not true for everyone. If you are just talking price, maybe true for some with the current RF offerings and prices. But prices will come down just like they did for EF. Switching, for me, was all about the glass. I rented the RF 28-70 f/2L for ten days and just had to buy. That's all it took to convince me + Viggo showing me the sharpness of the RF 85mm f/1.2 at f/1.2. I can survive on those two lenses alone for a very long time (I'll have to. ;)) I don't need a speed demon of a camera and 30mp is fine for me. The R beats my former 5D Mark III. Sold it and all my EF glass. IBIS would be nice, but I know how to get the shutter speed up. There wasn't any IS on my 24-70 or 35 or the 400 f/5.6 when I had it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Larsskv and Viggo