What lenses are coming next for the Canon RF mount?

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,027
291
Vancouver, BC
Double the cost and no IS is a hefty price to pay for 'one stop' lets hope it's a worth it for better, blur, autofocus, sharpness and all round goodness and at least the system gives the user the choice and you're not force to use the f2 over the cheaper f2.8 we can thank canon for that. Be good to see a comparison with these lenses...
It's kind of line 24-70/4 IS vs 24-70/2.8. The 2.8 is twice the price, you lose IS, and it's way heavier. I get what you're saying though, for sure. What it comes down to is diminishing returns -- when you keep doubling the price, weight and other factors, is the really big aperture worth it? I'm probably the wrong person to ask for "standard zooms" -- because I own the 24-70/2.8 (Mk1) and when I upgraded, I decided to get the 24-70/4IS, and not really, or at least not just, because of the price tag.

On the other hand, for 70-200, I'm more than happy to pay for the 2.8, and who knows, I'd probably bear the weight and pay for a f/2 even if it lost IS.

I am very confident than Canon will build pretty good f/4 RF lenses, though (and I'm sure I'll buy them...). These are bread and butter lenses for camera stores. I wonder if Canon will make lenses that are even cheaper than that for RF (ie cheaper than f/4L's). There are a lot of FL's in both zooms and primes that I use rarely that I'd probably be happy to buy an RF version of, if a non-L priced one were available.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
On the other hand, for 70-200, I'm more than happy to pay for the 2.8, and who knows, I'd probably bear the weight and pay for a f/2 even if it lost IS.

I am very confident than Canon will build pretty good f/4 RF lenses, though (and I'm sure I'll buy them...). These are bread and butter lenses for camera stores. I wonder if Canon will make lenses that are even cheaper than that for RF (ie cheaper than f/4L's). There are a lot of FL's in both zooms and primes that I use rarely that I'd probably be happy to buy an RF version of, if a non-L priced one were available.
It is safe to say that if this was actually technically possible, no matter the advancements in technology, a 70-200 f/2 would be much more complex, considerably heavier and also more expensive than a 200mm f/2 prime lens. Just think about this.
With that in mind, a 28-70mm f/2 is actually not that big or heavy (but a 70mm f/2 mirrorless prime would still be very small in comparison). But just generally speaking, it is still a huge, chubby glass, and may not be a pleasure at all to handle all day. The RF 24-70mm f/2.8 IS may just about hit the balance.

A few cheaper RF lenses will come of course, but they won't be as cheap as EF lenses with the increased development costs and more sophisticated electronics, the fully supported EF is still the kind of the backwards-compatible 'budget platform' with some filter goodies.


Back on track with the topic, one lens that was patented much earlier than the 24-70mm f/2.8 IS is a 16-27mm f/2.8 wide-angle zoom, and I think it will be released in a few months(maybe as a 16-28mm), I think the rear glass will protrude from the mount just like the RF 35mm prime lens so it may remain reasonably sized.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,027
291
Vancouver, BC
Probably not at this point, it is either this or that like with the Nikon cameras.
Making it lightweight is not their priority against technical advancements (like with IS) or optical performance. There may be a few cheap lenses here and there, but the system is not based around them.

The EF 24-105mm f/4 is still by far the most widely used lens used for photo and video, so it is no surprise to be the new kit lens as well.
And, unsurprisingly, the other popular option was the 24-70mm f/2.8, it will be very useful with image stabilisation .
Don't expect it to be under 2000$ though, if it turns out to be even sharper than before, maybe costing somewhere around 2300$ which was the original retail price on the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II lens, at least I don't expect it to be any closer to the RF 28-70mm f/2.

So yes, there may not be an RF 24-70mm f/4 IS for a few years, because they will already have three different standard zooms in their RF lens lineup.
Unfortunately, "light weight" almost always means plastic too :(
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
Unfortunately, "light weight" almost always means plastic too :(
On the outside yes they do feel a bit weird, but on the inside they are built superbly well (just look at the EF 35/1.4L II for instance, or the EF 11-24/4L, etc.)
For the price and weight I don't think they will be built much differently (at least they shouldn't be)
And very cheap lenses are more expandable, too.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,027
291
Vancouver, BC
It is safe to say that if this was actually technically possible, no matter the advancements in technology, a 70-200 f/2 would be much more complex, considerably heavier and also more expensive than a 200mm f/2 prime lens. Just think about this.
With that in mind, a 28-70mm f/2 is actually not that big or heavy (but a 70mm f/2 mirrorless prime would still be very small in comparison). But just generally speaking, it is still a huge, chubby glass, and may not be a pleasure at all to handle all day. The RF 24-70mm f/2.8 IS may just about hit the balance.

A few cheaper RF lenses will come of course, but they won't be as cheap as EF lenses with the increased development costs and more sophisticated electronics, the fully supported EF is still the kind of the backwards-compatible 'budget platform' with some filter goodies.


Back on track with the topic, one lens that was patented much earlier than the 24-70mm f/2.8 IS is a 16-27mm f/2.8 wide-angle zoom, and I think it will be released in a few months(maybe as a 16-28mm), I think the rear glass will protrude from the mount just like the RF 35mm prime lens so it may remain reasonably sized.
It would need some real advantages over the 16-35/2.8, which is a pretty great lens. The 200/2 is a lens that I have lusted for ever since it was released :)
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
It would need some real advantages over the 16-35/2.8, which is a pretty great lens. The 200/2 is a lens that I have lusted for ever since it was released :)
It means probably made with a good price/performance/size ratio in mind (like the Sigma 24-35mm f/2 lens) and should be reasonably priced, but people will complain anyway, and as usual there is nothing holding back from adapting any of the 16-35mm lenses until they come up with newer, more advanced, but more expensive stuff (and yes the current 16-35mm EF lenses are crazy sharp anyway so probably not really much to gain there).
 

Antono Refa

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
707
40
Sure, but this camera just came out, and likely we’ll have a higher end version next year. But there has to be a lot of these in the field before Canon spends all that money replacing excellent lenses like those, particularly the shorter ones. There has to be a market for it before they come out with a product.
I don't think a TS-E for EOS-R is around the corner, if for no other reason then there are other lenses that would bring higher profit, and position EOS-R better.

My non-expert understanding of the subject is EOS-R offers an opportunity to make better ultra wide TS-Es, so I expect a TS-E 17mm for EOS-R closer to 5 years than 15.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
I don't think a TS-E for EOS-R is around the corner, if for no other reason then there are other lenses that would bring higher profit, and position EOS-R better.

My non-expert understanding of the subject is EOS-R offers an opportunity to make better ultra wide TS-Es, so I expect a TS-E 17mm for EOS-R closer to 5 years than 15.
Also, they have just expanded and now have a very big EF line-up of TS-E lenses.
With physical manual focusing and the new communication offering no real benefits, I am not sure they are going to switch to the new platform any time soon rather then sticking to making a version II in EF-mount and keeping existing TS-E users happy.
They did however include live in-camera corrections for adapted TS-E lenses in the new EOS R body, thanks to the new processor, we'll see that in other cameras as well later on.
 

Antono Refa

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
707
40
Also, they have just expanded and now have a very big EF line-up of TS-E lenses.
With physical manual focusing and the new communication offering no real benefits, I am not sure they are going to switch to the new platform any time soon rather then sticking to making a version II in EF-mount and keeping existing TS-E users happy.
They did however include live in-camera corrections for adapted TS-E lenses in the new EOS R body, thanks to the new processor, we'll see that in other cameras as well later on.
I'm not saying it's clear cut, but... people have complained the TS-E 17mm isn't as sharp as the other TS-E lenses, so why would Canon pass an opportunity to improve on it?
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
I'm not saying it's clear cut, but... people have complained the TS-E 17mm isn't as sharp as the other TS-E lenses, so why would Canon pass an opportunity to improve on it?
That's exactly what I said, an EF version II is still going to be an improvement, without putting it completely aside from the rest of the family, some of them still being very new (for professional use it is safe to say you will have more than one TS-E lens)
 
Jun 19, 2013
124
7
Also, they have just expanded and now have a very big EF line-up of TS-E lenses.
With physical manual focusing and the new communication offering no real benefits, I am not sure they are going to switch to the new platform any time soon rather then sticking to making a version II in EF-mount and keeping existing TS-E users happy.
They did however include live in-camera corrections for adapted TS-E lenses in the new EOS R body, thanks to the new processor, we'll see that in other cameras as well later on.
+1.

Don't forget Canon is a conservative brand, for lots of reasons, but one of them is that they serve as well a lot of working pros. Contrary to a popular belief, a lot of pros don't upgrade all the time with the latest and the best gimmicks all the time. They use what they have as far as it does the job, for money reasons, but also for ergonomics (muscle memory), habits and the fact that most of us need to know their equipment very well to make the best out of it and know its limits.

I just saw a 6 month old reportage where a fashion photographer was shooting a whole collection of swimsuits for a very fancy brand in St Barth, with a.... 5D3 and 24-70 f2.8 v1; that's the reality of pro equipment for a lot of people.

Lots of pros don't upgrade because they don't need to when their tools are good enough. So the TS-E line being part of the tools Canon designed for pros, I think it's unlikely they'll want to make them RF only any time soon, when EF TS-Es work exactly the same on both mounts. Yes we could see some optical improvements with short RF TS lenses (I guess we could call them TS-R), but what I am saying is that in real life for most pros, it will be more of a problem than a solution until the whole market has switched to mirroless.

The simple fact that I can finally use a convenient pol filter through the RS-EF adapter is a much bigger improvement than a slightly upgraded optical formula. Will my client notice a 10% increase in sharpness ? Absolutely not; but he will prefer 10 times that wood floor without glare and with better colors due to the pol filter.
I think Canon is very well aware of that, and I don't see a new TS-R lens range until the R mount has become the main standard. That is when RF mount cameras outsells EF mount cameras. It will happen, not just tomorrow. As there is no penalty in using an EF TS-E on an RF mount there is no real need.

Once again, I think the real strength of the RF system is it's seamless compatibility with the "old" EF system. With Canon everything works like native plus added features (extra ring control or rear filter). With Sony or Nikon (Nikon has a better compatibility though) you lose features when using old glass; with Canon your old glass works better than the same, it actually gains features.

IMO that is the very strength of the EOS system. Yes Canon is behind in sensors, but that lens compatibility is enough to guarantee success to the R system.

As a side note I wonder if Canon will ever go for IBIS anytime soon, since they might conservatively see it as a mechanical weakness, the same way they considered tilt/flip screens for a while.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
+1.

Don't forget Canon is a conservative brand, for lots of reasons, but one of them is that they serve as well a lot of working pros. Contrary to a popular belief, a lot of pros don't upgrade all the time with the latest and the best gimmicks all the time. They use what they have as far as it does the job, for money reasons, but also for ergonomics (muscle memory), habits and the fact that most of us need to know their equipment very well to make the best out of it and know its limits.

I just saw a 6 month old reportage where a fashion photographer was shooting a whole collection of swimsuits for a very fancy brand in St Barth, with a.... 5D3 and 24-70 f2.8 v1; that's the reality of pro equipment for a lot of people.

Lots of pros don't upgrade because they don't need to when their tools are good enough. So the TS-E line being part of the tools Canon designed for pros, I think it's unlikely they'll want to make them RF only any time soon, when EF TS-Es work exactly the same on both mounts. Yes we could see some optical improvements with short RF TS lenses (I guess we could call them TS-R), but what I am saying is that in real life for most pros, it will be more of a problem than a solution until the whole market has switched to mirroless.

The simple fact that I can finally use a convenient pol filter through the RS-EF adapter is a much bigger improvement than a slightly upgraded optical formula. Will my client notice a 10% increase in sharpness ? Absolutely not; but he will prefer 10 times that wood floor without glare and with better colors due to the pol filter.
I think Canon is very well aware of that, and I don't see a new TS-R lens range until the R mount has become the main standard. That is when RF mount cameras outsells EF mount cameras. It will happen, not just tomorrow. As there is no penalty in using an EF TS-E on an RF mount there is no real need.

Once again, I think the real strength of the RF system is it's seamless compatibility with the "old" EF system. With Canon everything works like native plus added features (extra ring control or rear filter). With Sony or Nikon (Nikon has a better compatibility though) you lose features when using old glass; with Canon your old glass works better than the same, it actually gains features.

IMO that is the very strength of the EOS system. Yes Canon is behind in sensors, but that lens compatibility is enough to guarantee success to the R system.

As a side note I wonder if Canon will ever go for IBIS anytime soon, since they might conservatively see it as a mechanical weakness, the same way they considered tilt/flip screens for a while.
Yep, even people who are otherwise complaining can see that, since this is the least disliked part of all the product videos.



Yes, I already disputed that "old, less sharp lens -> no pro" question in the previous page as well...

I am sure they will have in-body IS at some point for the non-stabilised RF lenses like the 28-70mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.2 and also to further enhance the ones with IS, they've already stated it discreetly, that "this new mount enables further improvements to the camera bodies as well as lenses" and for the native RF mount there is a system recognising the motion, just not sending that to its own stabilisation system, only to the lens IS, if it has that.

But again, we will see the line-up boosted with three more separate models just like with the FF DSLR family 6DII 5DIV 5Ds/5DsR 1DX II (a cheaper, most basic one, one for resolution, and one for faster operation and better video) but it is the "standard" R model, that has a bit of everything, just like the 5D IV.
That's all first generation, other, bigger steps like this are coming later on, like Mark II models in 3-4 years' time.
 
Jun 19, 2013
124
7
Yep, even people who are otherwise complaining can see that, since this is the least disliked part of all the product videos.



Yes, I already disputed that "old, less sharp lens -> no pro" question in the previous page as well...

I am sure they will have in-body IS at some point for the non-stabilised RF lenses like the 28-70mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.2 and also to further enhance the ones with IS, they've already stated it discreetly, that "this new mount enables further improvements to the camera bodies as well as lenses" and for the native RF mount there is a system recognising the motion, just not sending that to its own stabilisation system, only to the lens IS, if it has that.

But again, we will see the line-up boosted with three more separate models just like with the FF DSLR family 6DII 5DIV 5Ds/5DsR 1DX II (a cheaper, most basic one, one for resolution, and one for faster operation and better video) but it is the "standard" R model, that has a bit of everything, just like the 5D IV.
That's all first generation, other, bigger steps like this are coming later on, like Mark II models in 3-4 years' time.

Yes I guess they will at some point join the IBIS community, but I wonder if it will on the higher end models, since they might consider it a non mature feature in terms of reliability (both in the mechanical sense and for heat transfer off the sensor). The rule until now has been that for pro equipment reliability is a must. I could see a whole 1st gen of cameras without IBIS, except maybe at entry level, then IBIS will be added in the future to higher tier cameras, when Canon thinks it's reliable enough for pros. As for the cycles, I would bet on a shortened 2-ish years for the R line rather than the 3-4 years we had until now with FF DSLRs.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
Yes I guess they will at some point join the IBIS community, but I wonder if it will on the higher end models, since they might consider it a non mature feature in terms of reliability (both in the mechanical sense and for heat transfer off the sensor). The rule until now has been that for pro equipment reliability is a must. I could see a whole 1st gen of cameras without IBIS, except maybe at entry level, then IBIS will be added in the future to higher tier cameras, when Canon thinks it's reliable enough for pros. As for the cycles, I would bet on a shortened 2-ish years for the R line rather than the 3-4 years we had until now with FF DSLRs.
It's all to do with technology, the space is fully there and sensors are getting more heat efficient. Really, almost no trouble at all reported with the now already three-year-old A7RII used in all kinds of places (wow, time just flies, isn't it) and it is also being kept on all of their new models as well, same with the Nikon Z.
But yes, for a camera that might be dropped onto concrete a fair few times (hopefully by accident), it is safer not to have it.

We'll see what happens, but these three additional models alone that I predicted might take up to two years to come out. They did the big system announcement with their "bit of everything" model, but now they can lean back and relax, releasing a new model or one additional RF lens here and there.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
856
96
It means probably made with a good price/performance/size ratio in mind (like the Sigma 24-35mm f/2 lens) and should be reasonably priced, but people will complain anyway, and as usual there is nothing holding back from adapting any of the 16-35mm lenses until they come up with newer, more advanced, but more expensive stuff (and yes the current 16-35mm EF lenses are crazy sharp anyway so probably not really much to gain there).
I doubt that at this point even Canon has a clear idea ofhow much of a performance edge a new RF lens has to have to get a lot of people to replace a high quality EF lens.
 

BeenThere

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 4, 2012
805
138
Solid state sensors (gyros & accels) are available and are very reliable, but are as sensitive as other electronics. Good software algorithms that integrate data from IS, IBIS, and the image sensor in an effective way (for all existing lens) may be the hang-up. Also, this is processor intensive, so has to be prioritized.
 

BeenThere

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 4, 2012
805
138
Implementing IBIS in a manner that only turns it on when non-IS lenses are attached would greatly simplify the design. That would work for me, but I can already hear the chorus of grousers if Canon did this.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
I doubt that at this point even Canon has a clear idea ofhow much of a performance edge a new RF lens has to have to get a lot of people to replace a high quality EF lens.
FIrst and foremost they say it is called the EOS R because you don't need to replace any of your lenses, they are not pushing anybody to do that.

And secondly, sure they have done their testing. Lots of it.
They did their internal research and testing several years before the actual mount was finalised(same with Nikon). And just looking at full-size samples, it is clear that these new lenses do present a new level of optical performance, although you can't gain much on an already excellent lens and there are always compromises.
Being able to do a 28-70mm f/2 a sign of progress itself, clear as day just with its name, even before any in-depth look.
 

Antono Refa

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
707
40
That's exactly what I said, an EF version II is still going to be an improvement, without putting it completely aside from the rest of the family, some of them still being very new (for professional use it is safe to say you will have more than one TS-E lens)
The TS-E 17mm is 10 years old. I doubt Canon would make a mark II for classic-EOS in the next ten years.

I do think Canon would make a new one for EOS-R sooner.
 

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
434
122
The TS-E 17mm is 10 years old. I doubt Canon would make a mark II for classic-EOS in the next ten years.

I do think Canon would make a new one for EOS-R sooner.
The EF lens development is fully up and running. Please take a look at their whole TS-E lineup, with release dates.
If they announce an RF TS-E lens, they need to announce at least two, maybe three and also promise to make a whole new lineup as well. Splitting up the family of speciality lenses makes zero sense, it is good for nobody, especially if we are talking about these, which have a much longer product cycle anyway. And they have way more important things to do. But doing one new version is not that big of a deal for them, if it is feasible to do. Or maybe just simply add a whole new TS-E 20mm lens close to like what Nikon has, making this family even a big bigger, all in EF mount.

Nikon has a 2015 patent for a 19mm f/4 mirrorless tilt shift lens. And they thought, ok we just stay in F-mount, because it is the sensible thing to do. And they did start to sell that in 2016, it is an SLR lens, but it is super tack-sharp in every way.

Will their existing customers using these buy their new cameras for that to replace all their TS-E lenses when their current 5DsR is producing results? No.
Is it nice to have an easy option to move a whole family of lenses to a smaller camera? Yes.

A lot of this has to do with thinking with simple, common sense, it seems a constant problem with "requesting" or predicting future lenses - or maybe some of it is just trolling.
 
Last edited: