Canon Will Announce A New VCM L Lens This Month

[Canon Rumors]

We have learned from multiple sources that Canon will launch a new VCM L lens later this month. For the moment, we can't go into great detail, but it will be very well received from the Canon universe.

Read the Full Article

 

[Exploreshootshare]

We have shown the patent for the optical design of the upcoming VCM L lens previously on this site, so you can take a gander at that.

Read the Full Article

Ohhhh yes please! 20mm F1.4 for me, that´d be great and maybe my first preorder?!

I´d also be happy for a 28mm f1.4 L since you've been waiting much, much longer than I have I can wait a little longer.

 

[Viggo]

100 f1.4

 

[john1970]

Interesting and not expected.

 

[fox40phil]

85 f1.4!

 

[m4ndr4ke]

Probably the 20mm, I'd say...

There's at least one RF 28mm already, while there's no 20mm at all.



I hope I get a high end RF 28mm before retirement. I mean, I still got 30+ years to go, so maybe it will happen...

...a third party, most likely.

 

[ashmadux]

Expected features include:

1. Cheaper design/smaller than ff image circle
2. Forced profile or wickedly bad results
3. 1400.00 price ish
4. Many many website headlines calling this price "affordable". Many commenters raging this silly headline.

R50v expectations:

1. M62 like design... psyche!! Same-ish goofy chunky current r50 design with more heft
2. Limited 4k120 with moderate crop (small rec. Profile?)
3. Same ol reliable/also-ran 24mp technology + potential read speed updates that canon will all "upgraded" but photography websites/podcasts will say we can't see where
4. Less cheap buttons...(15% chance)
5. Ai upscaling feature
6. False color and zebras
7. No Ibis, not a chance
8. Priced just below an r8, causing lots of frustrated comments regarding classic/weird marketing segmentation
9. Obvious missing features leading unsympathetic commenters to just reply with 'Canon is number one', 'sky is falling', ' and that complainers should just sell all canon gear and quit hoping'

I'm thinking I got at least half of this correct. I may or may not have a source in Canon marketing group..ahem.

Seriously though, will Cannon knock this out of the park or will this be yet another it would be good if if if camera. Remains to be seen. And if you took (half) of that list seriously, you need to chill out, it's not that serious.

Cheers/hah/groan

 

[jam05]

Well admin, that's sort of a "Bait and switch". The EOS RV has peaked the consumer's interest. And Canon is well aware of the peaked interest, so now a switch to the R50 which is most likely not as compact or progressive as the EOS RV.

 

[bn5fg]

Expected features include:

1. Cheaper design/smaller than ff image circle
2. Forced profile or wickedly bad results
3. 1400.00 price ish
4. Many many website headlines calling this price "affordable". Many commenters raging this silly headline.

I'm happy with my RF35f1.4L VCM. Haters gonna hate.

 

[jam05]

If its that same chunky R50 design, Its a bait and switch. Canon trying to still shove that failed R50 "Little Piggy" design. While teasing the EOS RV. I'm not buying any of it. Lipstick on a pig is still a what?

 

[Arturo+Lauren]

"or perhaps alongside a certain full-frame camera that is coming in the near future" Are you teasing a new full frame camera?

I wonder if Canon is going to announce anything video related for NAB in April?

 

[jam05]

They can roll that R50v "Little Piggy" out and make all the claims they want. If it looks like the R50, "they aint foolin nobody" but themselves. Sony, Panny, Fujifilm and even Sigma have far better compact designs than that R50 "Little Piggy"

 

[neuroanatomist]

"or perhaps alongside a certain full-frame camera that is coming in the near future" Are you teasing a new full frame camera?

Reference is to the R6III that's been discussed a lot recently.

 

[EricN]

85 f1.4!

This seems likely to me, but I would prefer 14mm or 12mm f/2.0

 

[grilled_rooster]

My wish-list
A) 100 1.4 -> Would be my go to lense for indoor sports, especially basketball. 85 often feels a little bit to short. 135 often is to narrow. Of course i could just use my-70-200 2.8. But the 1.4 prime look hits different. And most times lightning isn't good. Yeah, my R5II and R3 could handle high ISO. But a 100 1.4 would be very welcomed.
B) 28 1.4 -> I love that focal length. But I already have the 24 1.4 VCM. Not sure if I would keeping both. Maybe I would trade in my 24 for the 28.

 

[Canon Rumors]

I can let the cat out of the bag later today. Something has to happen first.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I can let the cat out of the bag later today. Something has to happen first.

 

[Canon Rumors]

View attachment 222930

Stupid integrity.

 

[AccipiterQ]

Can folks tell me why they like these VCM lenses? If you like shooting video that much, why not get video lenses and a camera that specializes in them? They must be selling because Canon keeps rolling them out, but I'm baffled. Lower image quality, but somewhat better for video applications seems like a hard no for me, at least for putting on an R5 or R3 or whatever.

 

[bn5fg]

Can folks tell me why they like these VCM lenses? If you like shooting video that much, why not get video lenses and a camera that specializes in them? They must be selling because Canon keeps rolling them out, but I'm baffled. Lower image quality, but somewhat better for video applications seems like a hard no for me, at least for putting on an R5 or R3 or whatever.

Because they're lightweight and practical, and the image quality is actually good. Don't even start with the "bad distortion Canon scam," pretty please.