Two Never Before Seen Lenses Coming from Canon This Year

[blackcoffee17]

Optically the rf 100-500 is excellent. however using it with an extender is significantly annoying. It just won’t collapse completely. A mark II that fixed that would be a great feature. Reducing the f/7.1 at the high end would be better for low light, even if it added some size / weight. For example f/6.3 would increase the front element from the current 77mm to approximately 82mm. Not much of an improvement I know, but according to Tesco every little helps.

Im afraid any aperture increase will be a significant size and weight increase and im not sure Canon will do that. The main selling point of this lens is being a compact do-everything sports, wildlife and events. But full TC compatibility would be great.

 

[Skyfall]

It sure would be nice if Canon would update the RF 100-500 f/4.5-7.1 being that it came out in September 2020. And big disappointment about the R7 Mark II, but the good news is I'm not out $2000-ish bucks!! If it has the same setbacks at the 7D MII, then it won't be released until the end of 2027.

Wonder what improvements are possible though? 80-500? 100-600 4.5-8? 0.5x macro? Reduction in size to 1kg?

 

[blackcoffee17]

Wonder what improvements are possible though? 80-500? 100-600 4.5-8? 0.5x macro? Reduction in size to 1kg?

Actually i would love a 100-600 but only if the optical quality stays the same or better and it will be still F5.6/6.3 at 400mm and 7.1 at 500mm.

 

[Skyfall]

Actually i would love a 100-600 but only if the optical quality stays the same or better and it will be still F5.6/6.3 at 400mm and 7.1 at 500mm.

I agree, or even 150-600 f4.5-8 if the weight would be the same.

 

[tattwah]

RF-S 19-42 5.6-7.1

Is it Real? I am hoping for brighter RF-S zooom to replace my 18-45 but i guess not yet.

 

[roby17269]

Is it Real? I am hoping for brighter RF-S zooom to replace my 18-45 but i guess not yet.

No it is not

 

[GMCPhotographics]

What are the odds that the R8II will also get the bigger battery. I mean the Nikon ZR got theirs together with IBIS in that slim body that doesn't even have a proper grip.

Definitely curious to see Canon's interpretation of retro. I'm usually not much of a fan (Fuji or Nikon Zf). I like modern control schemes.

The thing is, if you give the R8II the same sensor as the R6III, the same battery, same EVF and then add a AF joystick…you basically have a slightly smaller R6iii. With a similar price point.
The whole point of the R8 was a budget conscious (and more portable) R6ii.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I agree, or even 150-600 f4.5-8 if the weight would be the same.

Yeah, i think making it 100-500 instead of the usual 100-400 was a brilliant idea.

 

[exkeks]

Unrelated, but I've been slacking with the site a bit. I'm in the process of moving countries again at the end of June. The moving process is still awful, even with experience.

In case you didn’t notice: The Twitter postings have stopped in mid May.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I was pondering on what "two never seen lenses before" might mean in the view of the rumours. The RF 24-70/2.8 is rumoured to be expanded to a 20-70/2.8 and the RF 28-70/f2.0 is rumoured to be expanded to a more "regular" 24-70mm f2.0

 

[sanj]

If they are new lenses, they have never been seen before. Just saying.

 

[Ian K]

Im afraid any aperture increase will be a significant size and weight increase and im not sure Canon will do that. The main selling point of this lens is being a compact do-everything sports, wildlife and events. But full TC compatibility would be great.

Yes, I already said it would add size / weight. However the current version starts to fall apart in low light, due to the aperture. I would gladly exchange the change for more utility. If fact I'm about to take delivery of a RF 100-300 f/2.8, to use with and without a 1.4x or 2x. To make a “RF 100-300 f2.8 + RF 140-420 f/4 + RF 200-600 f/5.6”.

 

[justaCanonuser]

Back in 2015 in Cyprus, I took a live-view shot of the moon hand holding a 7Dii with a 300mm f/2.8 ii with a Canon 2xTC + 3rd party 3xTC at 1800mm - but I did rest the lens on a tree branch!


View attachment 229747

Alan, for using a tree branch as a steady camera support, with this setup, this is a really great image of the moon! Respect.

 

[justaCanonuser]

Sometimes I feel Canon is photography's Microsoft

To me, Canon is more photography's Toyota - not always fashionable but very reliable As I posted multiple times here, my wife as a Nikonian has an extended gear that she caresses much more than me. But we had to send Nikon cameras and lenses so frequently to repair service (broken mirror box, dead buttons from a few drops of rain, several dead AF drives) that I learned: if you can compare in real life, you know why it is wise to stick with Canon. At least this applies if you need a really rugged gear for wildlife that simply works in harder environments. In the past 15-20 years I only had one repair with my original 7D (dead thumb wheel), that's it.

 

[justaCanonuser]

and when was the EF 100-400 III released? exactly. why would the 100-500 need a refresh

I don't expect a Mark II of the 100-500 within the rest of my life span, too

 

[justaCanonuser]

I am willing to spend money on a never before seen lens if this is a compact internal zoom 20-70 f/2 IS

Plus, a lighter one than the current 28-70 f/2. This and the with 24mm wider end made me to decide against the f/2.0 and go for the f/2.8 RF zoom.