A Canon RF 100mm f/2L IS USM Macro gets a mention [CR1]

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
8,436
1,197
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
I have been told by an anonymous source that a Canon RF 100mm f/2L IS USM Macro lens is in the hands of select photographers with an announcement coming this year.
No further details about the lens have been given. It’s pretty obvious we’re going to get a native macro lens for the RF mount, and an f/2 lens would be a great addition to the RF lineup.
More to come…
Continue reading...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: fox40phil

jolyonralph

EOS R5 Mark II
CR Pro
Aug 25, 2015
1,357
716
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
I'd actually prefer a 90mm rather than a 100mm. It may seem a small difference, but 90mm would give me slightly more room to work with than 100mm does, but not too much (60mm or less).

I also don't see the need to replicate existing EF lenses which work well [edit - I managed to miss the f/2.0 part!]. There's nothing wrong with the current EF 100mm f/2.8L IS , so why not complement it with an RF 90mm macro.
 

Jstnelson

EOS R5
Feb 21, 2020
31
90
F2 for a macro lens seems a bit over the top. What’s the point?
I have seen so many people use the EF 2.8L as their primary portrait lens. It's stabilized, super sharp, great focal length for portraits, and it's affordable. It's an amazing all around lens and people buy it that wouldn't otherwise spend that much on a dedicated macro lens. If Canon makes a 100mm F/2 macro that takes amazing portraits for much less than the 85mm f/1.2 and it happens to also be an amazing macro lens, its going to appeal to so many more buyers than just macro photographers.
 

ronaldzimmerman.nl

I'm New Here
May 25, 2020
9
5
www.ronaldzimmerman.nl
I'd actually prefer a 90mm rather than a 100mm. It may seem a small difference, but 90mm would give me slightly more room to work with than 100mm does, but not too much (60mm or less).

I also don't see the need to replicate existing EF lenses which work well [edit - I managed to miss the f/2.0 part!]. There's nothing wrong with the current EF 100mm f/2.8L IS , so why not complement it with an RF 90mm macro.
Makes sense, but for venomous snakes I like the bit of extra reach. However, more than 100mm is too much because the DOF becomes thinner.
I prefer a Canon RF version of the Laowa 100mm 2:1 macro. That means with Canon weather sealing, autofocus, auto-aperture, IS, coatings and sharpness. For macro photographers having a 2x magnification is way more useful than a F2 aperture. Besides that I don’t want the extra weight that comes with F2.
Additionally a RF 50mm/60mm macro L would be perfect for situations where more work room and DOF is needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frjmacias

SwissFrank

from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
451
200
Enough with the IS, enough with the macro. Just announce a 50/1.8, 35/2, 28/2.2, and 24/2.8 that prioritize compactness over everything else, with image quality second, and then we can start carrying our R's around 24/7 in our backpacks. The jokey 35/1.8IS Macro is too big to have with you constantly. Leica's made 35/1.4's half that size.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
893
923
Enough with the IS, enough with the macro. Just announce a 50/1.8, 35/2, 28/2.2, and 24/2.8 that prioritize compactness over everything else, with image quality second, and then we can start carrying our R's around 24/7 in our backpacks. The jokey 35/1.8IS Macro is too big to have with you constantly. Leica's made 35/1.4's half that size.
I have and use the Summilux 35 asph a lot.
But its size cannot be compared to a 35 mm with AF, IS and other electronics inside (diaphragm, control ring etc...).
Yet, I'm also hoping for compact, lightweight high quality RF lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dantana

RobbieHat

EOS 90D
Feb 4, 2015
106
79
55
Rocklin, CA/The Sea Ranch, CA
Now we just need a Helicon extension tube type attachment that does automatic focus stacking. If there are EOS R options out there let me know. This lens and the R5 will definitely expedite my move to the R system. I have been doing more macro work lately and as mentioned the EF is a great lens already. I also use it for walking around when that focal length works. It is light, snappy and very sharp. A f2 version would be welcome and would be great for portraits as well.

Bob
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,063
706
Finally, a lens that I would use on a daily basis but I'm sure that it'd be twice the price of the EF version. The F2 would make for a brighter viewfinder and also produce beautiful closeup and portrait images.
It's an electronic viewfinder, it won't become any brighter as long as there is enough gain on the sensor to sustain it (but it will be less noisy in dim light).
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,063
706
And how big is the FF sensor compared to FT/mFT?
This would mean a different behaviour in crop factor and light gathering.
So a Zuiko 90mm f2 macro would be better to compare with a 180mm f/3.5L Macro, wouldn't it?
It was a full-frame lens for the film cameras, maybe you could have looked it up...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groundhog