A very interesting theory, hope you are right! This would be a really new (F.2) trinity.So... The new 70-200 2.8. What if... What if it was to the RF mount that the 70-200 f/4 IS is to the EF mount. And the real "pro" 70-200 is an F/2 IS. Hence why canon took the "bold' step to make the new RF 70-200 a collapsible/ compact design.
even if such a lens was made collapsible, 105mm front element will result in way to large and heavy lens. It is a pretty safe bet that Canon will not venture into that territory. Canon likes safe betting.So... The new 70-200 2.8. What if... What if it was to the RF mount that the 70-200 f/4 IS is to the EF mount. And the real "pro" 70-200 is an F/2 IS. Hence why canon took the "bold' step to make the new RF 70-200 a collapsible/ compact design.
Who needs such a zoom for astrophotogaphy? A simple 16mm F1. 8 prime would be better for it!
For those excited about it for landscape use, why are we shooting landscapes at F2?
There is already a 14mm 1.8f from Sigma !Who needs such a zoom for astrophotogaphy? A simple 16mm F1. 8 prime would be better for it!
i can see PJs using this lens wide open for a wide crowd shots in a poor light situation whilst having Canon RF 28-70 / 2.0 attached to a second body...Based on current RF pricing this won't be worth the asking (imho).
For those excited about it for landscape use, why are we shooting landscapes at F2?
Yikes! You are right--the combined weight in a backpack will be tough to swim with!I'd have to do weight training before I'd consider buying this new trinity.
It will be interesting the weight of this lens.
As I've said before I don't see the attraction of a 16-28MM F2 Zoom unless its great for Astro.
It all depends on the type of photography that you do.
I'm sure there will be buyers for it or Canon wouldn't design and sell it.
Or it could be the geniuses in marketing and engineering got together and said, "Once the camera is too big to keep in a pocket, who cares? Make the lenses as big as they need to be for ultimate IQ! The sky is the limit!"I will wait and see. I do not need a small body with heavy lenses. Maybe one wide angle zoom with f2 would be nice. The current 16-35 III is already very good and I am pleased with it ..... Canon is just showing its muscles with crazy heavy and expensive lenses ..... when it comes to mirrorless I am not sure if fullframe is the way to go. I think APC is. I like the philosophy of Fuji in this regard.
There is already a 14mm 1.8f from Sigma !
I will wait and see. I do not need a small body with heavy lenses. Maybe one wide angle zoom with f2 would be nice. The current 16-35 III is already very good and I am pleased with it ..... Canon is just showing its muscles with crazy heavy and expensive lenses ..... when it comes to mirrorless I am not sure if fullframe is the way to go. I think APC is. I like the philosophy of Fuji in this regard.
It’s too bad we don’t have sales stats on all Canon’s lenses. With every lens announcement or rumor, some people won’t understand the need for that particular lens. Don’t worry, there’s a need for that lens and Canon knows it.Or it could be the geniuses in marketing and engineering got together and said, "Once the camera is too big to keep in a pocket, who cares? Make the lenses as big as they need to be for ultimate IQ! The sky is the limit!"
And real estate......This lens (16-28 F2) would be amazing for indoor event photography like weddings, concerts, etc.