A Canon RF 7-14mm f/2.8-3.5 Fisheye Zoom is Coming Soon

[TexPhoto]

It would be enormous!! I have an EF 600/4L III so believe me I know what a pain it is to carry around a lens of that size, and a zoom would almost certainly weigh even more - to say nothing of the cost. In contrast, a 600/5.6L is something we've been asking for for years, and now it's going to be a zoom that makes it even more useful. Even there I would add a note of caution - the RF 100-300/2.8L weighs 2,650 g, and a 300-600/5.6 would be the same optical diameter, just physically longer so it will be at least that and maybe 3 kg.

The Sigma 300-600mm f4 is ever so slightly smaller than the Canon RF 600mm f4. And while heavier, it is almost exactly the same wight as my EF Canon 600mm f4 IS II. (still the best 600mm for use with TCs btw). Sigma even remember to cut Arca Swiss rails into the tripod foot. I wish Canon would just Allow Sigma to sell them.

 

[Uneternal]

I wonder if they picked such a late announcement time because it'll be possible to preorder the G7X III.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Riker and David from Sydney,

I have never felt the need for FF and shot for years with APS-C Canon and many fisheye lenses which all can be sharper in corners even with a smaller 6" / 140mm dome than most rectilinear lenses. Any middle curvature can be "de-fished" or flattened in software easily.

From 2016 - 2025 I tired of hauling housings, strobes and shot exclusively with compact cameras. Mainly the Canon G7X II plus various iPhones but always wanted to get back to APS-C.

I currently own two Canon R100 (the most despised made Canon in recent years) but produce great files with a decent lens. It's super cheap for traveling and shooting underwater. I justified a 2nd one purchased on the Canon refurbished site. with the "kit" RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens and RF-S 55-210 IS STM for a ridiculous $429.00 USD. Not being a long lens shooter I sold the EF)S 55-210mm IS STM and spare 18-45mm netting a spare body about $180.00 (!!!!)

I also own a Canon R50 and the AF CMOS II, tracking and other features would have made it my first choice to house but Ikelite didn't tackle the 21 pin hot shoe connector I use it as my main surface camera with the fabulous RF)S 18-150mm IS STM lens.

The lowly Canon R100 has a Canon "standard" 5 pin TTL hot shoe as does the R10 / R7. My Ikelite Canon R100 housing has a TTL fiber optic cord transmitter which I used for an article and their new small Ecko Fiber strobes:

Shooting the Ikelite Ecko Fiber Strobes in Roatán

www.divephotoguide.com

I did own a Nauticam NA-R50 for the Canon R50 for about 5 months but sold it... I didn't like being locked into just using "wet" expensive lenses you bayonet on outside the fixed housing's port.

The Ikelite DLM housing for the Canon R100 allows me to use multiple lenses. I'm strictly a wide to medium fish shooter these days, no more macro after 55 years diving this year......

The housing's interchangeable 6" dome port accommodates the underrated Canon RF-S 10-18mm IS STM and RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lenses. It will also allow the discontinued Tokina APS-C 10-17mm Fisheye with Canon EF-RF adapter. I have access to those from friends and may take it to Palau end of next month as a back up.

I could also use the discontinued EF 8-15mm L F4 with EF-RF adapter and a slightly longer dome port. But installing that large a lens requires inserting camera body from the back then lens, zoom gear and all through the front before sealing the port.

You have to do that EVERY TIME for changing batteries or memory cards. For me that's a deal breaker no matter how much sharper either the Canon EF 8-15mm F4L or new R F7-14mmL might be. I won't be justifying that cost, especially on an APS-C sensor.

My advice to Riker or others if you really require FF is just get a 6DII / III and new 7-14mm is your budget allows depending on your end photo use is.

On APS-C sensor Canon cameras I usually bought rectilinear lenses as I'd use them above water. Only the less expensive Tokina 10-17mm was used for a few years but I also tired of the curvature look. Many love it and some don't....

The Canon RF-S 10-18mm IS STM is actually damn near perfect behind the 6" dome on my Ikelite DLM housing for edge too edge sharpness. Partly because of APS-C sensor depth of field over FF and 10mm on APS-C is around 16mm which is about the widest one can get sharp corners behind any dome. Unless you're one of those who try and shoot f11-13-22 all the time which are flash shooters mostly. I can shoot even f-8 in bright conditions using ambient light tropical shooting and even at higher ISOs the files look fine.

Sorry for the long write up, just sharing insights from decades of looking for a good combination of performance to cost

David Haas

View attachment 227817View attachment 227818View attachment 227819View attachment 227820View attachment 227821

Great text (its almost an ode to the R100 ) and even better pics

 

[Exploreshootshare]

I thought the received wisdom was that polarising filters shouldn't be used with ultra wide angle lenses, something to do with making the sky weird? Am I misremembering?

Somebody beens reading on the f-stoppers site recently
you might get some weird vignetting with the CPL attached like in this pic. I wasn't paying attention when I changed my position and didn't adjust the CPL filter. I kept the pic as a reminder.


I did manage to get a pic without/ or a lot less vignetting:


Both images were shot on the R5 with the R14-35mm F4 L and following settings:
14mm
f18
ISO 125
shutter: 1/80 (first image) and 1/125 (second image)

 

[John D P]

Where is the long glass? They need to release something. 300-600, 150-600, 500 prime, etc.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Where is the long glass? They need to release something. 300-600, 150-600, 500 prime, etc.

Need to? Why? Just because you (and I) want them to do so, doesn’t mean they need to do so. I’m pretty sure that Canon knows best what lenses they need to release.

Personally, I want a 600/4 with a built-in 1.4x TC. But I don’t fool myself into believing that Canon must make me happy.

 

[mb66energy]

EOS M ?

EOS M50 mark iii with 4k and S&F would be welcome - to praise my EF-M 32!

 

[jeff89]

Not sure about $600 more for the RF mount, heck, I was hesitant when I thought it was only going to be $300, underwater 2.8-3.5 doesn’t buy me much, and the pictures I’ve seen with the F4 are incredible. B&H only had 3 left, now they have 2. All aboard the EF train, she’s about to leave the station.

 

[Canon Rumors]

Where is the long glass? They need to release something. 300-600, 150-600, 500 prime, etc.

They have a 100-500 and 200-800, there will never be a 500 prime (unless it's some DO thing, which appears dead), its purpose was because the 600 weighed a ton. The 100-300 that is terrific with TC's.... Sure, a 300-600 would be cool and hopefully a lot lighter than that Sigma thing.

 

[DSB]

1. As a certified scuba diver, I've been on occasion considering getting an underwater housing for my R5 / R5II.

For years I've shot underwater with 5DmkII in a Sea&Sea housing, mainly using an EF 14mm f2.8 or EF 100 f2.8 macro. I did use the previous EF fisheye from time to time, but found that I enjoy rectilinear wide angle lenses more. The old EF 24 f1.4 was also a frequent guest in my housing.

R5 and R5II are so much more advanced cameras and I have no doubt they would be amazing underwater, but when I start adding the costs... 2k€ for the housing, 2k€ for strobes and arms, 1k€ for various ports and gears... And then a couple more k€ for these new lenses. It's a steep investment for something that I get to use a few times a year and just for my own pleasure.

2. I wish Canon would include the drop in filters in more of their lenses. I find them to be so much better than the screw on filters.

3. People mentioning 300-600... I agree, the Sigma version is so tempting. Canon gatekeeping the RF mount is frustrating. I doubt that Canon will launch a 300-600 f4 version. Which is a shame. I think most people that own 600 f4 tele would be very happy to buy the zoom version. Pair it with 100-300 f2.8 and it's a wildlife photographers wet dream combo.

 

[Canon Rumors]

2. I wish Canon would include the drop in filters in more of their lenses. I find them to be so much better than the screw on filters.

3. People mentioning 300-600... I agree, the Sigma version is so tempting. Canon gatekeeping the RF mount is frustrating. I doubt that Canon will launch a 300-600 f4 version. Which is a shame. I think most people that own 600 f4 tele would be very happy to buy the zoom version. Pair it with 100-300 f2.8 and it's a wildlife photographers wet dream combo.

The drop-in filters are expensive and I don't imagine they sell a lot of them. Magnetic front filters are way more convenient.

100-500 is great for wildlife, 600 is too long a lot of the time outside of birds. 100-300 with a 1.4x... perfect for Africa.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

They have a 100-500 and 200-800, there will never be a 500 prime (unless it's some DO thing, which appears dead), its purpose was because the 600 weighed a ton. The 100-300 that is terrific with TC's.... Sure, a 300-600 would be cool and hopefully a lot lighter than that Sigma thing.

RF 500 f/4 IS DO sounds like a brilliant idea.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The drop-in filters are expensive and I don't imagine they sell a lot of them

They do not sell front filters at all.

 

[Skux]

One of the stores here in New Zealand has a placeholder for the G7 X and refers to it as "30th edition"



A 30 year anniversary puts it into a range of point & shoots:

 

[jeff89]

1. As a certified scuba diver, I've been on occasion considering getting an underwater housing for my R5 / R5II.

For years I've shot underwater with 5DmkII in a Sea&Sea housing, mainly using an EF 14mm f2.8 or EF 100 f2.8 macro. I did use the previous EF fisheye from time to time, but found that I enjoy rectilinear wide angle lenses more. The old EF 24 f1.4 was also a frequent guest in my housing.

R5 and R5II are so much more advanced cameras and I have no doubt they would be amazing underwater, but when I start adding the costs... 2k€ for the housing, 2k€ for strobes and arms, 1k€ for various ports and gears... And then a couple more k€ for these new lenses. It's a steep investment for something that I get to use a few times a year and just for my own pleasure.

2. I wish Canon would include the drop in filters in more of their lenses. I find them to be so much better than the screw on filters.

3. People mentioning 300-600... I agree, the Sigma version is so tempting. Canon gatekeeping the RF mount is frustrating.

Underwater photography is a bit cost prohibitive, I opted to use the R7 with the RF-S 10-18 and the Tokina 11-17 fisheye, which is expensive, but decided I now want the R5, RF 14-35, EF8-15 and RF 100 Macro, so only $3000 worth of strobes crosses over to the new setup.

I also agree about the 300-600, would love to have that for the RF mount with no limitations to AF like Sony crippled the E-mount version. So now thinking LUMIX S1 II. But carrying both Canon and Panasonic on a trip is a drag, and the RF 200-800 is ok, but no 300-600 f4, maybe RF 100-500?

 

[roby17269]

Need to? Why? Just because you (and I) want them to do so, doesn’t mean they need to do so. I’m pretty sure that Canon knows best what lenses they need to release.

Personally, I want a 600/4 with a built-in 1.4x TC. But I don’t fool myself into believing that Canon must make me happy.

It must be a *you* thing... Canon obviously, manifestly, undeniably, demonstrably, evidently and patently, must make *me* happy!

 

[dhaas]

DSB and any other underwater shooters.........

Your price estimates to buy an aluminum housing for a Canon R5 /R5 II are way low in today's world.......Even depending where you are in the world prices have increased significantly in the small underwater imaging world.

That was one reason I mentioned a great AF performing camera like the Canon R50......Look at the specs and the AF tracking performance is darn near high end models.

A friend did buy a Seafrogs housing for his Canon R50 which is unbelievably cheap but it works......He had a problem with the pop up flash not fully extending....When we were in Cozumel the built in flash lightning bolt icon would disappear past 5M / 15' depth.....

To Seafrogs credit they sent him a new front housing and he's used it successfully on several trips.

If I didn't house the dirt cheap Canon R100 for my needs I'd buy a Seagrogs housing for my Canon R50. I'd check tariffs buying from Hong Kong and delivery into the US though.

I'm not wild about the Seafrog's housing's DOME port connection but they do have a silly simple "test once vacuum system" ensuring your housing is sealed. But then you then release the vacuum, remove the little electronic test module and plug it and dive.

The housing has DUAL back o-rings and for my friend has been fine. There's one more problem if you choose the budget Seafrog's housing......

Being a light but tough polycarbonate they are extremely buoyant and I mean EXTREMELY floaty !!!! You'll need a nice metal dual handle tray and maybe attach a 2-3# or more weight underneath it to get it below the surface comfortably........Even with strobe arms and strobes or video lights it'll be a floater

If you're a snorkeler or surface shooter this might not be a problem. In fact I believe the Grand prize winner of one of the recent underwater photography contests shot a high end camera in a Seafrogs housing !

Your mileage may vary so choose accordingly.......

David Haas

Here's a few photos of my buddy and his Seafrog's Canon R50 housing with flat port for the Canon RF-S 18-45mm IS STM lens. I shot these with a Canon G7X II compact, no strobes so don't judge the color adjustment which I'm not a guru at! LOL........