A New Constant f/4 Aperture RF-S Zoom Coming

[Canon Rumors]

Most of us out there are convinced that Canon is going to announce the EOS R7 Mark II in the next couple of months. We're looking at announcement coming in May or June of this year, at least that's what all the signs point to. With the new “flagship” APS-C EOS R camera, we can […]

See full article...

 

[Tom R5R7]

Well, a 15-70 f/4 would be a great addition to the lineup. Kind of a jack of many trades type of lens, an APS-C version of something like the well-liked 24-105 f/4L. In fact, in terms of field of view equivalent, it would be a 24-113 mm lens. I'd buy the lens on its own merit for any APS-C R body really.

 

[BlueBomberTurbo]

F/6.3 equivalent is nice for a kit lens, but come on already, Canon.

 

[Xpenelas]

Sounds like a good replacement for the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM.

 

[Xpenelas]

Well, a 15-70 f/4 would be a great addition to the lineup. Kind of a jack of many trades type of lens, an APS-C version of something like the well-liked 24-105 f/4L. In fact, in terms of field of view equivalent, it would be a 24-113 mm lens. I'd buy the lens on its own merit for any APS-C R body really.

Should be a perfect kit lense for the R7 mkII if it's sharp enough.

 

[InternalRevenue]

Sounds like a good replacement for the EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM.

If it comes with a nice weight and size reduction I wouldn’t be too miffed about the loss of focal length on the long end. The 15-85 had soft corners (and distortion at 15mm) which I would like to see dealt with too, though I imagine if so it’ll be entirely digital correction.

 

[Xpenelas]

Distortion and vignetting on the 15-85 it's well corrected by digital correction, an RF version should be a lot smaller, like all angular APS-C lenses are because of the flange distance reduction.

Should be a big upgrade over RF-S 14-30 or 18-150 as a kit lense.

 

[Bob Howland]

F/6.3 equivalent is nice for a kit lens, but come on already, Canon.

It's not f/6.3. It's a 15-70 f/4 lens with the DOF of a 15-70 f/4 lens, regardless of the size of sensor. The only reason the DOF changes is when people move forward or back or change the focal length to maintain the same FOV. I'm rather interested in this lens but I already own the 18-50 Sigma and I highly value small size and especially light weight.

 

[Uneternal]

f/4 ... meh. Not great, not terrible. Depending on the price.
But I guess I still keep my adapted Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4, which weighs just 575 grams (incl adapter).

 

[zapper]

It's not f/6.3. It's a 15-70 f/4 lens with the DOF of a 15-70 f/4 lens, regardless of the size of sensor. The only reason the DOF changes is when people move forward or back or change the focal length to maintain the same FOV. I'm rather interested in this lens but I already own the 18-50 Sigma and I highly value small size and especially light weight.

He said "f/6.3 equivalent", which is (approximately) correct. It will take similar photos to a hypothetical 24-112mm f/6.4 full frame (same position, same DOF, same FOV, same shutter speed, same image quality with the full frame aperture and ISO 1.6x higher than APS-C). However, the hypothetical 24-112mm f/6.4 will take photos with higher IQ if the exposure permits base ISO, compared to the 15-70 f/4.

I would not buy a f/6.4 FF mid zoom, nor I would not buy a f/4 APS-C mid zoom. I consider FF f/4 to be acceptable compromise of versatility, IQ, and size/weight for wide and mid zooms, and f/2.8 to be acceptable on APS-C (I have the Sigma 10-18 and 18-50 f/2.8 lenses). I would LOVE a 15-70 f/2.8 RF-S lens. But f/4 on APS-C is a stop slower than I want.