Another announcement cycle is out of the way, so what’s next from Canon for the EOS R system?

[Tom W]

The 35 is coming reasonably soon. I'm guessing here BTW.
The 300/2.8 and 500/4 will probably be announced together as I suspect that they'll share some technology and a few parts.

Canon does need to round out the wide primes, and add an ultra wide or two. Also, it would be reasonable to assume that they'll be bringing a couple of the EF-M lenses into the RF-S mount.

I suspect that the 18-45 would be an FR-S, but 15-45 would be a ton more useful on the APS-C bodies.

AF tilt-shift lenses would be a very big deal. Probably a very expensive deal too.

 

[Swurre]

A replacement for the EF 200 f/2, like the rumored RF 250mm would be nice

 

[Mr.Cell]

Wasn't the Canon 100+ megapixel a CR3 news/source?

Or is it now a pipe dream, a unicorn??

 

[Anthny]

I have an R5 and use the RF100-500 for photographing birds etc. I sometimes use the 1.4 extender but find it cumbersome to add/remove in the field. I would really like an RF100-700 with about the same specs as the RF100-500 or alternatively an RF100-500 with a built-in 1.4 extender.

 

[fox40phil]

Please.... bring the 300 2.8 TC!!! I love my new 300mm (also with 1,4 and 2.0TC). But sometimes you need more or less focal lengths..in just some seconds!
But... I should start save for it.. would be instantly a 7-8k€ lense . I payed 3600€ für my mk II.

I m also in the boat of wide angle EF lenses... because of the filter adapter. But the TS-E sounds so nice... I still want the 17mm.

Go go Canon ! (Go go money )

 

[GoranS]

Maybe Canon can put this new 24mpx sensor in a cheap body, cripple the video side and fps (10 mech/ 10 elec) - all for 999 usd or less. Et voila - RP successor.

 

[Bob Howland]

Where is the RF-S 11-22 zoom and all the other M-mount lenses that should be ported to RF-S?

 

[koenkooi]

Where is the RF-S 11-22 zoom and all the other M-mount lenses that should be ported to RF-S?

Canon insists they have scheduled the release of 9 new lenses between now and 31-12-2023, that could fit a bunch of converted EF-M lenses. Imagine that the R100 is indeed M6II sized and gets announced with RF-S 11-22mm, 22mm f/2, 32mm f/1.4 lenses

 

[Canon Rumors Guy]

"It will take on the form factor of the EOS M lineup"

I'm curious about how they can put an R mount on the M100 body ... It's physically impossible !
Only a camera sized like the EOS M6 Mark II (or an M50 pushing form factor with the EVF) can handle it. That's just physics. Or may be they will make the cameras more "squared" to reduce global size (with a printer in it... wait !) ...

That, plus the fact they have to offer lenses like the 22mm, 11-22mm and 32mm with same size and weight to make the concept of "small R" interesting, to my sense + open R mount to Sigma, in order to have a decent, affordable and usable 56mm f/1.4 on this mount.

There is more chance they won't be a valuable replacement of M concept if they stop making it...

On the other hand, we can live without it... especially if you already own EOS M6 Mark II and the lenses I've listed above : they will probably last enough years with a good care, before they need to and can be replaced with something else... and probably else than Canon or even standard camera gears then

How is it impossible? It will be an APS-C camera. It will also likely omit the EVF. There will obviously be more small form-factor RF-S lenses converted from the EF-M lineup as well as new ones.

The RF mount is only 7mm wider than the EF-M mount,

One just needs to look at the Sigma fp, which is 3-4 millimeters bigger in size than an M200. Since the R100 will be APS-C, Canon will have more real estate inside the camera than Sigma did with the fp.

 

[Bob Howland]

Canon insists they have scheduled the release of 9 new lenses between now and 31-12-2023, that could fit a bunch of converted EF-M lenses. Imagine that the R100 is indeed M6II sized and gets announced with RF-S 11-22mm, 22mm f/2, 32mm f/1.4 lenses

And a 15 f/2 or f/2.8 please.

 

[Del Paso]

A 300/2.8 1.4x would receive huge critical acclaim, but I think a little longer and a stop slower would find a bigger market. I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting to see a 400/4 1.4x or even better a 500/5 1.4x DO.

Don't worry, the usual trolls would just criticize the in-built 1,4 X extender as long as Sonys don't have one.

 

[koenkooi]

And a 15 f/2 or f/2.8 please.

I don't see how that would be significantly different from the existing, already small RF 16mm f/2.8.

 

[Pierre Lagarde]

"Form factor" has nothing to do with having the exact same dimensions.

Ok, but still, an EOS M100 is something you won't have with R, at all. And dimensions/weight are the first interest of EOS M system, so yes it has to do with dimensions and that's what most users of this system appreciate : that it can be very small and light with lenses. With 20% more matter in the mount, the "small and light" gear concept is invalidated from the start. But, hey, let see how they will handle that anyway.

 

[Canon Rumors Guy]

Wasn't the Canon 100+ megapixel a CR3 news/source?

Or is it now a pipe dream, a unicorn??

It's coming, when is the unknown.

 

[neuroanatomist]

How is it impossible? It will be an APS-C camera. It will also likely omit the EVF. There will obviously be more small form-factor RF-S lenses converted from the EF-M lineup as well as new ones.

The RF mount is only 7mm wider than the EF-M mount,

The M100 is only ~6 mm taller than the outer diameter of the M mount, 67mm high, while the outer diameter of the RF mount is ~69mm. So, technically impossible unless Canon makes a camera where the the mount surface of lenses stick out above and/or below the camera.

Likely about the smallest height Canon could achieve for an RF mount camera is 71-72mm (similar to the Sigma FP, where the camera is only a few mm taller than the mount; the L mount is 2.5mm smaller than RF). That would make the hypothetical smallest RF camera only 1-2mm taller than the M6II, for example.

 

[SnowMiku]

I wonder how big the RAW files will be on the R5S?

 

[ERHP]

Still waiting on the super niche RF600 f/4L w/1.4x. The Nikon variant just released looks pretty nice.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I have an R5 and use the RF100-500 for photographing birds etc. I sometimes use the 1.4 extender but find it cumbersome to add/remove in the field. I would really like an RF100-700 with about the same specs as the RF100-500 or alternatively an RF100-500 with a built-in 1.4 extender.

120-700

Canon Patent Application: Canon RF 100-600 and RF 100-700mm

This next patent application describes what probably is a competing lens to the Canon RF 100-500mm L lens. This patent application deals with a Canon RF 100-600mm Lens and Canon RF 100-700mm lens. Would this be developed now that the 100-500 is coming out? It's really hard to say - is there...

www.canonnews.com

 

[Anthny]

120-700

Canon Patent Application: Canon RF 100-600 and RF 100-700mm

This next patent application describes what probably is a competing lens to the Canon RF 100-500mm L lens. This patent application deals with a Canon RF 100-600mm Lens and Canon RF 100-700mm lens. Would this be developed now that the 100-500 is coming out? It's really hard to say - is there...

www.canonnews.com

I missed this. Hope canon develops this sooner rather than later.

 

[GAOP]

A 300/2.8 1.4x would receive huge critical acclaim, but I think a little longer and a stop slower would find a bigger market. I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting to see a 400/4 1.4x or even better a 500/5 1.4x DO.

Agreed a RF 300 2.8 is due. Personally would rather see if without a 1.4x. Without a TC, the RF 300 2.8 should be light enough to hand hold for a reasonable duration. Plus if I have enough light for f4 I'd use the 200-400. It's a little shorter than a 300x1.4 but gives me more composition options. Sadly an RF 200-400 f4 hasn't been talked about anywhere I've looked. The decade old 200-400 design is due for an upgrade. And why not dream big, how about a 120-300 f2.8 (to match Sigma and Nikon's offerings) with the possibility of a TC.