Canon has registered two unreleased lenses with certification agencies

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,974
6,324
I'm pretty confident that the 2 code-named lenses are models that have been in production for many years, and someone somewhere has cocked up.
I don’t think so. The new SKUs are not for existing products. For example, Google “5554C002” and see what you get. Then try that with the new SKUs (you’ll get this thread and it’s clones, but no products and if you restrict to site:canon.com you get nothing).

So there are two new lenses coming. I just think they’re not going to be any of the ones people here are wishing for.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,974
6,324
Why on Earth would a 12 year old EF lens appear in the same certification document as 2 brand new unreleased models? Is it 1st April or what?
I can’t speak for Russia, but in the US the Consumer Product Safety Commission states, “Any material changes, such as changing the paint, metal, fabrics, or other items used to manufacture a product or changing the product's design or manufacturing process, for example, could render the product noncompliant. In that situation, you should retest for compliance to those rules affected by the material change. You may also need to update your GCC.”

So a small change in the manufacturing process for an old lens, e.g., a new paint formula, may necessitate a re-certification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
895
1,018
UK
I don’t think so. The new SKUs are not for existing products. For example, Google “5554C002” and see what you get. Then try that with the new SKUs (you’ll get this thread and it’s clones, but no products and if you restrict to site:canon.com you get nothing).

So there are two new lenses coming. I just think they’re not going to be any of the ones people here are wishing for.
You seem to be contradicting what you said in your other post regarding new paint on an old lens. Are you defining a lens as being "new" if it's just a change of paint colour? My guess is that the code-named lenses are simply old models that have had a very minor cosmetic revamp, or maybe some minor parts of the existing lens are now unavailable and had to be replaced with new parts and recertified - could even be something as trivial as a different focus-ring rubber.

What really puzzles me though, is why the old EF 100mm macro appears in the same certification. If that lens also has to be recertified because of a minor component being no longer available, why wasn't that lens given a new codename too?
 

PhotoGenerous

R5/R6 + GAS
CR Pro
Apr 11, 2017
66
90
If it's two versions of the same lens, then a black and silver (or white) version of the RF 18-45 is STM makes sense alongside black and silver (or white) version of the APS-C body.

Kick off the RF Rebel or SL line with two colors.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,974
6,324
You seem to be contradicting what you said in your other post regarding new paint on an old lens. Are you defining a lens as being "new" if it's just a change of paint colour?
No, I’m not contradicting myself. These are two new SKUs, meaning two new lenses. The sequential numbers is consistent with them being two different colors of the same new lens. That suggests an M-series kit lens

My guess is that the code-named lenses are simply old models that have had a very minor cosmetic revamp, or maybe some minor parts of the existing lens are now unavailable and had to be replaced with new parts and recertified - could even be something as trivial as a different focus-ring rubber.
They are new SKUs, so they are new lenses.

What really puzzles me though, is why the old EF 100mm macro appears in the same certification. If that lens also has to be recertified because of a minor component being no longer available, why wasn't that lens given a new codename too?
Because it’s not a new lens, it doesn’t get a new SKU. But a change in the production process may mean a new certification is needed.
 

Shane

I'm New Here
Nov 3, 2014
11
37
I love the 35 1.8 but would welcome a faster 35L. I really rally want to see a fast 135L. There were rumors of a 135 f1.4L. That would make my day!
 

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
895
1,018
UK
No, I’m not contradicting myself. These are two new SKUs, meaning two new lenses. The sequential numbers is consistent with them being two different colors of the same new lens. That suggests an M-series kit lens


They are new SKUs, so they are new lenses.


Because it’s not a new lens, it doesn’t get a new SKU. But a change in the production process may mean a new certification is needed.
OK I'm with you now, I thought you were suggesting that there were 2 new colour versions of an existing M lens, but you are talking about a completely new M kit lens in 2 colour versions. That's a logical enough conclusion based on the SKU's, but I would have thought that there were enough lenses for the M series already (for the market they are aimed at), so I'd think it more likely that this is a pair of small (pancake?) kit lenses designed specifically for the smaller RF cameras (RP and future models below it).
 

Bdbtoys

R5
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2020
454
320
Since we're all guessing anyway... the 14TS & 24TS were on the rumor roadmap for a while now so perhaps these?
 

mxwphoto

R6 and be there
Jun 20, 2013
41
57
If it is M kit lenses, then it would come with a new M body, exciting! On the other hand, it could also be a RF kit for a new rp/rebel, which wouldn't be bad either.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,974
6,324
OK I'm with you now, I thought you were suggesting that there were 2 new colour versions of an existing M lens, but you are talking about a completely new M kit lens in 2 colour versions. That's a logical enough conclusion based on the SKU's, but I would have thought that there were enough lenses for the M series already (for the market they are aimed at), so I'd think it more likely that this is a pair of small (pancake?) kit lenses designed specifically for the smaller RF cameras (RP and future models below it).
My suggestion was a replacement kit lens, e.g. an EF-M 15-45 MkII (I posted a link to a patent for one). Keep in mind there were many iterations of the APS-C DSLR 18-55mm, and the M15-45 replaced the M18-55.

The RF 24-105 is pretty compact. You seem to be suggesting EOS R-series bodies/lenses appealing to the same market as the M-series. I’m not sure we’re going to see than happen.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
6,754
4,710
68
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I wouldn’t discount the possibility that a couple of the remaining big whites may be pending. Canon held off on releasing new EF versions which could mean they have had the designs essentially done and have been waiting for the right time. With the R3 hitting the market and the Winter Olympics coming up they may want to expand the range of RF big whites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
895
1,018
UK
The RF 24-105 is pretty compact. You seem to be suggesting EOS R-series bodies/lenses appealing to the same market as the M-series. I’m not sure we’re going to see than happen.
I've got the RF 24-105mm F4L and yes it's more compact than the EF version, but still a bit large when attached to a small RP body.

As you know, I admire the M series and think they are great for people who want something pocketable and are happy with a limited choice of lenses. I don't see any possibility of Canon discontinuing such a successful line for some time yet. But ultimately I think they'd like to amalgamate the M and RF lines by switching all their MILCs to RF mount. I think it's perfectly feasible to produce a pocketable (APS-C) MILC with RF mount, at a price competitive with the M series, and aimed at the same market.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,974
6,324
I've got the RF 24-105mm F4L and yes it's more compact than the EF version, but still a bit large when attached to a small RP body.
Sorry for not being clear, we were talking entry-level kit lenses and I was referring to the RF 24-105 non-L.

FBCBD523-6C6B-493E-8B21-0DC1B053243E.jpeg

As you know, I admire the M series and think they are great for people who want something pocketable and are happy with a limited choice of lenses. I don't see any possibility of Canon discontinuing such a successful line for some time yet. But ultimately I think they'd like to amalgamate the M and RF lines by switching all their MILCs to RF mount. I think it's perfectly feasible to produce a pocketable (APS-C) MILC with RF mount, at a price competitive with the M series, and aimed at the same market.
Possibly. However, I think the RF mount is simply too large. The RF mount cap is as tall as my EOS M6.

12E03AF1-581E-4703-AEA8-7D14F4593769.jpeg
 

PhotoGenerous

R5/R6 + GAS
CR Pro
Apr 11, 2017
66
90
The RF mount might be too big for the M6 body, but the question is how small of a body can Canon make with the RF mount, and is it small enough for the target market even if it's larger than the M6.

I think Canon will certainly attempt to find out. And as soon as it seems possible, if it turns out that way, they'll drop the M line as fast as they dropped the EF mount.
 
Last edited:

dcm

It's not the gear. But it helps.
CR Pro
Apr 18, 2013
1,052
727
Colorado, USA
The RF mount might be too big for the M6 body, but the question is how small of a body can Canon make with the RF mount, and is it small enough for the target market even if it's larger than the M6.

I think Canon will certainly attempt to find out. And as soon as it seems possible, if it turns out that way, they'll drop the M line as fast as they dropped the EF mount.

I looked into this a while back. The RP (132 x 85 x 70) is about as small as you can go with a viewfinder. The RP has similar margins (space above, below, left, and right) around the lens as the M6 (119.6 x 70 x 49.2) does. Most of my EF lenses overwhelm the M6. They could shave a bit off the top if they eliminate the viewfinder, but the width is necessary for a grip to hold the body with an attached lens and have some form of lens release mechanism.

The EOS M50 (116 x 88.1 x 58.7) is actually a bit larger than the M6. The M100/200 (108 x 67 x 35) are slightly smaller with very small margins around the mount. I doubt an R mount body can go that small.
 
Last edited:

PhotoGenerous

R5/R6 + GAS
CR Pro
Apr 11, 2017
66
90
Yes, Canon has only produced well over a million EF mount cameras this year. Total abandonment.
"Fast as" doesn't mean instant abandonment. However, as soon as it was clear the RF line was succeeded, they did a mass announcement of newly discontinued lenses.

Which doesn't mean there won't be a sufficient amount of years to support the products that people bought, but it's clear they wont be producing more EF lenses or release new bodies.

They will drop the EF-M mount as fast as the EF mount, meaning still years of overlap and sufficient product support but clear sign of transitioning.
 

dcm

It's not the gear. But it helps.
CR Pro
Apr 18, 2013
1,052
727
Colorado, USA
"Fast as" doesn't mean instant abandonment. However, as soon as it was clear the RF line was succeeded, they did a mass announcement of newly discontinued lenses.

Which doesn't mean there won't be a sufficient amount of years to support the products that people bought, but it's clear they wont be producing more EF lenses or release new bodies.

They will drop the EF-M mount as fast as the EF mount, meaning still years of overlap and sufficient product support but clear sign of transitioning.

It might be better to clarify what you mean by "drop". It really happens in stages, some of which can be many years apart. Cease new product development? Cease manufacturing? Cease sales? Cease support?

Canon continued to manufacture, sell, and support film bodies long after they ceased new product development. For example, Canon released the EOS-1v in 2000, ceased manufacturing in 2010, ceased to sell the EOS-1v in 2018, and will repair them until 2025 as long as parts remain. The last SLR film bodies were released in 2004, with a few SureShot film bodies in 2005. Canon ceased to sell most film bodies in 2008.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user