Canon officially announces the RF 16mm f/2.8 STM and RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,216
2,013
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
MELVILLE, N.Y., September 14, 2021 – Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the RF16mm F2.8 STM and RF100–400mm F5.6–8 IS USM lenses. Both lenses invite current EOS R series users and those who are considering a move to Canon’s prominent mirrorless system, such as the EOS R or EOS RP, to expand their content creation abilities with the visual drama of an ultra-wide-angle lens and true telephoto-only zoom lens. As the “lens first” EOS R series continues to expand, these latest lenses open the door to a wide-range of imaging creators, encouraging them to test the powers and possibilities of their art.
Preorder: Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM $299 | Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM $649

Ultra-Wide Perspectives
Whether you are excited...

Continue reading...
 
Last edited:

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,456
645
35
Pune
Will be waiting for reviews of both these lenses as they look quite interesting for closeup work. Though that f8 still feels odd.
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
677
842
Canon really added the lens hoods + soft case with both lenses? At least that's what it says at Wex UK. Might be a mistake.
 

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
442
553
Is it odd that none of the reps that tested the R3 had anything to say about the new lenses?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,589
3,930
Canon really added the lens hoods + soft case with both lenses? At least that's what it says at Wex UK. Might be a mistake.
May be market-dependent. I recall that in Malaysia, Canon included the hood with the EF 50/1.8 II (and other non-L lenses, but the nifty fifty stuck out as it was the cheapest lens). B&H list only the front and rear caps as included with the RF 100-400 and 16/2.8.
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
677
842
May be market-dependent. I recall that in Malaysia, Canon included the hood with the EF 50/1.8 II (and other non-L lenses, but the nifty fifty stuck out as it was the cheapest lens). B&H list only the front and rear caps as included with the RF 100-400 and 16/2.8.

Makes sense. At least UK customers get something extra for the much higher GBP price.
 

CaMeRa QuEsT

EOS M5 11-22/4-5.6 22/2 50/1.8 STM+EF-EOSM 270EXII
Sep 12, 2016
43
42
Here's the 16mm's MTF. Pretty convenient for Canon to not show MTF@f/8 anymore, isn't it? Of course, what else would you expect from a $300 UWA lens?


Following are full size samples@f/8, f/9, and f/2.8 (too large to attach here):

 

Attachments

  • spec-mtf.png
    spec-mtf.png
    16.8 KB · Views: 84
Sep 14, 2021
2
0
England
acave.photos
Canon really added the lens hoods + soft case with both lenses? At least that's what it says at Wex UK. Might be a mistake.
The parkcameras linked here also offer hood and soft case, for the same price as just the lens on Canon store. The hood is over £70 alone???

I'm deciding on whether I want this nice, compact zoom, or if I should get a cheap second hand 400 5.6. I'll probably be at the 400 range more often than not anyway, but I already have the rf800 to fit in my bag and another large >1kg lens won't fit!

Ofc, my thin wallet has made the decision a lot easier...
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,419
2,282
Unless that 100-400's weight is comparable to my tamron 18-400 (APS-C)...I'll likely pass. I do have that range covered with my EF 100-400 L mk II (with dedicated adapter).
 

frjmacias

EOS R5 and EOS M50
May 14, 2020
62
60
29
Monterey, California
I got my preorder in for the 16mm! I was eyeing that lens since I saw it announced here. Hoping to do an extensive review if I get it in early enough. Who knows with all the shortages. That is why I did not want to wait for the reviews. It's cheap enough that I can test it out and decide if it will stay in my bag.
 

xwxw

EOS M50
Nov 3, 2020
32
47
Unless that 100-400's weight is comparable to my tamron 18-400 (APS-C)...I'll likely pass. I do have that range covered with my EF 100-400 L mk II (with dedicated adapter).
They are identical in price: $649.

The weight shows the canon is 10% lighter: 100-400 at 635 grams and 18-400 at 710 grams.
 

SereneSpeed

EOS 90D
Feb 1, 2016
113
63
*dry heave*
*reminds self it’s a $300 lens*
The lines are supposed to remain relatively flat from left to right, aren't they? I don't think I've ever looked twice at an MTF chart, but I seem to remember all the ones I've seen having far less slope...

Was hoping for a lighter (hiking) alternative to my EF 16-35. Maybe not? I'm a bit finicky with lens quality, perhaps I need to cancel my pre-order.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,589
3,930
The lines are supposed to remain relatively flat from left to right, aren't they? I don't think I've ever looked twice at an MTF chart, but I seem to remember all the ones I've seen having far less slope...

Was hoping for a lighter (hiking) alternative to my EF 16-35. Maybe not? I'm a bit finicky with lens quality, perhaps I need to cancel my pre-order.
Here are the MTFs of the EF 16-35/4L IS (this is the older format, the new one above for the 16/2.8 does not have the curves shown as thin lines below, so only compare the 4 thick lines here to the MTF above. Short version of interpretation is that the center of the frame is on the left and the edges are on the right, and higher lines are better.

Screen Shot 2021-09-14 at 3.38.46 PM.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: SereneSpeed