Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?

[Zadak]

wwYAPODFC.


b4? Lol. I’d been using the above abbreviation for ‘yet another prediction of doom for Canon’ for well over a year when I responded with it to this post:



That was in 2014. At that point, Canon had been leading the ILC market for 11 successive years. Now they are up to 23 years of leading the market.

But I’m sure this time you’re correct. They are doomed, Charlie.
w

Canon as a company does more than just consumer-facing stuff, hence is why I said it as an ironic gotcha to whoever thinks I was touting that it is doomed as a company. So you just proved my point really. A group of people on these forums like to make fun of people criticizing Canon's decisions and path and all they are met with is "haha look another Canon is doomed poster" and "Oh this was said X years ago"... as if past performance is indicative of future prospects.

Anyway, just because Canon is and will be fine as a company, that doesn't mean the market of consumer-grade imaging solutions is not getting more and more captured by the like of DJI and Insta360. To be fair, it is a good thing overall. For Canon? It needs to get moving with updates, software integrations (no that doesn't mean AI necessarily), and in general great stand-out hardware

 

[neuroanatomist]

Anyway, just because Canon is and will be fine as a company, that doesn't mean the market of consumer-grade imaging solutions is not getting more and more captured by the like of DJI and Insta360. To be fair, it is a good thing overall. For Canon? It needs to get moving with updates, software integrations (no that doesn't mean AI necessarily), and in general great stand-out hardware

Well then, I’m sure you can support your assertion that Canon’s consumer imaging profit is dropping because it is, “…getting more and more captured by the like of DJI and Insta360.” Their financial reports don’t show that (profit and unit sales generally increasing, including last year when the overall ILC market dropped by 1%)…but you know better. Yeah.

The internet is full of ‘experts’ like you, who believe their opinions are facts and know better than Canon what Canon ‘must do’…or else. Or else, what? Exactly.

 

[scyrene]

Canon as a company does more than just consumer-facing stuff, hence is why I said it as an ironic gotcha to whoever thinks I was touting that it is doomed as a company. So you just proved my point really. A group of people on these forums like to make fun of people criticizing Canon's decisions and path and all they are met with is "haha look another Canon is doomed poster" and "Oh this was said X years ago"... as if past performance is indicative of future prospects.

I don't think that's a fair representation. I think there's a bunch of longstanding forum members who have seen it all before, and a regular conveyor belt of new posters who say silly things that boil down in most cases to "I want X, Canon should make X, and if they don't it will hurt them" (sometimes phrased the other way - "if they make X they will sell really well!"). And it is gently - and sometimes not so gently - pointed out that just because you want something doesn't mean making it would be a good business move for them. And that usually gets pushback in the form of deflection, ad hominem attacks, tantrums, etc. As for past performance not being indicative of the future - why should we believe you, naysayer number 10000, and not trust in the continued performance of the big company in question? As I've asked many people over the years, what is different now, what is special about your request?

the market of consumer-grade imaging solutions is getting more and more captured by the like of DJI and Insta360.

A statement like this would need to be backed up by stats/figures.

To be fair, it is a good thing overall. For Canon? It needs to get moving with updates, software integrations (no that doesn't mean AI necessarily), and in general great stand-out hardware

They release updates regularly. But I suspect (going back to your original statement about not being excited by them) what you really mean is, they need to do things you personally like. Which explains the response you've had so far on here.

 

[Zadak]

Ah yes, the 2 bullies in charge are hard at work here. Canon is still a very large company and will take years for them to take a hit.

Chinese manufacturers are still ramping up, and the leaps DJI and Insta360 are making every release are quite impressive. As I said previously, I didn't even consider buying a gimbal the previous years, but man did they improve a lot and have a lot to offer for a fraction of the cost.

Again, not saying Canon is doomed now, and as a company it won't go under, but it will probably fall hard in the consumer space within the next years. Sony sensors are at least in every phone and other imaging devices for consumers, Canon... not so much. Canon is the Intel of consumer cameras (for consumer camera space), and as I said, without some exciting stuff in the pipeline, the next 5-10 years will be very telling. Either make things cheaper, or offer something nobody else can.

Gimbals these days offer a great 24-240mm coverage, that is very light and great for content creation. Software has good integration so you can churn out edits quickly. It's what the masses need/want. Will there still be a niche with Mirrorless camers? Absolutely. But will it capture as much consumer space as it used to? Not really, not without changing their ways

 

[roby17269]

Mostly portraits and candids, but not only portraits.

The obvious use is photographing people from far enough away that you are not really in the scene. People, kids, and animals often stop reacting to the camera, and the expressions become more natural.

But my personal raison d’être for the RF 135mm f/1.8L is compositional control. The narrow field of view forces careful thinking about foreground, subject, and background. A step or two left, right, forward, or backward can completely change the geometry, compression, and layering of the image. Getting low to photograph children or animals at eye level can make the lens feel especially immersive.

To me, the lens is about connection, compression, and separation. It works for portraits, candids, pets, some wildlife, and even landscapes.

I use my old EF 100mm f/2 in a similar way, but the 135mm imposes a different discipline and produces a different feel.

Here are two recent examples I have handy on my phone, a dog portrait and a landscape.

The 135 isn’t a lens for every subject, it’s a lens that reveals the world a very particular way and rewards us when align and think that way. I encourage you to take it out of the box and mount it up. Try a day with only the 135mm and see if it changes how you think and see. It truly is a marvelous lens and I hope its design philosophy finds its way into other new Canon primes like the rumored RF 100 1.4L design.

When is a 135 1.8 useful?
When 85 is too short and 200 is too long and 2.8 is too slow ;-)

Seriously though, as most primes, it is a specialized tool. If one likes compression and isolation with nice bokeh and one can control the distance from the subject, then it is a great option. It works great at parties when kids are roaming around. I like the 135 1.8 (I have it) as other fast primes because I believe that they challenge me to try different things. And I like its rendering like I like the rendering of the 50 1.2 and 85 1.2... But it is not a lens that I would take traveling / hiking (e.g.) since in those occasions I value versatility more.