Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM to be one of the next lenses announced

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
477
530
UK
Hmm, me thinks you don't know Canon. They have never done high volume 'loss leaders' the loss leaders have been super exotic headline lenses like the 50 f1.0 and the 200 f1.8. Don't forget for years the Rebels and entry level kits were the cash cows of the camera industry and very few people who purchase entry level kits buy anything else.
True, and Canon is a conservative company that's renowned for being slow to change. But business models sometimes have to change to reflect new market conditions.

I believe Canon makes most of its money from selling lenses, rather than camera bodies, and in order to sell those lenses they need to get people to commit to the new mount. To do that, they need to attract novices to RF, so they need to release at least one cheap RF body.

Canon needs a full set of RF gear ranging from cheap-as-possible bodies and kit lenses, through the enthusiast middle ground, up to the exotic and expensive pro equipment. It makes a whole lot more sense to base all of these cameras on a single mount, in terms of design, manufacturing and progressing users along the upgrade path.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,129
4,730
To do that, they need to attract novices to RF, so they need to release at least one cheap RF body.
The EOS RP launched at $1300 and today is <$1000. That’s just $150 more than the APS-C M6 II. I’d say they’ve already released a cheap RF body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

BBarn

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 2, 2020
72
59
Yep, the RP is a great small camera. It's unlikely there will be a camera much smaller that utilizes the RF mount. A little cheaper perhaps, but a crop frame won't lower the cost much, or allow for a camera much smaller than the RP due to the size of the RF mount itself. A crop frame RF camera and lens for birders might make sense if the market was large enough. But such a combo wouldn't be low cost or small.
 
Last edited:

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
477
530
UK
The EOS RP launched at $1300 and today is <$1000. That’s just $150 more than the APS-C M6 II. I’d say they’ve already released a cheap RF body.
I agree, but we began the thread talking about whether Canon will introduce a cheap APS-C in RF, to replace the M series. I think it makes more sense both for the customers and Canon's benefit, to phase out M and consolidate APS and FF in RF mount.

It would reduce Canon's production costs to have all bodies and lenses in the same mount, and it would make the APS novices more inclined to stay with Canon if they upgrade.

If a lightweight and affordable set of FF lenses were produced in suitable focal lengths, there would be little or no necessity for a separate set of APS lenses, so folk upgrading from APS to RF wouldn't need a new set of lenses.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,129
4,730
I think it makes more sense both for the customers and Canon's benefit, to phase out M and consolidate APS and FF in RF mount.
I don’t see how larger cameras and lenses would benefit customers. I don’t see how phasing out their best-selling camera line (and likely the world’s best-selling camera line) would benefit Canon.

Since the EOS R launched we have seen only on1 new FF DSLR from Canon – the 1D X III (out of the league for R bodies so far), and three new FF MILCs. In that time there have also been three new EOS M cameras, and three APS-C DSLRs (both lines certainly outsell Canon’s FF MILCs). Does that suggest anything to you about Canon’s strategy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
477
530
UK
Well as you point out, they phased out DSLRs despite them being incredibly popular and selling by the bucket load, so there's no reason why they wouldn't phase out the M series too. You clearly disagree, and that's fine, we'll have to agree to differ. Not worth going to war over :)

Had to laugh at the 14-35mm announcement, which describes the R3 as being "under development", despite the official announcement being only hours away if rumours are true. It will be my next lens.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,129
4,730
Well as you point out, they phased out DSLRs despite them being incredibly popular and selling by the bucket load, so there's no reason why they wouldn't phase out the M series too. You clearly disagree, and that's fine, we'll have to agree to differ. Not worth going to war over :)

Had to laugh at the 14-35mm announcement, which describes the R3 as being "under development", despite the official announcement being only hours away if rumours are true. It will be my next lens.
Where did I say they phased out DSLRs? They haven't – in the past three years, they've launched the same number of APS-C DLSRs as APS-C MILCs (three of each), and APS-C cameras sell far better than FF cameras. They may be phasing out full frame DSLRs, or may simply building out the EOS R line with most of their development resources, which they have to do for it to succeed, and mature product lines need less development work.

I'm going to pass on the 14-35 for now, stick with the EF 16-35/4 IS, and when I need wider than 16mm I also have the EF 11-24/4. Was hoping for the R3 to launch, but that's life...
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,524
5,782
I'm going to pass on the 14-35 for now, stick with the EF 16-35/4 IS, and when I need wider than 16mm I also have the EF 11-24/4. Was hoping for the R3 to launch, but that's life...
Of course one huge advantage of using the EF 11-24 on RF is, as we have mentioned before, the ability to use the filter adapter. This is one of the main reasons I am looking to buy into an RF camera, it will also increase the functionality of my TS-E17 and EF15mm fisheye lenses. One compact CPL and one VND for all my ultrawides and TS-E’s and EF300 f2.8 in one hit. Glorious...
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
477
530
UK
Where did I say they phased out DSLRs? They haven't – in the past three years, they've launched the same number of APS-C DLSRs as APS-C MILCs (three of each), and APS-C cameras sell far better than FF cameras. They may be phasing out full frame DSLRs, or may simply building out the EOS R line with most of their development resources, which they have to do for it to succeed, and mature product lines need less development work.

I'm going to pass on the 14-35 for now, stick with the EF 16-35/4 IS, and when I need wider than 16mm I also have the EF 11-24/4. Was hoping for the R3 to launch, but that's life...
Apologies, I misread. But they are certainly in the process of phasing out their DSLRs, which in most of the world were until recently their best selling line of cameras (M series are I think still the best selling line in Asia).

EF 16-35mm F4 is a stunning lens, but unfortunately mine was stolen a couple of months ago. I had intended to replace it, but the announcement of the 14-35mm at a very reasonable projected cost has convinced me that I should go for that instead.

I'd really like it if Canon brought out a stabilised 180mm macro in RF mount, as hand-holdability of my EF version is limited, relying only on IBIS without OIS backup. It's currently my most often used optic. No sign of a stabilised version on the roadmap unfortunately...
 

hawkjody

CR Pro
Aug 16, 2016
6
3
Got my copy of this lens 10 days a go and got to test it out this weekend in Sequoia NP - Using the full wide angle to capture the big trees - SEVERE vignetting at 14-15 mm - any one elsce seen this or could this happen with a bad copy?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,129
4,730
Got my copy of this lens 10 days a go and got to test it out this weekend in Sequoia NP - Using the full wide angle to capture the big trees - SEVERE vignetting at 14-15 mm - any one elsce seen this or could this happen with a bad copy?
Scroll about halfway down the review or search for 'Capture One'.

 

BBarn

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 2, 2020
72
59
Got my copy of this lens 10 days a go and got to test it out this weekend in Sequoia NP - Using the full wide angle to capture the big trees - SEVERE vignetting at 14-15 mm - any one elsce seen this or could this happen with a bad copy?
That lens requires considerable correction (by design). When corrected, the vignetting should be acceptable. The latest version of Canon DPP (4.15) has the corrections.