Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS to come before EF version [CR2]

[Bob Howland]

What the source is suggesting sounds like a really bad idea from a business standpoint. The compelling cameras have to come first, before the fancy lenses will capture buyer interest and the current EOS R just isn't very compelling. And may I remind all you folks that EF lenses can be used on R bodies but R lenses can't be used on EF bodies?

 

[DrToast]

Since this rumored lens has IS, not sure why you are complaining here in this thread.

Because it’s another indication that they’re not going to put IBIS in their R bodies? I don’t want IS on this lens; I want it to not need IS.

 

[DaveGrice]

oh boy DSLR are dying faster than i thought...

not a SINGLE EF lens in 2019?!

not even a new 50mm .... how much longer must people wait for a new L 50mm?

My money says you can stop waiting, it's not happening. I'll be a little surprised if we see another EF Mount L, at all, not just in 2019. I think the Great Whites we just got were the last hurrah.

 

[Ozarker]

I've got an R (I love it btw, even without two cards) and I'm really anxious for exactly this lens, or there-abouts. I've got nothing to look through yet because I'm waiting for the polarizing adapter; and none of the first four RFs are a good fit for my needs. Besides this rumored standard zoom I've got a pretty small-niche wish-list, so I'm resigned to waiting awhile. But if Canon is reading this:

A 28mm IS f2.0 Plenty fast but compact, too. No macro required.
A 17mm TS-E that uses filters. Front, back—doesn't matter. 19 or 20mm would be close enough.
A 24mm TS-E compact and with excellent optics.

And yeah, expensive year ahead!

Not trying to be a smart Alec, but if you can't yet mount a lens on it how do you know you love it?

 

[Ozarker]

Because it’s another indication that they’re not going to put IBIS in their R bodies? I don’t want IS on this lens; I want it to not need IS.

No biggie. I want IS in the lens. It is far superior on long focal lengths. https://photographylife.com/lens-stabilization-vs-in-camera-stabilization

 

[Talys]

Yes, exactly. The EF lineup is already essentially complete and up to date (with one exception, apparently..) So it is obvious Canon will try and build up the RF lineup as quickly as possible. Of course, forum dwellers will immediately take this as a signal that DSLRs are dead. Typical over-reaction.

Was the one exception 24-70/2.8 IS or 50/1.4 IS?

 

[Talys]

Because it’s another indication that they’re not going to put IBIS in their R bodies? I don’t want IS on this lens; I want it to not need IS.

No biggie. I want IS in the lens. It is far superior on long focal lengths. https://photographylife.com/lens-stabilization-vs-in-camera-stabilization

Ultimately, I don't think it's an either/or thing. I used IBIS on a Sony A7R3, and lenses without in-lens stabilization were clearly far inferior in IS performance to lenses with. However, IBIS does add something, whether the lens has ILIS or not, and we take all we can get, right? I'm sure that one day Canon will put IBIS in the camera. Either way, think that in-lens IS is still important if you want to get the most you can out of stabilization performance, and it's not like post-IBIS (or with Sony) people will start clammoring for lighter lenses with no IS.

To be honest, though, what I really missed on the Sony was Canon's mode 3 IS -- where it kicks in just when you're going to take the shot, so that you don't have to fight it when you're composing.

 

[Refurb7]

There are plenty of EF lenses already. If I were the boss of Canon, I'd be making a lot of new RF lenses right now. Putting EF lenses on hold for a while makes perfect sense. See how the market develops and take it from there. If RF is very strong, then put more and more into RF. If EF stays in high demand, then go back to making new EF lenses

 

[gzroxas]

I’m really happy they are apparently working on a lot of extremely high quality glass! Now I just need a spec/tech advanced body that could be sold around the R price and I’ll be happy!!
I can’t afford a 3000usd body especially if competitors offer the same functions at much lower prices, but maybe that lower end Full frame R could be my savior

 

[LDS]

A 24mm TS-E compact and with excellent optics.

I'm afraid the need to deliver a larger image circle, and the mechanism to move optics precisely while keeping them aligned works against compactness. Shift only may lead to a less bulky lens, but when adding the tilt and rotating mechanisms, the lens becomes bulkier. I prefer a more versatile lens than a compact but less versatile one, especially since most of the time it will be used on a tripod.

 

[Deleted member 378875]

Are they seriously not going to put IBIS in the R bodies? That’s ridiculous.

apparently never ! https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60911043

 

[Deleted member 378875]

Continue reading...

Some interesting observations from Optical Limits on 24-70 lenses in general ...

"Let's start this review with a little discussion - are 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses an attractive offering or just overhyped? Within our local team that's an open question"
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1052-sigma2470f28art

"lack the greatness that should come with these price tags"
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1052-sigma2470f28art?start=2

I had the EF 24-70 mark II and sold it as I found I rarely actually used it ... as I found my 16-35 f/4 was fantastic for landscapes (although I increasingly use panoramas these days a la Thomas Heaton) and I used primes and 70-200s for portraits ... displacing the 24-70 out of my bag almost always.

On a day trip when I want to travel light with a simple configuration (one camera, one lens, Lowepro Toploader case) I find my 24-105 f/4 mark II on either a 5Ds or 5Div competes admirably with the 24-70 Mark II off-tripod (in the f/4 - f/5.6 range) and gives me substantially better range.

True, its not a perfect lens for portraits begging the creamiest blur, but a great all-rounder and, in my opinion, solidly deserving of its L status, and at 105mm can produce some surprisingly good portraits.

So, personally, I can't say I'm too fussed whatever they do !

 

[Deleted member 378875]

I don't think the dslr is already dead, but the comment at the end about the EF version might be dependent on how the R is received doesn't give a lot of confidence

ha ! doesn't sound like the leak came from the marketing department then

 

[twoheadedboy]

Some interesting observations from Optical Limits on 24-70 lenses in general ...

"Let's start this review with a little discussion - are 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses an attractive offering or just overhyped? Within our local team that's an open question"
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1052-sigma2470f28art

"lack the greatness that should come with these price tags"
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1052-sigma2470f28art?start=2

I had the EF 24-70 mark II and sold it as I found I rarely actually used it ... as I found my 16-35 f/4 was fantastic for landscapes (although I increasingly use panoramas these days a la Thomas Heaton) and I used primes and 70-200s for portraits ... displacing the 24-70 out of my bag almost always.

So, personally, I can't say I'm too fussed whatever they do !

Agreed. I have the 24-105 STM for a light do-everything-non-extreme lens and the 50mm f/1.8 for when I need blurred backgrounds in the midrange, a giant 24-70 f/2.8 does nothing for me. I'm considering the 24-105 f/4 and 50 f/1.2 R mount now but those are less necessary and more to get the most out of the system. The other lens I want is a 28mm f/1.4 IS, I'm probably going to get the Sigma but I'd rather have Canon glass, 24 is too wide and 35 not wide enough.

 

[qudek77]

The lenses are really good no doubt, but the bodies man, I mean they really need to put out a "PRO 5D MARK IV-ish" body 'cuse the R is just not cutting it for me, and they should put it out as fast as possible.

 

[Rudeofus]

This must all sound terrible, if you are heavily invested in EF mount lenses. If you are not, and can wait for a year: enjoy the great prices for used equipment a year from now! I was about to get a new 24-70, now I'll just wait and see what happens.

 

[SecureGSM]

https://lensvid.com/gear/canon-interview-eos-r-and-more-photokina-2018/

no EF lenses are released by Canon in 2019.

• On sensor image stabilization is something that Canon didn’t include because of cost and target market (again this camera was not really designed for pro video work)
• Canon promised to release the “holy trinity” of lenses in 2019 (24-70mm, 70-200mm, 16-35mm).
• Just like the Nikon Z6/Z7 – Canon targeted with the EOS-R photo enthusiasts and not pro shooters. This led to many decisions that people have later criticized (slow shooting speed, single memory card slot, no full sensor readout in 4K), however, for the most part, all of these are the result of the way Canon’s engineers designed this camera for the specific target audience they went for (just think about this camera as a slightly more advanced mirrorless 6D MKII).

 

[Ladislav]

I don't want to go and buy a new camera to use the new lens when my current camera works perfectly fine and is better for what I often shoot. Moreover I can buy second new 5D4 cheaper than new R. R definitely has plenty of awesome features and it is a future but I want to choose when I make a switch. Canon's approach is just turning back to everyone who made investment to DSLRs by not delivering lenses which are long overdue - 24-70L 2.8 IS L and new 50. If they already did that, they could do whatever they wanted with RF because the most important lenses for EF mount would be updated and DSLR could be slowly phased out.

At this point it looks like Canon is really doing this move with 24-70 because they are late to the game and they believe that who needed those lenses already made investment to third party options or is happy with non-IS version and since there is no long term plan for DSLRs it may not be feasible to release EF version. Definitely middle finger from Canon for me since I have experience with third party option and I really want to replace it with Canon one.

 

[YuengLinger]

CR Guy says, "The EF lens lineup is going to take a backseat to the RF line for the foreseeable future."

Man, I took so much flack on this forum for saying this here 90 days ago!

 

[YuengLinger]

I don't want to go and buy a new camera to use the new lens when my current camera works perfectly fine and is better for what I often shoot. Moreover I can buy second new 5D4 cheaper than new R. R definitely has plenty of awesome features and it is a future but I want to choose when I make a switch. Canon's approach is just turning back to everyone who made investment to DSLRs by not delivering lenses which are long overdue - 24-70L 2.8 IS L and new 50. If they already did that, they could do whatever they wanted with RF because the most important lenses for EF mount would be updated and DSLR could be slowly phased out.

At this point it looks like Canon is really doing this move with 24-70 because they are late to the game and they believe that who needed those lenses already made investment to third party options or is happy with non-IS version and since there is no long term plan for DSLRs it may not be feasible to release EF version. Definitely middle finger from Canon for me since I have experience with third party option and I really want to replace it with Canon one.

Have you considered that 5DIV owners are not the primary target market? But when you feel it's time to get a new body, Canon will have a higher-end, perhaps truly pro variation of mirrorless. And your legacy EF glass will still work well on that new body.