Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM II mentioned [CR2]

[koenkooi]

This could be easily fixed if Canon would just implement focus breathing compensation like Sony did.

Like Canon did in the R6II, R8 and R50? https://cam.start.canon/en/H001/supplement_0160.html

 

[EricN]

Fan boy? I'm not the one buying all the new and shiney...just because. Moaning about not having a native RF 35mm L.

There are some advantages to use ef lenses. They can work with Canon's film cameras, there are three kinds of adapters which could be interesting: the filter adapters, helicoid adapters, and tilt shift adapters. I wonder how many people had parents that spoiled them into thinking the deserve exactly what they want when they want it without the idea of waiting or noticing alternatives...

 

[roby17269]

I could have sworn the latest rumor for the 35 f1.2 was cr3 the most reliable. I think you'll get it this year.

I am not sure what to believe... CR3 or not they are all rumors after all.
I had hoped for an announcement before CP+ but I guess I can just wait

 

[EricN]

I am not sure what to believe... CR3 or not they are all rumors after all.
I had hoped for an announcement before CP+ but I guess I can just wait

Mirrorless 11:3

By faith we understand that the RF 35mm f/1.2 was created by the word of Canon

Apologies to anyone who's offended.

 

[davision]

This could be easily fixed if Canon would just implement focus breathing compensation like Sony did.

They already have that feature, didn't you know?! But I want a Lens that I can also use for RAW Video about any Digital Fixing Nonsense in a 3000€+ Lens.

 

[roby17269]

Mirrorless 11:3

By faith we understand that the RF 35mm f/1.2 was created by the word of Canon

Apologies to anyone who's offended.

No offense here.... but unless I can shoot with "faith", I still want a real 35mm fast L 1.2 prime

 

[EricN]

They already have that feature, didn't you know?! But I want a Lens that I can also use for RAW Video about any Digital Fixing Nonsense in a 3000€+ Lens.

You can get such a lens, but wouldn't it usually be a manual cinema lens with a smaller image circle than full frame?

 

[EOS 4 Life]

They already have that feature, didn't you know?! But I want a Lens that I can also use for RAW Video about any Digital Fixing Nonsense in a 3000€+ Lens.

RED cameras definitely do not have that feature.
If Canon wants RED owners to buy RF lenses then they should be optically corrected.

 

[David - Sydney]

That's your answer? You sound like a Canon fanboy. i'm not going to buy a 9 year old EF lens that needs an adapter everytime i want to use it. EF is now an obsolete system!

Good luck finding a wide angle tilt-shift lens or a 8-15/4 (14 years old) less than 9 years old without an adapter. The other "recent" TS-E lenses are already 7 years old.
EF lenses still fill the "middle" segment for pricing and clearly fill niches that aren't available in RF (or E or Z mounts).
If you don't like adapters then buy one per EF lens and never remove it. There is no technological or other reason to dislike them.
Lenses can be discontinued for manufacture at any time but that doesn't make them obsolete
Obsolete is different from backward compatible.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Obsolete is different from backward compatible.

^^This.

I find using the adapter a slight hassle, but not a big one. I have replaced most of my EF lenses with the RF versions, but of course there are no RF versions of my TS-E 17 and 24, as you mentioned.

 

[Pete Roberts]

Good luck finding a wide angle tilt-shift lens or a 8-15/4 (14 years old) less than 9 years old without an adapter. The other "recent" TS-E lenses are already 7 years old.
EF lenses still fill the "middle" segment for pricing and clearly fill niches that aren't available in RF (or E or Z mounts).
If you don't like adapters then buy one per EF lens and never remove it. There is no technological or other reason to dislike them.
Lenses can be discontinued for manufacture at any time but that doesn't make them obsolete
Obsolete is different from backward compatible.

these kinds of lenses are specialty lenses, not used by your average canon R shooter. The 35mm on the other hand, is probably one of THE most used focal lengths ever and 5 years later we still don't have an RF version. But hey let's have a Mark II of the 28-70 f2! Ridiculous!

 

[neuroanatomist]

these kinds of lenses are specialty lenses, not used by your average canon R shooter. The 35mm on the other hand, is probably one of THE most used focal lengths ever…

Perhaps it’s your most-used focal length. Canon doesn’t really care about that. They care about what focal lengths are THE most purchased. For some reason, Canon prioritized 50mm, 85mm and 135mm fast L primes over a 35mm. Hint: that reason is probably that they have decades of sales data (but I will acknowledge the slim possibility it’s just because they don’t like @roby17269). They have released 35mm and 24mm non-L primes.

The reality is that fast primes are niche lenses now, too. Zooms are generally far more popular, and Canon already offers 6 L-series zooms covering 35mm.

 

[EricN]

Perhaps it’s your most-used focal length. Canon doesn’t really care about that. They care about what focal lengths are THE most purchased. For some reason, Canon prioritized 50mm, 85mm and 135mm fast L primes over a 35mm. Hint: that reason is probably that they have decades of sales data (but I will acknowledge the slim possibility it’s just because they don’t like @roby17269). They have released 35mm and 24mm non-L primes.

The reality is that fast primes are niche lenses now, too. Zooms are generally far more popular, and Canon already offers 6 L-series zooms covering 35mm.

I agree with you, it's foolish to think Canon is going to shoot themselves in the foot regarding what will bring in the most profits. However, I am sure they hate @roby17269

 

[Quack]

Can someone explain to me why Canon hasn't released a 35mm L lens yet? What is the hold up? it's ridiculous. I don't really need it myself but if they're going to start coming out with Mark II L lenses like the 28-70 f2 (and therefore tanking the resale value of the Mark I) before a 35mm L and 24mm L etc then my faith in Canon and the direction they're going will be gone.

1. Canon believes or knows that sale numbers will be small...or
2. Canon knows that photographers interested in a 35mm L lens already own it in the EF version and are not likely to replace it, because most photographers are happy with what gets the job done and will not needlessly spend money on something just because it is "new and shiny."

Unlike many forum participants who somehow have an aversion to EF lenses for their R series cameras, Canon understands that EF and EF-S lenses are part of the lens lineup for R series cameras, therefore there is no particular reason to rush and produce RF lenses that they have determined will sell the least, or have the least impact on their ability to market the system.

 

[roby17269]

I agree with you, it's foolish to think Canon is going to shoot themselves in the foot regarding what will bring in the most profits. However, I am sure they hate @roby17269

what's not to like about me?!? I'm a lovable guy
I've spent so much money with Canon.... (yes yes I know that in the grand scheme of things, I do not matter to Canon.... but they matter to me)
You and @neuroanatomist are just meanies

 

[roby17269]

1. Canon believes or knows that sale numbers will be small...or
2. Canon knows that photographers interested in a 35mm L lens already own it in the EF version and are not likely to replace it, because most photographers are happy with what gets the job done and will not needlessly spend money on something just because it is "new and shiny."

Unlike many forum participants who somehow have an aversion to EF lenses for their R series cameras, Canon understands that EF and EF-S lenses are part of the lens lineup for R series cameras, therefore there is no particular reason to rush and produce RF lenses that they have determined will sell the least, or have the least impact on their ability to market the system.

How would #2 benefit Canon? They are in the business of selling lenses (and cameras and other stuff). If someone buys a lens and then never upgrades that is not good for Canon.
Do you think that most people getting EF lenses are buying them new? Otherwise people sticking to EF lenses or buying them second hand are not bringing Canon much revenues.

They have to introduce new lenses to induce people to upgrade (at least for people moving from EF to RF).
Now it is entirely possible that a fast 35L was de-prioritized compared to 50, 85 and 135 because the EF equivalent 35 1.4L II was more recent than the EF equivalents of the other 3.
But still, 35mm is a classic focal length and one of the most represented in all systems.

In any case, it doesn't matter to Canon that I want it badly. I still want it though

 

[EricN]

what's not to like about me?!? I'm a lovable guy
I've spent so much money with Canon....
You and @neuroanatomist are just meanies

Aww I'm just kidding you. It's not my first desire, but I want that f/1.2 goodness too!

 

[EricN]

How would #2 benefit Canon? They are in the business of selling lenses (and cameras and other stuff). If someone buys a lens and then never upgrades that is not good for Canon.
Do you think that most people getting EF lenses are buying them new? Otherwise people sticking to EF lenses or buying them second hand are not bringing Canon much revenues.

They have to introduce new lenses to induce people to upgrade (at least for people moving from EF to RF).
Now it is entirely possible that a fast 35L was de-prioritized compared to 50, 85 and 135 because the EF equivalent 35 1.4L II was more recent than the EF equivalents of the other 3.
But still, 35mm is a classic focal length and one of the most represented in all systems.

In any case, it doesn't matter to Canon that I want it badly. I still want it though

I feel certain a lawyer would yell, "Objection! #2 was speculation!" for two reasons.

I have difficulty thinking nobody has bought an R mount camera without already owning an EF camera.

Yes, if I need the best quality 35mm prime, then I'm going to choose the EF f/1.4. However, I think we are all aware some people will not make that choice.

 

[koenkooi]

[…]
I have difficulty thinking nobody has bought an R mount camera without already owning an EF camera. […]

I bet a large part of the people buying the R10/R50/R100 models don’t have an EF camera. Maybe an EF-M, but not an EF camera.

And don’t forget all the switchers!

 

[AlanF]

what's not to like about me?!? I'm a lovable guy
I've spent so much money with Canon.... (yes yes I know that in the grand scheme of things, I do not matter to Canon.... but they matter to me)
You and @neuroanatomist are just meanies "

"Never give a sucker an even break" (Canon, advised by W.C. Fields).