Canon RF lens size comparison when mounted to the Canon EOS R body

[Sharlin]

That's fine - but some form of stabilization is warranted here - if not in the lens, then perhaps in the body?

Somehow for decades people have managed fine without stabilization on their frigging f/2 lenses. Believe or not, people even make big money with lenses like the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 without a stabilizer!

 

[memoriaphoto]

If the 28-70 F2 is under $2000, I would order one right away.

Try 3500-ish

 

[3kramd5]

1. 
   

2. One thing I don't understand about these lenses - you can clearly see a metal material protruding from the end of the lens, and so it doesn't quite fit flush into the camera (unlike the EF mount comparison in the image to the far left) - why is this the case? Is it simply design related, or is this perhaps the sign that another camera will arrive with full EF/RF native compatibility?

   It certainly sits flush; it wouldn’t work otherwise. I think it’s just an aesthetic choice, good or bad. Perhaps it serves as a “you’re holding this type of lens” reminder.

 

[MrAndre]

Canon 24-70 2.8 II doesn't have IS and it's a stable in most wedding photographer lens arsenal including me. How did all these wedding photographers including me survive before IS?

No other camera manufacture have created something ground breaking in this zoom range as 28-70 F2. Not Nikon, Sigma, Zeiss, Sony, Tamron, Batis etc.

28-70 is already 3lb and some already complain about the weight which is similiar to Sigma 105 1.4 Art/70-200 2.8 II IS. They would have added an extra 4mm and make 24-70 F2 IS if it's an easy engineering feat.

Engineers have to make compromises on cost, size, weight, and optic performance and under marketing team decision.

I am not saying that this is not an extraordinary lens. It would just be even greater with IS. And since we all were hoping for IBIS, this superb lens is where the lack of it hurts me the most.

 

[bokehmon22]

I am not saying that this is not an extraordinary lens. It would just be even greater with IS. And since we all were hoping for IBIS, this superb lens is where the lack of it hurts me the most.

I think they could have add IS if it's the engineer decision and size and marketing is not a factor. Due to the size and weight, they aren't sure if it's going to profitable. If it is successful, I can see them adding IS to it in the future. Since memoriaphoto suggests $3500 for non-IS 28-70, IS would add more to that. How many wedding photographers nowadays charge that much for a wedding and even have the money to spend? Some are switching to Sony A7III because it only costs $2000.

Try 3500-ish

I wouldn't be surprised. It's a first in its class just like 11-24 F4. Hopefully it's closer to $3000 and used price is even cheaper.

 

[PerKr]

1. 
   
2. 
   It certainly sits flush; it wouldn’t work otherwise. I think it’s just an aesthetic choice, good or bad. Perhaps it serves as a “you’re holding this type of lens” reminder.

This. The lenses are close enough in design to the EF lenses that it would be a bit too easy to mistake one for the other. Having the grey section makes it a bit more obvious. Also, it's a way of standing out somewhat, just like that stripe tamron decided to add on their lenses

 

[LDS]

One thing I don't understand about these lenses - you can clearly see a metal material protruding from the end of the lens, and so it doesn't quite fit flush into the camera (unlike the EF mount comparison in the image to the far left)

I wonder if the 50/1.2 and 28-70/2 optical schemas can be adapted for EF mount lenses.

 

[eyeheartny]

Gotta say, I'm leaning toward springing for the 28-70, the 50, and the 35 and being all set for a long while.

 

[peterzuehlke]

You go designing a unique groundbreaking lens and also somehow fitting an IS group somewhere there, as if this one wasn't difficult enough to design as is, most likely! It's not like IS is just some sort of a checkbox you toggle in the CAD software...

it's a box that is already checked off in the 28 2.8 IS, 35 f/2 IS and 85 1.4 IS, so one has to consider carrying one 3lb zoom vs two or two-and-a-half , probably better primes. And zooms are great for video vs primes but at 70mm, shooting video with no IS is problematic. Guessing Canon will come out with IBIS on a higher end model soon, to compete with Nikon and Sony.

 

[jjesp]

The 35mm f/1.8 looks promising. Wonder how much different it will be in IQ to the Nikon 35mm. The Nikon is way to big for a 35mm I think....

 

[eyeheartny]

The 35mm f/1.8 looks promising. Wonder how much different it will be in IQ to the Nikon 35mm. The Nikon is way to big for a 35mm I think....

The IQ on the Nikon 35 looks outstanding-- I saw some test shots on a Z7 that were jaw-dropping.