Canon RF-S 11-22mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM coming first half of 2023

[Canon Rumors Guy]

Canon will likely release at least three RF-S lenses in 2023, a couple of them will likely be based on their EF-M counterparts. One of the lenses we’re told that will launch in the first half of 2023 is an RF-S 11-22mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM. The EF-M version was a favourite of EOS M shooters

See full article...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Excellent. The M11-22 and M18-150 make a great pair, will be good to have both in RF-S versions.

 

[Bob Howland]

Excellent. The M11-22 and M18-150 make a great pair, will be good to have both in RF-S versions.

Add the RF100-400 zoom and an R7.

 

[hunck]

Can you use this on a R5 or R5C in cropped movie mode?

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Can you use this on a R5 or R5C in cropped movie mode?

Yep

 

[entoman]

Hopefully plenty more to come in RF and RF-S.

Any minute now, we'll see wish lists appearing...

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Looks like a port of the EF-M 11-22, which is a fine lens. I'm glad to see Canon starting to fill out the RF-S line.

 

[vondo]

Hopefully plenty more to come in RF and RF-S.

Any minute now, we'll see wish lists appearing...

Mine: 60mm macro. Then I can consider the R10 for underwater use.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

Argh, Canon. Please give us an APS-C wideangle-zoom going down to 10mm - or even better down to 9mm...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Add the RF100-400 zoom and an R7.

Personally, I’m hoping the rumored ‘R8’ is an M6II-like smaller body. If so, I’d get that and the 11-22 / 18-150 as a travel set since unlike the M6II it could serve as a backup for my R3.

Perhaps the RF-S 11-22 will be announced alongside the R8, if the latter is a vlogging camera it needs an ultrawide.

I am considering the RF 100-400 for travel, to urban destinations where a longer focal length may occasionally be useful but not sufficiently to justify bringing the 100-500L.

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Hopefully plenty more to come in RF and RF-S.

Any minute now, we'll see wish lists appearing...

I'm eager to see that 16-55 constant f/2.8 that CR reported on shortly after the R7/R10 announcement.
Plus: Let the independents make RF and RF-S lenses!

 

[Maximilian]

Wonderful to see a much liked optical formula to reaper in RF-S version.

 

[Maximilian]

I'm eager to see that 16-55 constant f/2.8 ...

I'm really hoping for all APS-C fans for such a lens to come.
Honestly, I wouldn't even bet a penny on that. I hope I'm wrong

 

[Swerky]

RF-S 11-22 f4.5-5.6? The EF-M lens goes from f4 to 5.6, and the EF-S lens is a 10-18 f4.5-5.6. So if the info is correct, the coming RF-S lens is a bit slower than the former and less wide than the latter. I believe it should be a 4-5.6 like the EF-M lens.
Anyway I\'m not interested before seeing an 11mm f2.8 prime. Not likely to happen. Get a third party manual focus one.

 

[AlanF]

I am considering the RF 100-400 for travel, to urban destinations where a longer focal length may occasionally be useful but not sufficiently to justify bringing the 100-500L.

Also, you can walk around an urban environment with an RF 100-400 and not be so noticeable. Every R owner should have one!

 

[entoman]

I am considering the RF 100-400 for travel, to urban destinations where a longer focal length may occasionally be useful but not sufficiently to justify bringing the 100-500L.

Definitely a good idea. Lightweight, compact, close-focusing, excellent stabilisation, well built and sharp enough for most purposes even wide open at the long end. Great value too.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Also, you can walk around an urban environment with an RF 100-400 and not be so noticeable. Every R owner should have one!

I don’t mind being noticeable (the R3 sort of stands out anyway). I also don’t mind the extra weight for a lens that will be used often on a trip. But for urban European destinations, if I’m going to bring a heavy lens I’d choose the 11-24/4 over the 100-500L. With the RF 100-400, I’ll likely bring both (in addition to the RF 14-35, 24-105 and TS-E 17).

Definitely a good idea. Lightweight, compact, close-focusing, excellent stabilisation, well built and sharp enough for most purposes even wide open at the long end. Great value too.

Even better value right now, with the current rebate dropping the price by 23% to $500.

I just ordered one from B&H.

 

[mxwphoto]

I don’t mind being noticeable (the R3 sort of stands out anyway). I also don’t mind the extra weight for a lens that will be used often on a trip. But for urban European destinations, if I’m going to bring a heavy lens I’d choose the 11-24/4 over the 100-500L. With the RF 100-400, I’ll likely bring both (in addition to the RF 14-35, 24-105 and TS-E 17).


Even better value right now, with the current rebate dropping the price by 23% to $500.

I just ordered one from B&H.

The 11-24 rocks with the CPL adapter!

For the price weight and optics the RF 100-400 is unbeatable. I just came back from Yosemite and the sharpness wide open never made me left wanting (also hikes with it feel SO much easier!).
If there is one downside it is that the lens needs ISO cranked up once sunlight starts trailing off. I have also had focus hunting in complex tree shade scenarios while shooting birds, but that's on a R6. Perhaps your R3 would perform better in that regard.

 

[entoman]

For the price weight and optics the RF 100-400 is unbeatable. I just came back from Yosemite and the sharpness wide open never made me left wanting (also hikes with it feel SO much easier!).
If there is one downside it is that the lens needs ISO cranked up once sunlight starts trailing off. I have also had focus hunting in complex tree shade scenarios while shooting birds, but that's on a R6. Perhaps your R3 would perform better in that regard.

Yes, you do need to increase the ISO in low light due to the smallish maximum aperture (F8 at 400mm), but the excellent stabilisation allows you to shoot at quite low shutter speeds - I was getting about 10% of my butterfly shots very sharp at 1/60 @ 400mm when working in very poor light in dark rainforest a couple of weeks ago.

With the R5, and using Topaz DeNoise AI, I normally shoot in the ISO 800-1600 range, but even at ISO 6400, denoised shots are extremely acceptable when viewed on a 5K 27" screen. At that speed the cropped RAWs look pretty awful, but modern denoise software really works miracles.

 

[Chuck3819]

I work at a camera store and back in the DSLR days, the Sigma Art 18-35mm 1.8 was a very popular lens for Canon crop sensor/S35 Cinema camera users. I really wish Canon would fill that void with something like an RFS 18-45mm 1.8. It would be a must have for R7/R10/C70 users.