Canon to Announce Another “World’s First” at Some Point This Year

[neuroanatomist]

Wild guess: Canon starts with the 18-150 RF-S and 24-240 RF lenses, leaves the optical formula intact but changes the mechanical design to add zoom motors and jacks up the price by at least 50%.

How well do video shooters / content creators like zoom lenses that change aperture as you zoom?

A cheaper way would be an external power zoom adapter, like the one for the RF 24-105/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 Z. The reason that one is the PZ-E2 is because the -E1 was specifically for the EF-S 18-135mm lens.

 

[benperrin]

Everything else has IBIS? What about C50, C70, C400, C80, etc - a 24-70mm f2 would be the perfect cine zoom, but without IS is tough. Hope it has it.

Yep or the R5C which doesn't have IBIS. I would prefer a lens like this with IS.

 

[Bob Howland]

How well do video shooters / content creators like zoom lenses that change aperture as you zoom?

A cheaper way would be an external power zoom adapter, like the one for the RF 24-105/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 Z. The reason that one is the PZ-E2 is because the -E1 was specifically for the EF-S 18-135mm lens.

Then why put a zoom controller around the shutter release on the R50V, R6V and C50? I just zoomed the 18-150 manually from end to end on the R50V. The ISO changed first, the aperture next and the shutter speed last of all. The video appearance didn't change much at all.

Last Saturday, I was trying to keep Irish dancers centered and frame filling when they were moving between 10 and 50 feet away from me. I was using a 10-18mm zoom and zooming manually, badly. I had attempted the same thing, much more successfully, three years ago with an HF-G60 camcorder and LANC controller on a tripod.

 

[Skux]

23-71mm f/2.8

 

[neuroanatomist]

Then why put a zoom controller around the shutter release on the R50V, R6V and C50?

All three of those cameras came after the launch of the RF 24-105/2.8 Z and the RF 70-200/2.8 Z lenses. Add the PZ-E2 adapter to either of those lenses and the power zoom can be controlled by the zoom controller on the camera. Same for the new RF 20-50/4L PZ lens, which uses internal motors instead of an external accessory for power zooming.

The first two are not really the same market segment as the R50V, since the lenses are ~$3K and the power zoom adapter is another $1150 (or $1450 for the -B version that is compatible with other cinema accessories). The 20-50/4L is closer to that mark at $1400, but still likely too expensive for most R50V users.

But I do expect we'll see cheaper, non-L PZ lenses in the future. The EF-S 18-135 lens launched at $600, and the PZ-E1 adapter for power zooming was $150. The 80D that was announced alongside the 18-135 and PZ-E1 doesn't have a zoom control on the camera, but you can use the Canon smartphone app connected via Bluetooth to the camera to remotely control the power zoom of the lens.

I just zoomed the 18-150 manually from end to end on the R50V. The ISO changed first, the aperture next and the shutter speed last of all. The video appearance didn't change much at all.

That's good to know, thanks. I've read complaints about variable aperture zooms for video, but of course the G60 is f/2.8-4.5 and it doesn't seem to be a significant problem to me (which means little given my experience with shooting video).

...an HF-G60 camcorder and LANC controller on a tripod.

Thanks again for bringing the LANC controller to my attention previously, I used that exact setup last week and it is very convenient. I mentioned above that I'd likely get the C50 if I start shooting video with an ILC, and the fact that the C50 has a LANC port is one reason (the R6V does not).

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I hope for a 15mm TS-E. First RF tilt shift. I’m not even asking for autofocus (or shift if it makes it easier). It just needs to be sharp.

I'm guessing....highly likely. A RF TS-e is the only "new tech" that we've heard about on the rumour mill other than a funky 1/1.4/2x all in one teleconverter.
Maybe the worlds first TS-e lens that can auto focus is on the cards?

 

[Eloniel]

I'm guessing....highly likely. A RF TS-e is the only "new tech" that we've heard about on the rumour mill other than a funky 1/1.4/2x all in one teleconverter.
Maybe the worlds first TS-e lens that can auto focus is on the cards?

Or a variable multiplier macro lens with autofocus.

 

[Eric84]

"Worlds first" Maybe a full frame zoom with aperture below f2 then
If its not the rumored 24-70mm, then maybe a 35-85mm f1.8L

 

[candyman]

When I think of a "World's First", I immediately think of a zoom: the TS-R 14-24mm f/3.5 with AF. But that is probably very optimistic.
This lens would really stand out.

 

[Kiton]

.....We don't think Canon is going to make some pointless prime like an RF 85mm f/1L. Sure, it'd be the only one out there, but that's just chasing numbers and serves no real purpose........

I bought a 85 1.2 and returned it after a week! Nice glass but just too big, heavy and awkward.
I ordered the 1.4 version instead.

a 50-150 AND a 100-400 like Sony's would be great

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Or a variable multiplier macro lens with autofocus.

Yes we'd all love to see a MP-e 65mm or a EF 180mm macro replacement. Even a zoom version that you've mentioned or alluded too would be interesting. However, hardly new / revoluotionary / never seen before type of product.

 

[Eloniel]

Yes we'd all love to see a MP-e 65mm or a EF 180mm macro replacement. Even a zoom version that you've mentioned or alluded too would be interesting. However, hardly new / revoluotionary / never seen before type of product.

A MP-e 65mm replacement with autofocus would be a world premiere...
I can't imagine buying a manual focus macro lense in 2026-2027.

 

[AJ]

maybe Canon finally has some epic RF-S lenses in the pipeline

Haha! Thanks for the laugh. That's pretty funny.

 

[Steve_FR]

How well do video shooters / content creators like zoom lenses that change aperture as you zoom?

I’m a video shooter (but not content creator) I prefer a constant aperture for video…so generally I find myself using the smaller end of the aperture on the long end.. and thus getting the short end of the stick when varying zoom - to keep exposure from changing during zooming.

 

[Steve_FR]

Yep or the R5C which doesn't have IBIS. I would prefer a lens like this with IS.

Perhaps a “world’s first” could be an f/2 zoom with OIS - correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe anyone has done an f/2 with optical IS yet? So maybe something like 24-70mm f/2.0L IS. That adds some weight gain, though.

 

[Rceres]

.....We don't think Canon is going to make some pointless prime like an RF 85mm f/1L. Sure, it'd be the only one out there, but that's just chasing numbers and serves no real purpose........

I bought a 85 1.2 and returned it after a week! Nice glass but just too big, heavy and awkward.
I ordered the 1.4 version instead.

a 50-150 AND a 100-400 like Sony's would be great

I can understand preferring the RF 85mm f/1.4L VCM if the RF 85mm f/1.2L feels too big, heavy, or awkward. That would make sense.
But I don’t quite follow the jump from “the RF 85mm f/1.2L is too big” to “a 50-150mm f/2 or 100-400mm zoom would be great.” The RF 85mm f/1.2L is about 103 mm wide, 117 mm long, and 1195 g. The Sony 50-150mm f/2 GM and 100-400mm GM are similar in diameter, roughly twice as long, and heavier. Those are not exactly small, discreet, easy-handling lenses either.
To me, the more interesting question is what Canon could do with a redesigned stills-first RF 85mm f/1.2L II. The current lens is optically legendary, but compared with newer RF designs it feels bulky. The RF 135mm f/1.8L shows how good Canon can be when optical performance, autofocus confidence, and handling all come together.
Imagine a new RF 85mm f/1.2L II with a slimmer barrel, a more modern internal focusing design, faster AF, the same or better rendering, and maybe even IS. Canon’s recent lenses suggest there is still room to improve both handling and usability without giving up what made the original special.
I get that zooms are popular, and Canon should absolutely keep building them. But some of us are still waiting (and hoping!)for Canon’s next generation of stills-first halo primes.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

a 50-150 AND a 100-400 like Sony's would be great

I really don't get why so many people want Canon to copy Sony. Don´t get me wrong, some of their newer offerings are great, but yet there is a lot of potential to do things differently. Furthermore, looking at Canons line-up some lenses just don't need copying.

As for the 50-150mm, there are a lot of people, me included, who are hoping for a 70-xxx which is a lot lighter. Sonys lens weighs 1.34 kg which depending on your use case is just too heavy. For sports photographers, the weight is nothing and the zoom range super useful. Wedding photographers can work the weight, too. But for street, portrait, family events, indoor plays it is too big and heavy imo. I'd much rather have a sub 1kg zoom and therefore other specs than Sonys lens. The biggest problem with the 28-70mm F2 is... bulk and weight... just like for with the 85mm F1.2. So, design them differently.

Sonys 100-400mm honestly comes at a weird time. 10 years ago it would have been the killer lens because most lenses in that area were 100-400mm but now there are so many offerings across camera manufacturers with more intriguing options. Of course, 100-400mm perfectly accompanies the 400-800mm, but 150-600mm or 100-500mm is just much more useful. Even though they are not internal zooming lenses. So again, no need to copy.

I do agree though that it would be nice if Canon started offering big whites somewhere between the 200-800mm and the filthy expensive big whites, but hopefully with a more useful and more intriguing focal range.

 

[Kiton]

I can understand preferring the RF 85mm f/1.4L VCM if the RF 85mm f/1.2L feels too big, heavy, or awkward. That would make sense.
But I don’t quite follow the jump from “the RF 85mm f/1.2L is too big” to “a 50-150mm f/2 or 100-400mm zoom would be great.” The RF 85mm f/1.2L is about 103 mm wide, 117 mm long, and 1195 g. The Sony 50-150mm f/2 GM and 100-400mm GM are similar in diameter, roughly twice as long, and heavier. Those are not exactly small, discreet, easy-handling lenses either.
To me, the more interesting question is what Canon could do with a redesigned stills-first RF 85mm f/1.2L II. The current lens is optically legendary, but compared with newer RF designs it feels bulky. The RF 135mm f/1.8L shows how good Canon can be when optical performance, autofocus confidence, and handling all come together.
Imagine a new RF 85mm f/1.2L II with a slimmer barrel, a more modern internal focusing design, faster AF, the same or better rendering, and maybe even IS. Canon’s recent lenses suggest there is still room to improve both handling and usability without giving up what made the original special.
I get that zooms are popular, and Canon should absolutely keep building them. But some of us are still waiting (and hoping!)for Canon’s next generation of stills-first halo primes.

Two totally different beast for different assignments in my books.
I would never take a 50-150 to cover a parade or a protest, but I would take it to tennis, or a hockey game.
The 100-400 would be good at MLS soccer and CFL football games.

The 85 1.4 will come almost everywhere with me. I could have used one last night on assignment in a small dimly lit Italian restaurant. I used the 50 1.2, but the 85 would have been nicer. Ironically, I use to say I would never own the 50 1.2 because I really disliked the EF version, but there was no RF 50 1.4 so I got the 1.2 and now I love it.

I do wish for a 28 f2 that would fit in a pocket, but I know it is never coming from Canon, maybe sigma one day .

 

[Bob Howland]

I’m a video shooter (but not content creator) I prefer a constant aperture for video…so generally I find myself using the smaller end of the aperture on the long end.. and thus getting the short end of the stick when varying zoom - to keep exposure from changing during zooming

Are you letting the camera determine the exposure when you zoom or are you maintaining the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture? When shooting wide angle in my living room, the automatic exposure is dominated by the room lights and white walls and ceiling. When I zoom in on a bunch of black lenses, the camera changes the exposure because what it thinks is 18% gray differs between the two scenes. The lenses in the wide angle shot are darker than in the close up shot. It has nothing to do with the fact that the lens has different apertures at different focal length because the camera tells the lens what aperture to use. This is different than in the dark ages of the 1970s when the user told the camera the film ISO (then known as ASA) and manually set the aperture and shutter speed. I do not miss those days!

My guess is that professionals in big budget productions manually set the ISO, shutter speed and aperture after manually measuring the light level and determining the contrast of the scene.