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

[CanonGrunt]

Canon should update the old FD 50-300 f/4.5 L. Add a wider aperture, fancy new lens elements, some autofocus. Make it the price of a kidney on the black market… lol. I’d be interested though.

 

[FH_1]

Screw the 24-70. RF Tilt shift please. Please please.

 

[riker]

Almost like they listened to our comments a few days ago
I would have liked a 28-85/2 more but hey, this is great news anyway.

I'm not an expert but I got the feeling IS is more effective than IBIS and I loved the original idea of IBIS+IS working together and providing the best result. I know officially IBIS provides 6-7-whatever stops but I'm skeptical.

Well, anyway, just make it as light as possible while maintaining IQ on a level which makes sense to use it on a 45MP body.

For second lens I don't want the 50-150/2, rather something more lightweight, like 105-135/2 or 120-150/2 with some macro capabilities. I don't need overlapping lenses, I don't even mind some gap.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

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.

The problem Canon had with the rf 135mm, is that the ef version was / is so strong. Sure the new lens is sharper, gains 1/3 stop in brightness and an image stabiliser. However, it’s larger and heavier. Plus is very expensive, you really have to want one to justify the rf version over the ef version. The EF version puts out really great images that are very similar to the rf version. For a lot of users who already have the ef version, there’s not a particularly strong enough reason to upgrade.

 

[Chig]

What about a 70-200mm f/1.8?
Awesome world's first and hopefully Canon can make it a bit lighter than the very similar spec RF 100-300mm f/2.8 and would be great to have a built in 1.4x extender for 98-280mm f/2.5

 

[Eloniel]

What about a 70-200mm f/1.8?
Awesome world's first and hopefully Canon can make it a bit lighter than the very similar spec RF 100-300mm f/2.8 and would be great to have a built in 1.4x extender for 98-280mm f/2.5

70-200 f2.0 would already be incredible.

If it accept extender (which I think it would not) it would be insane because it would compete against the 100-300 f2.8 which is very very expensive.

 

[riker]

In 1998 there was a EF28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM.
28-135 is the perfect zoom range, it's all you need 80-90% of the time. I'd love to see newer generations.

 

[scyrene]

28-135 is the perfect zoom range, it's all you need 80-90% of the time.

Speak for yourself

 

[Exploreshootshare]

What about a 70-200mm f/1.8?
Awesome world's first and hopefully Canon can make it a bit lighter than the very similar spec RF 100-300mm f/2.8 and would be great to have a built in 1.4x extender for 98-280mm f/2.5

I really don´t like the F1.8 as a max aperture. I always associate it with entry-level primes or zooms. In addition, I am a fan of apertures with full stops such as a f2-2.8 zoom. Worst in this regard is the RF 100-500mm with its 4.5-7.1. I´d really prefer a 4-5.6 or even F4-8

So, either make it 70-200mm F2 or a F1.4 please

Yeah, I am weird sometimes

 

[scyrene]

I really don´t like the F1.8 as a max aperture. I always associate it with entry-level primes or zooms.

What about the 200mm f/1.8L?

 

[Bob Howland]

What about the 200mm f/1.8L?

He did say 70-200 f/1.4 (or f/2) The front element would have to be the same size as a 400 f/2.8. I want a longer sibling to the 20-50 f/4 L IS Z, with the same design philosophy and at the same price, perhaps 35-85 f/2.8 L IS Z or 60-150 f/2.8 L IS Z.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I want a longer sibling to the 20-50 f/4 L IS Z, with the same design philosophy and at the same price, perhaps 35-85 f/2.8 L IS Z or 60-150 f/2.8 L IS Z.

I want world peace. I give that an equal chance. Maybe a bit better.

 

[Bob Howland]

I want world peace. I give that an equal chance. Maybe a bit better.

The only thing I can say with any certainty is what is likely to cause us to pull out my credit card and spend my money. Think of my wishes as a form of marketing input to Canon.