The only reason why I really want to see f/2 holy trinity is hope that it will somehow push down prices of f/2.8 holy trinity.
Upvote
0
Canon working on another f/2 zoom lens for the RF mount [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Not unless one goes crop... especially Micro 4/3. Anyway, these are fast "L" lenses and for full frame. Nobody buys "L" for light weight. Bodies are lighter. Lenses, nope.
Upvote
0
I have to frequently haul around the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II. You're right, it is heavy. However, I would still be happy to carry around an f/2. I think it won't be 70-200mm though. Probably 70-120, 70-130, 70-150. Something shorter.
Upvote
0
I didn't consider the diffraction part, but I doubt 100MP cameras will be mainstream in a decade. If there's one thing I never heard about the 5Ds is that it is a popular model.
I think its the other side of the equation - there aren't enough people who would buy a camera with that high a resolution.
The sensor can shoot 9.4 fps, oh so very slow.
People keep saying they want high resolution for reach, e.g. birds, I don't think they'll object to smaller sensors.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
By whom? Shorter when retracted because it is not internally zooming. I never saw anyone from Canon saying it would be tiny compared to the EF 70-200 f/2.8L II, III.
Upvote
0
Lucky ones who are always on right place with camera and dont need better reach =better resolution 
I want that teleportation gift too!
Well i guess studio photographers wont need better resolution ,their models come as close as wanted to come
90% peoples would buy higher resolution camera if price is near enough low resolution camera.
I want that teleportation gift too!
Well i guess studio photographers wont need better resolution ,their models come as close as wanted to come
90% peoples would buy higher resolution camera if price is near enough low resolution camera.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
If Sigma can do 24-35 f2 on EF years ago....I think Canon could certainly do a 20-35 or similar on the RF after doing a great job on the 28-70 f2.
Upvote
0
It’s all about marketing I think, it makes the system seem impressive but the reality is the R body needs a vertical grip just so you can hold these big lens steady for any length of time. Making the body bigger again and in truth the R isn’t high enough in quality to match these lenses anyway. The new L lenses are sharp but are absolutely massive and expensive making them not practical for 90% of Canon users out there. The 2.8 trinity should be great and not to big and when some nice 1.4 or 1.8 primes come out like the 35 then Canon will have a nice system that’s actually practical. And the pro body needs to be release now!
Upvote
0
that's a pretty good memory that patent application was found so long ago I had trouble finding it. it was actually one of the first full frame mirrorless patent applications we discovered.
https://www.canonnews.com/canon-patent-application-canon-applies-for-a-mirrorless-full-frame-20-zoom
basically 90-130mm or 70-125mm 2.0
Upvote
0
I agree with most of your comments, but so much depends on what one is doing.
For example, in astrophotography, fast is of paramount importance, but when hiking anything more than a F4 (or 5.6) is a brick. Primes are way better than zooms, until you get yourself into a weight or space limited situation. Superzooms suck until you get somewhere you can’t change lenses....
Give it a few years and we will see a fuller lens lineup, fast primes, slow zooms, and lots in the middle. At the moment we should all be happy that Canon went to great lengths to make sure that the entire EF and EF-s collection can be used on the R series with no extra elements.
Upvote
0
24-240.....
Look for some slow (and light) lenses once the system gets more mature.....
Upvote
0
If the heavy bulky RF lenses are going to be used as studio lenses maybe the point is that the R is a pretty good fit. In a studio setting, focus accuracy and sensor quality may be important, but things like fps and focus tracking, not so much.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
