Canon working on another f/2 zoom lens for the RF mount [CR1]

[SecureGSM]

You do realize any 200mm f/2 lens must have a front element at least 100mm in diameter? That the smallest 200mm f/2 lens Canon has ever released is the 5.5 pound EF 200mm f/2 L IS?

It was a joke Michael, it ain't gonna happen anytime soon. i replied in response to someone posted that 24-135 f2.0 lens would never leave the body for an event shooter. I suggested that 135mm is too short at the longer end. not enough of reach. hence me posting that 200mm would suffice but not physically viable for the reason you have just mentioned. ther lens would be huge, likely the size of 200-400 / F4.

 

[Del Paso]

If you can’t figure it out on your own then me explaining it to you still won’t change the fact that you are not capable of understanding. But don’t freak out I’m sure your winning personality is all you need to succeed at life.

Is this your way to argue?
Sad, really sad...

 

[Phil]

Is this your way to argue?
Sad, really sad...

Oh I wasn’t arguing because when you are correct there is nothing to argue. But unfortunately It doesn’t stop the ignorant and dim witted from trying to argue with you. Speaking of ignorant and dim witted good to see you trying to participate in the forum. If you work on your photography knowledge and skills you might have something worthwhile to contribute one day.
“A” for effort!

 

[Kit.]

when you are correct there is nothing to argue.

That's incorrect.

 

[flip314]

It was a joke Michael, it ain't gonna happen anytime soon. i replied in response to someone posted that 24-135 f2.0 lens would never leave the body for an event shooter. I suggested that 135mm is too short at the longer end. not enough of reach. hence me posting that 200mm would suffice but not physically viable for the reason you have just mentioned. ther lens would be huge, likely the size of 200-400 / F4.

The 1200mm f5.6 is way overdue for a refresh, f2 would be nice on that lens as well.

 

[Ozarker]

Don’t misunderstand me, I do like my EOS R, vertical grip, RF 24-105, RF 50mm 1.2 and RF 85mm 1.2, also I have used the 28-70 but found it just a tad to big so I got the 24-105 instead, sorry but by the way you were talking just just assumed you didn’t own any of those products so I didn’t think you would understand any points I might try and make about them. So sorry about that, how do you find your Eos R and RF lenses? You don’t find the body to small to comfortably hold it for any length of time with the heavy lenses? You don’t think when Canon releases a larger more sturdy pro body it will be a lot more comfortable to hold with the big glass?
Do you find the 30 megapixel sensor is getting all the quality out of the new L glass that they can produce? Do you not think a higher megapixel body might be able to show the full potential of these extremely high quality and extremely expensive new L lenses better than the EOS R? I mean if you don’t find this to be your experience with the new R system that’s fair it’s just the the people I know with the same gear all feel the same way and that is when a new higher megapixel professional body comes out then they will be able to get the full potential out of their RF Pro Glass which they and I spent so much money on.

Actually, I find my R to be just fine. The kit 24-105mm f/4L is good too. Thanks for asking. However, for what I do (portraits and fashion), I'd prefer something faster. The biggest glass I have is 70-200. I won't be buying the grip. I have had a 400mm. Anything larger than that in the "big" stuff category would be on a gimble for me, if I had it.

However, you were not talking about that. There is no "big" glass in RF yet. My response was to your statement that the R nor RP are not up snuff for RF lenses. The fact is, they are for many of us. Yes, even the f/1.2 lenses and the f/2. On the other hand, plenty of 7D Mark II (Not a big camera. Smaller than the 5D and 6D series) owners don't seem to have a problem with super-tele lenses on them. Some prefer APS-C for their birding. Putting a grip on the R isn't a problem. Using a gimble on a 600mm or 800mm L wouldn't be a problem.

So please educate me, otherwise, knock it off with the superiority complex.

 

[Del Paso]

Oh I wasn’t arguing because when you are correct there is nothing to argue. But unfortunately It doesn’t stop the ignorant and dim witted from trying to argue with you. Speaking of ignorant and dim witted good to see you trying to participate in the forum. If you work on your photography knowledge and skills you might have something worthwhile to contribute one day.
“A” for effort!

I humbly apologize if I unintentionally hurt the feelings of a universally acclaimed photographer.

 

[YuengLinger]

Some very reasonable people see the R as an overpriced 6D II. Some see the same body as a bargain 5DIV.

Can't we all just get along?

 

[SecureGSM]

The 1200mm f5.6 is way overdue for a refresh, f2 would be nice on that lens as well.

hit the gym, man.. hit the gym...

 

[uri.raz]

1 You want buy lense what is totally useful 10 year later too. There could be 100mp crop sensor 10 year later and smaller than f2 may be diffraction afffected. but yeah i was wrong on that thing speed boosters will solve that problem.

Because everybody and their sister will be buying 100MP crop sensors, *and* will want to squeeze every last pixel out of it. Yeah, sure.

its too expensive or it just too slow for most peoples with nowadays computers.Or too bad DR. And it doesn't sound good idea add one more format when got rid APS-H

1. It shoots nearly 10fps, sufficient for a large enough number of photographers.

2. There are photographers shooting with a Hasselblad H6D-400c, which has higher resolution.

3. I don't see any reason Canon couldn't scale the sensor to 80MP APS-C.

4. Canon uploaded photos and video taken with this sensor, DR looks good.

So at this point it sounds like you're throwing excuses, hoping one of them would stick.

 

[Pape]

Because everybody and their sister will be buying 100MP crop sensors, *and* will want to squeeze every last pixel out of it. Yeah, sure.



1. It shoots nearly 10fps, sufficient for a large enough number of photographers.

2. There are photographers shooting with a Hasselblad H6D-400c, which has higher resolution.

3. I don't see any reason Canon couldn't scale the sensor to 80MP APS-C.

4. Canon uploaded photos and video taken with this sensor, DR looks good.

So at this point it sounds like you're throwing excuses, hoping one of them would stick.

OK we see 120mpixel RS on spring then , they really need it .
Canon isnt competing with sony, Canon is competing with samsung and apple.
If performance cap is big enough between phones and RS some peoples may come back as camera users.
Now most of peoples wont see difference on mobile phone pic and full frame pic. but with police serie magniifying effect 120mpix gives ,many may want real camera.