Delays seem to be the name of the game for 2021

[Aaron D]

It's all moot until I get some assignments, but I'd like to update my TSE lenses. The rumored auto-focus TSR's make me anxious, though. I do't want to pay huge amounts for a feature that will be useless for architectural. So the RF 14-35 f/4 L might wok well in place of my 17mm TSE. I'll have to wait and see.

What happened to the rumored TS zoom lenses? That could be terrific! A 24-50mm TSR: no auto-focus, no IS, no bluetooth or wi-fi, doesn't have to be f/1.2.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

The more I think about about the 18-45mm F4-5.6 lense the less sense this lense makes to me.

If it indeed is for an APS-C RF body:
- why would Canon go from 18-55mm down to 45mm? 55mm is barely enough to be happy with this lense...
- why not make an RF version of the EF-S 18-135mm F3.5-5.6? This would make much more sense imho.
- if this lense is for an APS-C RF body it practically means that it won't be an R7 because 7d shooters would never put on the 18-55 kit-lenses...

If it is a full frame lense:
- Wouldn't this lense be money down the drain? For an wide-angel it isn't wide enough and a zoom lense there are far better options such as the 24-105mm F4-7.1. Even as a replacement for the 17-40mm ist just doesn't seem right when an 14-35mm is underway... especially considering that the EF 16-35mm F4 replaced the 17-40mm in the first place...

It really bugs me that I can't figure it out. But knowing Canon, they will put it to good use such as the 600mm F11 and 800mm F11 which many folks didn't see any use in.

I am just hoping for the 14-35mm F4 at the moment. So hopefully, it'll get some mentions and at least a development announcement.

 

[Aaron D]

I'm not sure that I understand the niche for the 100-400 rumour unless it's either very compact, reasonably cheap, or very very sharp. I always felt (right or wrong) that the 100-500 was a spiritual successor to the EF 100-400 so duplicating the lens on RF seems like an unexpected choice. I'm definitely curious to learn more about where it fits in to the lineup.

Smaller and less expensive would be great reason for such a lens, certainly worthwhile if so. That range might be a replacement for my EF 70-200 f/4. Though by that time I might have the RF one and won't need a 100-400.....

 

[Exploreshootshare]

I'm not sure that I understand the niche for the 100-400 rumour unless it's either very compact, reasonably cheap, or very very sharp. I always felt (right or wrong) that the 100-500 was a spiritual successor to the EF 100-400 so duplicating the lens on RF seems like an unexpected choice. I'm definitely curious to learn more about where it fits in to the lineup.

As I understand the rumor, it will be the successor for the 70-300mm lense. Cheap and affordable (compared to other RF lenses, not EF...) And just like Canon upped the range of EF 100-400mm L to RF 100-500mm they are doing the same here.

In my opinion it's a wise move because more range for "affordable, cheap" lenses might trigger some smartphone shooters to actually buy an RP and 100-400mm lense or something similar. You can't attract new customers or smartphone shooters with an 18-45mm or 18-55mm lense anymore because SP are just too good nowadays. Therefore, this lense makes sense to me.

 

[Dragon]

The RF 18-45 is an odd one. Could be an interesting lens for video shooters, especially when using the cropped 4k etc on the R/RP.

But for a wide angle stills lens it's a total non starter. It's not quite a 17-40 replacement, nor it is an affordable UWA option. They really need to hurry up with a good cheap wide angle for RF. Something like an EFS 10-18 type of deal. £2k+ for the RF 15-35 is not an option for most!

I am thinking it actually is a non-L replacement for the 17-40, which arguable didn't deserve the L moniker in the first place. Actually, 18-45 is a very useful range for a FF lens. Great for walkabout and street, particularly if it is small. It actually makes very little sense for a high performance APS-C body (i.e. 7D II replacement).

 

[Jasonmc89]

Hope they don’t announce the R7 just yet. I’ve just spent what I’d saved up on an RC car. . Yes, I’m a big kid, now leave me alone!

 

[Rumourhasit]

Can’t see the point in the RF100-400. Can anyone make a case for canon releasing this

 

[eosbob]

So, will they push back the release of the R1? Maybe that depends on the Olympics.

 

[Tangent]

My personal theory is both. It'll be like the 24-240 - where at the wide end of FF it vignettes heavily and relies on heavy software correction (which works well, to be sure). But will work very well on an APS-c body we have yet to see. In this way, they will be creating lower cost entry level FF lenses that are also bread-and-butter lenses on APS-c bodies. One mount then allows two sensor sizes.

-Brian

Sounds likely.

The RF 18-45mm f/4-5.6 IS STM would make a lot more sense if it's, say, $250. Maybe not a bad FF WA travel or hiking option. But afaik we don't have a price yet.

 

[dwarven]

Can’t see the point in the RF100-400. Can anyone make a case for canon releasing this

A cheap/light alternative to the 100-500. Cost and weight will always be limiting factors for a lot of people.

 

[Nigel95]

Been checking this site every day hoping to find some R7 rumors. Still using a SL2, which still does the job but I want an high end APS-C upgrade man..

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Can’t see the point in the RF100-400. Can anyone make a case for canon releasing this

Just scroll up it is the EF 70-300mm replacement with extra range

 

[unfocused]

Can’t see the point in the RF100-400. Can anyone make a case for canon releasing this

To make money.

 

[Bdbtoys]

I'm not sure that I understand the niche for the 100-400 rumour unless it's either very compact, reasonably cheap, or very very sharp. I always felt (right or wrong) that the 100-500 was a spiritual successor to the EF 100-400 so duplicating the lens on RF seems like an unexpected choice. I'm definitely curious to learn more about where it fits in to the lineup.

I would rather have tacked this on someone else's post but no one mentioned it yet. It's a non-L.

So it will definitely be cheaper/smaller/lighter for the masses (this was mentioned by others).

 

[slclick]

Why anyone would ever complain about the possibility of more choices is beyond me.

Oh, because you personally would not buy it so your selfish worldview should be imposed on the rest of us?

 

[Bdbtoys]

Why anyone would ever complain about the possibility of more choices is beyond me.

Oh, because you personally would not buy it so your selfish worldview should be imposed on the rest of us?

I'm not sure if I saw what anyone said as a complaint per se. 2 specifically mentioned the 100-400 but it was worded as they don't know what people would 'see' in it. And it could have been literally that... 'they' didn't see why and asked for input on it from others point of view.

 

[Andy Westwood]

Even the lack of current R bodies and RF lenses is unprecedented Wex the biggest retailer in the UK looks like it’s just got a supply of R bodies in today because I looked over the weekend and virtually all R bodies were on back order. RF Lens stocks at Wex are still exceptionally low with more than half the lenses again out of stock.

If you have this gear used for sale on eBay it’s making mad money, over the weekend a used RF 100 – 500 made full new retail price and only this evening I saw an RF 50 f/1.8 sell for £252 that’s £33 over full new retail price.

Last week I sold a spare EOS EF to R adaptor on eBay for £191 that is £92 over full new retail price apparently you just can’t get them in the retailers.

And all this when many pros like event and wedding photographers are sat at home doing nothing, we certainly are living in crazy times.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Even the lack of current R bodies and RF lenses is unprecedented Wex the biggest retailer in the UK looks like it’s just got a supply of R bodies in today because I looked over the weekend and virtually all R bodies were on back order. RF Lens stocks at Wex are still exceptionally low with more than half the lenses again out of stock.

If you have this gear used for sale on eBay it’s making mad money, over the weekend a used RF 100 – 500 made full new retail price and only this evening I saw an RF 50 f/1.8 sell for £252 that’s £33 over full new retail price.

Last week I sold a spare EOS EF to R adaptor on eBay for £191 that is £92 over full new retail price apparently you just can’t get them in the retailers.

And all this when many pros like event and wedding photographers are sat at home doing nothing, we certainly are living in crazy times.

This really does sound absolutely crazy. But is the shortage only related to Canons problems or also maybe to the difficulties with the Brexit? I live in Germany and RP/ R bodies seem to available at most photo stores (just checked several online). Even the R6/ R5 can be found at some places to my surprise.

The adapter still can't be bought separately, but it is available in RP/ R bundles. It's a shame it is not sold with R5´s... You only get one for free when you register your camera on CPS I think, but then the adapter is not available

 

[Fran Decatta]

Why I didn't hear about that 24mm? seems to be very desirable!

 

[amorse]

I'm not sure if I saw what anyone said as a complaint per se. 2 specifically mentioned the 100-400 but it was worded as they don't know what people would 'see' in it. And it could have been literally that... 'they' didn't see why and asked for input on it from others point of view.

I am definitely curious about how it fits in to the lineup, but I hope my curiosity isn't taken as a suggestion that it won't have a place or shouldn't be made. I think the innovation in the RF 70-200s (both the 4 and 2.8) are a pretty great examples of how they can take a well-known lens and add something new and really useful. This being really similar to a lens already on the market makes me wonder what they're going to do to separate the lenses, but in an excited way and not a judgemental way.

Obviously it's great to have more choices and if you're right in having it be a non-L cost-effective solution, then this lens will have a place in plenty of camera bags.