Here are some rumoured RF-S lenses that may be coming in the near future.

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
Canon Rumors Premium
Jul 20, 2010
11,092
3,543
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
With the reality that is RF-S lenses, Photo Rumors has posted a list of rumoured upcoming RF-S lenses. Some of them look like they could be using the optical formulas from a few EF-M lenses.
Using the optical designs of EF-M lenses will definitely help keep development costs and time required to bring the lenses to market much more managable than all-new designs.
As the supply chain issues begin to improve, I’d expect to see more RF-S lenses in 2022.
Rumored RF-S Lenses

Canon RF-S 11-55mm f/4-4.5 IS STM (18mm-88mm equivalent)
Canon RF-S 16-55mm f/2.8 IS USM (25mm-88mm equivalent)
Canon RF-S 22mm f/2 STM (35mm equivalent)
Canon RF-S 32mm f/1.4 STM (50mm equivalent)
Canon RF-S 55-250mm f/4.5-7.1 IS STM (88mm – 400mm equivalent)

We have not been able to independtly verify that these lenses are in fact on the horizon. Whenever we do, we’ll let you know.

Continue reading...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Yes, an RF-S 16-55mm f2.8 would be nice (an 15-55mm/2.8 even better).
Nothing else mentioned are interesting to me.

An RF-S version of the EF-S 15-85mm f3.5-5.6 or eventually a faster 15-70mm range (f2.8-4.0?) is what Canon should do as standard-zooms in my opinion. But what I want the most (I'm sure my current EF-S 15-85mm will continue to work fine on my R7), is somehing wider than the EF-S 10-22mm. I'm thinking that the shorter flange distance of mirrorless should make it possible to go wider without lens gets bigger, heavier or downgrades optically compared to the EF-S 10-22mm. Something like an RF-S 9-20mm maybe? Or even an RF-S 8.5-18mm?
I have Sigma's old 8-16mm, but besides being a little short in the long end, it is too heavy to be the default wideangle zoom in my bag. But if designed for mirrorless, couldn't it be done better?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
A 22mm RF-S pancake on the R7 (because IBIS) would be a great small setup ... in general I want more pancakes (love my shorty forty).
Coupled with RF 16 and 50 that would be a great set of primes for most users.
Add a 28mm macro and the ef-m line is replaced.
28mm is too short, bring the EF-S 35mm to RF-S.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
As stated elsewhere, I think the 11-55 is a typo - most likely an 11-22 similar to the M lens.
In fact, I think the 2 primes are going to be very similar, optically, to the M primes, and the 16-55 f/2.8 would be a revision to the decent 17-55 f/2.8 EF-S lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Upvote 0
As stated elsewhere, I think the 11-55 is a typo - most likely an 11-22 similar to the M lens.
In fact, I think the 2 primes are going to be very similar, optically, to the M primes, and the 16-55 f/2.8 would be a revision to the decent 17-55 f/2.8 EF-S lens.
I concur the 11-55 being a typo. Seeing the other possible offerings all being rehoused ef-m it wouldn't make much sense to develop a UWA rather than rehouse the existing one, especially with Canon trying to cut costs.
 
Upvote 0
Great rumor! I'm definitely interested in the 16-55 f/2.8. That's a great focal length range for APS-C. I don't need f/2.8, but I like the size, weight, and handling of a fast normal zoom like that. I love the Sigma 17-70 f/2.8-4! That's been my "normal" lens on every APS-C DSLR I've had for the past ten years (T2i, 70D, and 7D Mark II), my a6400 (with MC-11 adapter), and soon (hopefully) on my preordered R7 (with the Canon adapter).

I know a lot of people really like the EF-M 32 mm f/1.4, and the 22mm f/2 will also make a lot of people happy. I like an inexpensive pancake lens too, but 22mm is a bit wider than I normally like.

If the 55-250 is as good as the EF-S STM version, it will be a great hiking/biking lens. I don't mind f/7.1 because I'm an "f/8 and be there" guy, but it makes me wonder how much they're tinkering with the EF-S optical formula. Hopefully it doesn't lose IQ.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0