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

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
649
671
Coupled with RF 16 and 50 that would be a great set of primes for most users.

28mm is too short, bring the EF-S 35mm to RF-S.
There already is a small inexpensive RF 35mm f/1.8 that has .5x macro capability. Unlikely you will see a different RF-s lens at that focal length.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Swerky

G1X Mark III
Sep 3, 2020
37
26
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've seen the same rumoured lenses on another site mentioned in this article the day the R7 and R10 were announced. Could be a typo in both cases, could be a rumour thrown into the wind, could be real. Although an 11-55 would need to rely heavily on digital correction, specially at the wide end. At 17.6-88 equivalent, it would surely make a great walk around lens. I'd like to see it happen. I'd also like a good 10mm f2.8.
 
Last edited:

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
649
671
I've seen the same rumoured lenses on another site the day the R7 and R10 were announced. Could be a typo in both cases, could be a rumour thrown into the wind, could be real. Although an 11-55 would need to rely heavily on digital correction, specially at the wide end. At 17.6-88 equivalent, it would surely make a great walk around lens. I'd like to see it happen. I'd also like a good 10mm f2.8.
That should be easy. Just scale the 16mm FF, but then BF distance might be a bit on the short side.
 

mdcmdcmdc

EOS R7, M5, 100 (film), Sony α6400
CR Pro
Sep 4, 2020
213
318
There already is a small inexpensive RF 35mm f/1.8 that has .5x macro capability. Unlikely you will see a different RF-s lens at that focal length.
Personally I don't consider a $500 lens "inexpensive". Maybe compared to other RF lenses, but my reference is the $125 EF-S 24mm f/2.8.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Stig Nygaard

EOS R7, Powershot G5 X II & Olympus TG-5
CR Pro
Jul 10, 2013
223
380
Copenhagen
www.flickr.com
1653539169513.png

Photorumors now have a image of the 22mm (if not fake of course?):


Though I'm not personally interested, I see why a lot of people could be interested in this...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

pzyber

Ambassador
Mar 25, 2011
45
51
Sweden
www.jimmynordstrom.se
View attachment 203897

Photorumors now have a image of the 22mm (if not fake of course?):


Though I'm not personally interested, I see why a lot of people could be interested in this...
Looks exactly like the ef-m 22/2 but with RF mount.

Same as the released 18-150 seems to be exactly the same as the ef-m lens. Just another mount and some minor changes to the exterior. 18-45 seems to be a bit different though. 15-45 would have the lens stick a bit out from the mount if they just adapted it. I guess that's why it's 18 and not 15 at the wide end like the ef-m lens.

If they release the 22 and a small m-sized body without evf I will get one immedietly. My favorite light travel and long hike combo. The 32/1.4 I would get as well, another amazing m lens.
 

mustafa

EOS M6 Mark II
Jul 20, 2012
92
66
I would like to mount my (several) M lenses to a small RF body. Viltrox?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
791
1,039
The Canon RF-S 55-250mm f/4.5-7.1 IS STM seems a bit slow compared to the old EF-S equivalent.

Canon seems to be happy to cancel high ISO improvements of new cameras with slower and slower lenses. The EF-S 55-250 5.6 is already very light and compact, what's the point of 7.1? To save extra 10 grams?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
791
1,039
Looks exactly like the ef-m 22/2 but with RF mount.

Same as the released 18-150 seems to be exactly the same as the ef-m lens. Just another mount and some minor changes to the exterior. 18-45 seems to be a bit different though. 15-45 would have the lens stick a bit out from the mount if they just adapted it. I guess that's why it's 18 and not 15 at the wide end like the ef-m lens.

If they release the 22 and a small m-sized body without evf I will get one immedietly. My favorite light travel and long hike combo. The 32/1.4 I would get as well, another amazing m lens.

But the RF mount flange distance is 2mm bigger, so all the EF-M lenses would need some optical adjustments / changes. Not enough to just change the mount.
 

Pierre Lagarde

Canon, Nikon and So on ...
Aug 4, 2020
85
113
France
www.deviantart.com
The only real data that we have seen from Canon about the M system is the discontinuation of the M6ii in Australia
I'm afraid there is more than Australia. M6 Mark II was already stopped in Honk-Kong and Philippines nearly three weeks ago. Now in France, one of our main web retailer (Digixo) has simply stopped any Canon M product, and I guess Canon is just selling their stocks in France by now. Signs may be here I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,409
505
Considering the R10, I'm a little surprised the wider zoom starts at 18mm. Wouldn't the target audience want something starting at 10mm (equivalent to 16mm on FF)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
791
1,039
Considering the R10, I'm a little surprised the wider zoom starts at 18mm. Wouldn't the target audience want something starting at 10mm (equivalent to 16mm on FF)?

Very strange design choice from Canon, especially because they already had the very tiny/cheap/small 15-45 in EF-M.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,409
505
Very strange design choice from Canon, especially because they already had the very tiny/cheap/small 15-45 in EF-M.
Yes. The ultra wide FF zooms start at 14mm & 15mm, EF-S has 10-18mm/22mm for years. IIRC, there were no rumors of RF lenses that might be wider crop ultra wide zoom.

I'm wondering whether sales of ultra wide zooms for crop sensors are so low Canon doesn't see any profit in making a new one / repackaging the 10-18/22mm, or is it an intentional move to encourage landscape photographers to buy a FF camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

mdcmdcmdc

EOS R7, M5, 100 (film), Sony α6400
CR Pro
Sep 4, 2020
213
318
Yes. The ultra wide FF zooms start at 14mm & 15mm, EF-S has 10-18mm/22mm for years. IIRC, there were no rumors of RF lenses that might be wider crop ultra wide zoom.

I'm wondering whether sales of ultra wide zooms for crop sensors are so low Canon doesn't see any profit in making a new one / repackaging the 10-18/22mm, or is it an intentional move to encourage landscape photographers to buy a FF camera.
As I see it, wide APS-C lenses are conveniences for occasional use.

If you regularly need ultrawide FOVs, or very shallow DOF, FF is a better choice for you.
 

HMC11

Travel
CR Pro
Sep 5, 2020
97
106
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.
Assuming my interpretation of what the Canon US rep in the Adorama video said is correct, it sounded like the current and next few RF-S lenses would be based on the optics of the M lenses. I also assume that these lenses are good enough for a 32.5mp APSC sensor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
791
1,039
View attachment 203897

Photorumors now have a image of the 22mm (if not fake of course?):


Though I'm not personally interested, I see why a lot of people could be interested in this...

Plastic mount.... because it costs extra 10 cents to make metal mount like the EF-M
 

Quackator

EOS RP
Jul 19, 2011
392
241
But no doubt smaller. More likely a stretch of the EF-M 55-200 than anything like the EF-s lens.
But still, adapting the old EF-S looks like the far better option, capability and image quality wise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

BBarn

EOS 90D
Nov 2, 2020
109
105
The R7 made sense. But the rest of this APS-C stuff looks like M series in a bigger and more expensive package. If consolidating to a single mount is saving money for Canon, they don't appear to be passing the savings on. At least when it comes to camera bodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,409
505
As I see it, wide APS-C lenses are conveniences for occasional use.

If you regularly need ultrawide FOVs, or very shallow DOF, FF is a better choice for you.
I can see how the target audience for the 7D would consider an ultra wide lens as a convenience for occasional use.

I don't see any reason why an owner of an 850D / 90D / R10 would see an ultra wide less any less useful than an 5D / R5 owner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users