Sadly my APS-c jorney went with Sony for 7 years. I never made full swich into sony. Sony RAW and colors were not worth it. Now the Sony APS-C jorney is ending. Finally.
If the optical formula of the M version is fine, why change it?
Producing a completely new set of lenses unnecessarily, just because the mount changes, makes no sense. The design and manufacturing costs would need to be recouped and passed on the the customer. I suspect that most people would prefer to stick with the existing designs and keep the purchase price lower.
If the optical formula of the M version is fine, why change it?
Producing a completely new set of lenses unnecessarily, just because the mount changes, makes no sense. The design and manufacturing costs would need to be recouped and passed on the the customer. I suspect that most people would prefer to stick with the existing designs and keep the purchase price lower.
Of course, if new designs offered a significant improvement (e.g. closer MFD, wider max aperture, faster AF, nicer bokeh, additional focal lengths) then they would be very desirable, but obviously a lot more expensive than re-using existing designs, which was the point of my response to Madbox. Just look at the price of RF exotica, compared to nearest-equivalent EF glass!
Ideally APS-C users would have both - affordable re-ported M glass, and highly specified compact exotica. Realistically, we'll have to see just how popular the R7 and R10 become, as Canon are unlikely to pour resources into completely new APS-C glass unless demand is high.
I hope your upcoming R7 lives up to your expectations, the specs look excellent, and the only thing stopping me from getting one is the ergonomics - my muscle-memory would have problems if I was constantly switching back and forth between R5 and R7.
Sigma has 16 / f1.4 in E mount , which I sold… it is Very fine video lens and it was very sad to sell away.
I wish Canon would come up with L grade RF-s lens , just as Sony has , and Fuji too. Low focus breathing - hopefully. Looks like these lens are a lot cheaper than FF lens.
I wish Canon would come up with L grade RF-s lens , just as Sony has , and Fuji too. Low focus breathing - hopefully. Looks like these lens are a lot cheaper than FF lens.
Don't hold your breath. Years of EF-S lenses, none with the L designation. The EF-S 17-55/2.8 and 10-22/3.5-4.5 delivered optical quality equivalent to some L lenses...the former aged and was never updated, the latter was replaced with the inferior 10-18/4-5.6.
Who’s been duped? Has Canon misled anybody about what they would develop? Where are the official statements about specific lenses coming? Or did you dupe yourself by expecting a bunch of f/1.2 APS-C L primes?
The EF-M 22 and 32 are great lenses in their own rite, and I’ve known people who have bought M50‘s just so they could use the 32. If the 55-250 is based on the EF-S 55-250 STM design, it will be a great lens too for traveling light. And I, for one, was glad that one of the first two RF-S lenses was a port of the EF-M 18-150. I got the EF-M version with my M5, and having an RF-S version was icing on the cake when I preordered the R7 kit. Not L quality perhaps, but definitely punches above its weight for a kit lens.
And I daresay Canon has redefined the expectations of “kit” lenses over the past 5-10 years with the EF-S 18-55 STM, EF-S 18-135 STM and USM, and EF-M 18-150. All sharp and versatile.
(I know this is a zombie thread but I felt compelled to respond)