But remember, they also had an EF 24-105, 24-70 f/2.8 and 24-70 f/4. Despite this overlapping, each seemed to sell well.
If Canon thinks there's a market for a 24-105 f/2.8, who knows?
Upvote
0
Is a Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS on the way? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
If Canon thinks there's a market for a 24-105 f/2.8, who knows?
One Focus Photos
Wedding Photographer/ SEO Specialist
I'm still dying for that 70-200 2.0 lens lol. They did it for the 28-70 so let's see it for the 70-200. Definitely weird though they have so many lenses in the same range though but I guess they do that to help with budget. Not sure I'd ever get a 4.0 lens but then again I only shoot weddings.
-Cody M
-Cody M
Upvote
0
Exactly, given we cannot have the Tamron due to the 3rd party lens ban; no need to start from 24 or 28, a 35-150 f2.8 is the dream lens of any wedding and ceremony photographer, you really can shoot all the event with just a single lens, and ditch both 24-70 and 70-200. If I exceptionally need some wider shots, I'll throw in the bag the super light and super inexpensive 16 f2.8 STM, and crop it according to what's needed, if needed.
But I bet we will never ever see such a lens from Canon, because if you can buy one 35-150 instead of both 24-70 and 70-200, why give ypou the opportunity to spend less money and be more happy? Not gonna happen.
Upvote
0
I think 70-200mm f/2 would be a stretch, but I'd sure go for a 70-135 or 70-150. It'd probably be a $3k+ lens. Maybe $5k or more?
Upvote
0
Although I do not think this lens will be a reality. But if it did, I would be very interested in getting it if the IQ was better than the f4 version. Then it will be much more than a walk-around lens... (Not to say that great photos cant be made from the f4 lens).
Upvote
0
Funny how a fact can become so much more. There is no "official" 3rd party lens ban from Canon. Of course, this is the internet, so why bother with accuracy? Canon had two (I think it was two) 3rd party lens makers stop their production of AUTO FOCUS lenses due to patent infringement. At no time, to my knowledge, did they announce any sort of ban or official policy of any kind. People on the internet interpreted their actions to be a ban, some people going so far to say that there would NEVER be any 3rd party lenses allowed. The possibility of reverse engineered lenses seems to be avoided. Only a few weeks ago at CP+, Canon developers spoke about 3rd party lenses:
Canon developers interviewed at the recent CP+ 2023 venue in Japan said this. Via Google translate :
"Certainly, there have been many inquiries from third parties, and we have listened to their requests. However, we do not have direction or policy on this matter. I cannot give details, but if it is in line with our strategy, we will take necessary measures on a case-by-case basis. One example is the launch of Cosina's RF lenses. Cosina's Voigtlander 50mm F1 is the first 3rd party lens that can communicate with the body via an RF mount. We are in talks with other manufacturers."
Does this mean we should expect 3rd party AF lenses any time soon? No, I doubt it. But let's not rush to conclusions either, that it will never happen. We just don't know, which I understand frustrates people, so they make up their own answers instead of being patient and waiting for the real answer.
Upvote
0
Hey, what's this https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...yn85mm_f1_8r_df_dsm_yn85mm_f_1_8r_df_dsm.html ? That looks like a just announced autofocus lens for RF!
Upvote
0
It seems to be one of those "AUTO FOCUS lenses due to patent infringement." that have been stopped.
B&H has it backordered.
amazon.de has it listed since July 10th, 2021.
8 pcs. left, international shipping, incl. customs. So it seems to me that those are the rest from a first production batch.
Upvote
0
Yongnuo did announce an updated version of that lens yesterday: https://asobinet-com.translate.goog...l=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Looking at the existing 85mm and its MTFs, I can't figure out what the actual update is.
Upvote
0
"Avoiding mentioning "for Canon", it is said that it is compatible with "multi-mount" other than Sony / Leica / Nikon."
Not sure what that means which is even more difficult since it is translated.
Upvote
0
Or not using the RF AF protocol but the EF protocol instead? To avoid patent infringement?
Upvote
0
I couldn't imaging a 24-105 2.8 being heavier than the 28-70 F2. I'd totally buy that lense as it's all I'd need to shoot a wedding while keeping an RF 50 on my other body.
Upvote
0
I think it would make sense combined with a 100-500 using two bodies. The 2.8 24-105 would have a stop more low light capability than the f/4 version and 35 mm more at the long end which is important for those leaning to longer focal lengths compared to the 24-70.
Upvote
0
Is there any chance this could be some sort of cropped sensor lens. Like a EF 24-105 f/4 with a built-in focal reducer, making it f2.8?
Upvote
0
Let me rephrase
"...given we cannot have the Tamron due to the actual unfortunate unavailability of third party autofocus lenses, and the lack of a realistic timeline for their release in R mount"
Sounds better? But my argument is not changing: for whatever reason it is, Tamron manufacture a lens I'm not able to purchase in R mount at the moment, and so I do hope that Canon would release a matching lens.
Lens that, on the other hand, I would surely NOT buy if released by Canon, due to the price that would certainly be not less then 2500/3000€/$/£, while the Tamron 35-150 for E-mount can be purchased in the 1600/1800€ range, which is roughly what I can earn by reselling my 24-70 and 70-200, and so would be a viable switch, because yes I would be glad to shoot a wedding with a single lens, but I wouldn't be glad to do it at the expense of putting an extra (at least) 1000€/$/£ over it.
But hey, it's internet and it's a rumors forum, so I think I can hope Canonon releases stuff, even if I don't have the money (or better, I have it but I don't intend to spend it) to purchase it.
Upvote
0
Hmmm.... future rare vintage collectors item in 50 years. One of those with that vintage "look".
Upvote
0
On the other hand, Canon makes some greats that can't be matched imo. I had the RF 50mm f/1.2L. Yes, very pricey. When I got slaughtered by the pandemic I had to sell. I got the Tamron 45mm f/1.8, falsely reasoning and hopelessly hoping, "It can't be that much different." I was lying to myself, hoping to feel better.Let me rephrase
"...given we cannot have the Tamron due to the actual unfortunate unavailability of third party autofocus lenses, and the lack of a realistic timeline for their release in R mount"
Sounds better? But my argument is not changing: for whatever reason it is, Tamron manufacture a lens I'm not able to purchase in R mount at the moment, and so I do hope that Canon would release a matching lens.
Lens that, on the other hand, I would surely NOT buy if released by Canon, due to the price that would certainly be not less then 00€/$/£, while the Tamron 35-150 for E-mount can be purchased in the 1600/1800€ range, which is roughly what I can earn by reselling my 24-70 and 70-200, and so would be a viable switch, because yes I would be glad to shoot a wedding with a single lens, but I wouldn't be glad to do it at the expense of putting an extra (at least) 1000€/$/£ over it.
But hey, it's internet and it's a rumors forum, so I think I can hope Canonon releases stuff, even if I don't have the money (or better, I have it but I don't intend to spend it) to purchase it.
The Tamron I have sucks wide open with horrible CA wide open. It's great by f/2.8. The Canon costs worlds more, but tack sharp at f/1.2. That's the reason for Canon for me. Someday, sigh, someday.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The high end RF range has unicorn lenses that sound amazing but are even better when you actually own them, as long as sticker shock doesn't kill you. 28-70 is a magical lens without peer, 70-200/2.8 is amazingly tiny, and 100-500 is way better than I thought it would be.
Some of the lenses are pretty nice improvements over EF like 14-35 /4 vs 16-35.
My one complaint is that teleconverters have very limited compatibility / utility because of how close the first element is to the sensor. I guess I'd love a enthusiast 200-600 too.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
