Is a Canon RF 24-70mm f/2 launching with the EOS R?
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I can very definitely state that I am not rattling off stats for stats sake. Each of the things that I put on that list because I either use that feature on my current camera (Sony A7R III)
120fps is used for creating cinematic slow motion b-roll shots. If you want to see an example, watch anything by Peter McKinnon. I would tell you to watch my stuff, but I don't want to be known by the stuff I am currently putting out. I have a lot to learn.
To build on what BeenThere said, the m50 is not full frame. It has a 2.56x crop factor in 4K video mode, this means that a standard 24mm lens functions like a 60mm lens in video mode. This is obviously very limiting. It does have DP AF for 1080p, but it does not work in 4K.
The Nikon Z cameras are great, but still crippled from the perspective of a vlogger. They have atrocious battery life (I do not believe it is possible to charge via USB C and shoot video at the same time), no flip LCD (by "flip" I mean I should be able to see myself to frame the shot), and their AF system isn't on par with Canon.
The lack of flip screen is one of my primary frustrations. Since I shoot entirely by myself, framing shots is difficult without that m50-style flip screen. I have overcome this by adding an external monitor, but that makes my camera rig a lot more awkward.
Upvote
0
True. Although I have no idea why. I mean I see the purpose, but personally I've never had a memory card fail ever in 13 years of using digital cameras. I think that desire is massively overrated.
Upvote
0
True. A lens like that would be most attractive (and financially reasonable) for people who have no reason not to drop 5k on a 1DXII so why'd they make it not an EF lens? To show off? That's what shiny and fast primes (1.4/135 or something) are probably better for.Correctly questioning part of my mind:
Idiotic 'what if it's true?' part of my mind:
- Why would Canon offer a boat anchor of a lens in a thin new mount (designed to reduce length)?
- Why would Canon give the middle finger to countless EF users with a dream lens that won't work on their SLRs?
- Canon doesn't open new systems with 'push the boat out' Spruce Goose sort of enterprises. They keep it simple.
- The grip on that camera would need to be the size of Gibraltar to comfortably control that.
- We presume all the sales units are in the $2k model market segment, not the higher end stuff... So why start high end with (surely) a $2-3k lens?
- People who cling to their EF lenses at night and are terrified that the end is nigh need a kick in the balls that the end is nigh is really happening. This release could get folks to flip their gear and (who knows?) buy in on this new system as 'the future'.
- Stubborn EF users (i.e. most of us here, myself) will want a reason to buy into this new mount for a reason other than "it's an inch thinner". And an f/2 standard zoom we'd never get on EF is a reason.
Still think this is nonsense on balance. Just riffing out loud here.
- A
Upvote
0
That word you keep using, I do not think it means what you think it means. Prosumers are advanced enthusiastic amateurs. People who take photography very seriously, but don't make a living at it. They definitely don't "stick" to their cell phones. The reason a single SD card slot would be just fine, and not an "epic fail" (what are you, a teenager in your parents' basement?) is that a single SD card works perfectly well for the mast majority of uses and users. I have two slots in my 7DII, and the only times I ever use the second slot are when the card in the first slot fills up (and I could prevent that from happening by buying bigger capacity cards). I'm not a professional, so I'm not particularly worried about needing backup. Besides, in the eighteen years that I've been using digital cameras, I've never had a card fail in a camera. I've actually only ever had one card fail at all, and that wasn't while shooting, and didn't result in the loss of any images. The single SD slot in my M6 is just fine with me. I wouldn't say no to a second slot, but wouldn't want it, if it made the camera any bigger or more expensive.
Upvote
0
I think it'll be more dramatically bigger/heavier than that. Canon thankfully built 4x 70-200s to let us make a semi-perfect comparison on this.
70-200 2.8L IS II 52.6 oz / 7.83" length / 77mm front element
70-200 2.8L 46.2 oz / 7.64" length / 77mm front element
70-200 f/4L IS 26.8 oz / 6.77" length / 67mm front element
70-200 f/4L 24.9 oz / 6.77" length / 67mm front element
As you can see, aperture absolutely obliterates IS for impact to weight (basically doubling it in this case), and the FL / max aperture will lead large aperture glass to need a larger front element. I think with a 24-70 that front element FL / aperture rule is less onerous than it would be for a longer tele lens, but I still think the weight of this 24-70 lens would be enormous, like in 3 lb / 50 oz-ish range.
- A
Upvote
0
Definetely not a teenager in the basement but thanks for the compliment!
I guess I tend to differentiate between a photo prosumer and a prosumer. I think there is a broad prosumer market who have the monies to buy pro cameras but are not necessarily spend said monies, and instead find cell phones to be a sufficient avenue for them. I do think long-term, all traditional camera manufacturers need to attempt to bring these cell phone users back into the photography market through exciting new technologies.
I agree with you on failures - I too have only used a single card in cameras. But given the massive negative reaction that Nikon received on their Z6/Z7 lineup, it would be a terrible decision for anyone to launch a camera with a single slot - let alone SD.
I have never been a fan of SD due to their higher failure rate and slower write speed versus Compact Flash (which is hence why I only use my CF slot and not the SD slot). I would prefer a CFexpress solution personally, due to the fast speed and high reliability.
Upvote
0
I rather have a 24-105 F2.8 Lens. Big or not. Even if it is 70-200 size. You wouldn't need anything else in your bag IMO
Upvote
0
My belief, is that Sony set the standard of what a $2k camera (should) be goin into 2019. Adequate resolution(s) for photo AND Video, Memory redundancy (multiple card slots), and for the video, Autofocus improvements and LOG in some shape or form. All should be in the form of Benefits to the user and not just Feature clout for the Brand, model, etc.
Upvote
0
These types of rumors tend to generate lots of emails to CR Guy asking about them, so its best to address them up front.
Upvote
0
Correctly questioning part of my mind:
Idiotic 'what if it's true?' part of my mind:
- Why would Canon offer a boat anchor of a lens in a thin new mount (designed to reduce length)?
- Why would Canon give the middle finger to countless EF users with a dream lens that won't work on their SLRs?
- Canon doesn't open new systems with 'push the boat out' Spruce Goose sort of enterprises. They keep it simple.
- The grip on that camera would need to be the size of Gibraltar to comfortably control that.
- We presume all the sales units are in the $2k model market segment, not the higher end stuff... So why start high end with (surely) a $2-3k lens?
- People who cling to their EF lenses at night and are terrified that the end is nigh need a kick in the balls that the end is nigh is really happening. This release could get folks to flip their gear and (who knows?) buy in on this new system as 'the future'.
- Stubborn EF users (i.e. most of us here, myself) will want a reason to buy into this new mount for a reason other than "it's an inch thinner". And an f/2 standard zoom we'd never get on EF is a reason.
Still think this is nonsense on balance. Just riffing out loud here.
- A
No idea about the physics or plausibility of such a lens but you're right, it'd be a good way of launching their mirrorless offering as being more than just about smaller cameras, showcasing the potential afforded by a new mount and undercutting any negativity in that. It'd also be a great way of selling a whole new generation of, previously impossible, high end lenses at ££££s.
Not aware of complaints that Nikon can now offer faster lenses just cos they won't work on a D5. It's not as if anyone's been deprived of the option, if it's a physical impossibility on an SLR mount, and we all assume a new mirrorless Canon FF will offer backward compatibility.
Separately, I don't get the fuss about single card/SD, assuming it's aimed at a consumer market. I mean SD is lousy physically, flimsy, easily lost, prone to splitting apart and jamming in camera (although Sony appear to have finally addressed this) but if people's argument is that a mirrorless body should be smaller, I'd imagine a CF/CFast slot would work against that. I'd be willing to bet money that the vast majority of consumers using cameras with two slots never even fit a 2nd card. I use two cards for the convenience of being able to edit from one and still be able to pick up the camera and continue shooting in an instant but I've never run it as dual write, although I understand why some do for those jobs where you have to be bullet proof and can't go back to do over.
No reason why these kind of specs won't be sensible for a low-mid end consumer design in the same way as the 6D. For professional use, I'd rather they stick to the 5D/1D form factor in virtually every way but give us the feature and performance benefits of mirrorless and make it weigh as little as possible.
Upvote
0
Canon has it and it is called XF400! It has all spec you mentioned (except it is HD 60P and not interchangable lens but has the widest and a very long reach lens). On top, it has also built-in ND and 3 ports (two XLR, one 3.5mm) for external mic, DPAF and unlimited recording time, price pont close to 3K!
Upvote
0
I'm unconvinced that a mirrorless camera announcement is imminent, and I certainly don't believe that this lens is happening. But if this lens was real, shouldn't it have IS, or would that make it too big...
Upvote
0
IS on standard FL lenses might be going the way of the dodo before too long. If this behemoth is indeed for the new mount, IBIS may cover its stabilization needs.
- A
Upvote
0
I was going to say this.
Plenty of other sites do this already, publish every thing they come across and gloat when they inevitably turn out to be right about 1 or 2 of them. There's no point in doing this, no valuable information whatsoever.
Please don't become one of those sites. It's better to be wrong than to be useless.
Upvote
0
The same source also mentioned that the EOS R will only have one SD card slot.
I can almost hear the Sony fans recycling their Nikon7/6 Articles
I can almost hear the Sony fans recycling their Nikon7/6 Articles
not for me. I also don't see sigma not copying the idea and doesn't really strike me as much to look at: I have faster lenses in that range already. I have nothing f0.95 on anything and the only choice is the mitakon, which is budget lens.one SD card slot. Well now that makes this rumor sound legit, because we know one SD card slot will cause major problems for all the camera market experts. ; )
a 24-70 2.0 would be a FAR nicer halo lens than the 58/.95 manual focus lens from the dark side
Upvote
0
Latest gossip:
EOS R body
EOS R 24-105 kit
RF 35 mm F 1.8 M IS
RF 50 mm F 1.2 L USM
RF 28 – 70 mm F 2 L USM
RF 24 – 105 mm F4 L USM
M adapter R
EOS R body
EOS R 24-105 kit
RF 35 mm F 1.8 M IS
RF 50 mm F 1.2 L USM
RF 28 – 70 mm F 2 L USM
RF 24 – 105 mm F4 L USM
M adapter R
Upvote
0
Similar threads
