Is Canon prepping the announcement of two more lenses? It looks that way

[unfocused]

So can we just write off any hopes of any interesting L glass for the rest of this year? It’d save me some time.

Interesting is subjective and these will be interesting to many people, just not you apparently.

 

[unfocused]

Wondering where the 24mm will land in price. There is a lot of room between $600 for the EF f2.8 and $1,549 for the EF f1.4.

 

[Sorosuub]

Where oh where is the 35L f1.2?!

 

[entoman]

So can we just write off any hopes of any interesting L glass for the rest of this year? It’d save me some time.

Leaving aside "fantasy" lenses with crazy zoom ranges and ultra-wide apertures, what sort of L glass would you consider "interesting" and reasonable?

I think Canon have produced a great deal of "interesting" RF glass, including some very appealing non-L lenses.

 

[nunataks]

I wonder if the 15-30 would compare well against the (sometimes maligned) EF 17-40 L? I'm sure there will be a lot of digital stretching at the wide end. But that has worked out well with the 24-240 and 16mm 2.8.

Brian

I hope not...I feel like its unnecessary lazy and the 16 is very not usable on the edges for certain applications. Being as slow as it is I feel like its not necessary either.

 

[scyrene]

Interesting! I have just started with the R system and what I lack is wide angle and wide aperture; I'd figured the 16mm would be the most appropriate next step, but maybe I should hold off. Or get either the 50 1.8 or 35 1.8 and then make a judgment of the wide angle options in a few months.

 

[scyrene]

Interesting! I have just started with the R system and what I lack is wide angle and wide aperture; I'd figured the 16mm would be the most appropriate next step, but maybe I should hold off. Or get either the 50 1.8 or 35 1.8 and then make a judgment of the wide angle options in a few months.

(I should add, only the very cheapest lenses are in my price range! Even some of the consumer zooms are eye watering to me now).

 

[jeanluc]

The 15-35 will likely be very affordable. Since it is a landscape lens, as long as it’s reasonably sharp the aperture won’t matter most of the time. For any low light/night work you could get it and the 16 2.8. I bet both together will be a lot cheaper than the 15-35L or the 14-35L.

 

[pzyber]

Where oh where is the 35L f1.2?!

I wonder that too, but at the same time it took Canon 11 years from the release of the EF-mount to bring out EF 35L f1.4.

 

[bergstrom]

Another way of saying "affordable".

or "more canon junk".

 

[t.linn]

Interesting is subjective and these will be interesting to many people, just not you apparently.

He said "interesting L". These do not seem to be L series lenses.

 

[roby17269]

Where oh where is the 35L f1.2?!

I am with you. Yes the RF lens lineup needs to be fleshed out more in multiple ways, but most of the recent lens announcements have been underwhelming... to me.
The RF mount started strong with great L primes and zooms and some innovative non-L lenses, but recently we've had a series of less interesting (to me) lenses including cheaper primes and re-adapted / re-teleconverted exotics and crop zooms.

I say bring on more fast primes and TS offerings!

 

[Besisika]

Count me in for the 24mm. F1.8 is exactly what I need; bright enough, relatively small, and not too pricey; hopefully.

 

[t.linn]

Leaving aside "fantasy" lenses with crazy zoom ranges and ultra-wide apertures, what sort of L glass would you consider "interesting" and reasonable?

I think Canon have produced a great deal of "interesting" RF glass, including some very appealing non-L lenses.

Interesting L glass would include, for me, RF tilt-shift lenses with AF, an RF 35 F1.2L, and any small, lightweight L glass like we're seeing from Sony with their newer GM lenses like the v2 24-70 F2.8. I would also welcome an RF 20mm lens with controlled coma that works well for astrophotography. Sony and Nikon both offer something like this.

 

[scyrene]

I am with you. Yes the RF lens lineup needs to be fleshed out more in multiple ways, but most of the recent lens announcements have been underwhelming... to me.
The RF mount started strong with great L primes and zooms and some innovative non-L lenses, but recently we've had a series of less interesting (to me) lenses including cheaper primes and re-adapted / re-teleconverted exotics and crop zooms.

I say bring on more fast primes and TS offerings!

Most people can't afford such things. I'm not sure a system built only on the absolute upper end is the best way to remain maximally profitable. Canon are good at targeting casual consumers, and even if those are bleeding away, it's likely there's still money in catering to them.

 

[entoman]

Interesting L glass would include, for me, RF tilt-shift lenses with AF, an RF 35 F1.2L, and any small, lightweight L glass like we're seeing from Sony with their newer GM lenses like the v2 24-70 F2.8. I would also welcome an RF 20mm lens with controlled coma that works well for astrophotography. Sony and Nikon both offer something like this.

If leaked roadmaps are any guide, you could be in luck fairly soon. "The two rumored autofocus tilt-shift lenses from Canon will be the Canon TS-R 14mm f/4L and Canon TS-R 24mm f/3.5L." - Canon Rumors May 2021.

An RF lens specifically designed for astrophotography is also I think quite likely, and would be a guaranteed good seller.

Personally I rate close-focusing (at least 1:3, preferably 1:2) as one of the most important features that I'd like to see become a standard feature of new RF glass.

 

[SnowMiku]

It's good to see some wide aperture non-L lenses like the Canon RF 24mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro. I've never used a wide angle Macro but it sounds great to get the subject and background, I wonder if it's going to be real lifesize macro and not half .5x size.

It's good that they stuck with f/5.6 for the Canon RF 15-30mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. But it's a shame that they didn't release an RF-S 15-55mm.

 

[flaviojzk]

This is the rumor I have been waiting for since I found out the 18-45 was an aps-c lens!

 

[HMC11]

My guess is that the 15-30 would follow along the lines of the 24-240 and 16mm in having large distortion and heavy vignetting at the 15mm end, requiring software correction. This usually means that even stopped down to f8 (assuming that produces the best optical performance), the corners would still not improve much compared to wide-open. The distortion and vignetting may not reduce to 'acceptable' level till about 16-17mm, making this effectively a 17/18-30mm lens. At the same time, the optical quality could well not be high enough to compensate the software-corrected corners, unlike the 14-35L, which also have heavy vignetting and strong distortion at 14/15mm, but the optics are good enough to allow software-corrected corners to still be pretty good. Nevertheless, if I were to take this as an 18-30mm lens with good to very good optical performance, and if it is light (300g?) and that the price point is good, say, $400, then this could be an attractive option (for me).

 

[EverydayPhotographer]

I know it isn’t a popular thing to say, but I am happy about this announcement. It may not be “interesting L series lenses,” but it’s the consumer market that will actually pay the bills and make those flashy Ls possible. And in that arena, Canon continues to stretch the boundaries. It used to be APS-C and 18mm to 300mm, take it or leave it. Now they’re giving the consumer market full frame cameras and decent telephoto options to 400mm, plus 600 and 800mm. And we already have a 16mm consumer prime lens. If this rumor turns out to be true, it will continue to deliver possibilities that were previously reserved mostly for much more financially endowed users. I like the move. It’s not flashy, but more impressively, it opens doors.