Predicted Canon RF-S & RF Lens Releases In 2025

[TostitoBandito]

Agreed that the fisheye is popular underwater but I am not sure how a RF version would be substantially better than the EF one. It is generally easy to find a second hand EF lens as people get bored with doing weird portraits.
I'm using the fisheye less for underwater now as I can go to 14mm with the RF14-35/4. Best of wide and super-wise angle options.
The fisheye is still fun for astrolandscapes though!

At minimum an RF version would be shorter compared to the EF plus the RF adapter, so possibly shorter housing port extensions. And adding IS would be nice.

I also shoot the 14-35 a lot currently underwater, it's a great and relatively compact little lens. Just have to be mindful of the corner sharpness at its widest.

 

[Swissbob]

28-400 4-6.3 L IS USM please.

 

[David - Sydney]

At minimum an RF version would be shorter compared to the EF plus the RF adapter, so possibly shorter housing port extensions. And adding IS would be nice.

I also shoot the 14-35 a lot currently underwater, it's a great and relatively compact little lens. Just have to be mindful of the corner sharpness at its widest.

The current 8-15/4 doesn't have good edge sharpness either and I tend to radially crop at 8mm to remove the terrible chromatic aberration. I haven't used the VR fisheye lenses but I imagine that they are much better on the edges than the 8-15/4.

Yes, a RF fisheye length should be shorter but you would probably need to buy another port extension to fit (extra cost).
IS wouldn't be useful for these focal lengths. IBIS is much more useful at those focal lengths which we now have with most mirrorless bodies.
Corner sharpness is acceptable for me at 14mm as it is unusual for subjects to go right to the edge. For me 14mm gives me a little cropping even when the subject comes closer than I expected.

 

[One Focus Photos]

Should be some good solid lenses. I just wonder when we'll get something really crazy. In my opinion the 28-70 2.0 was a huge shift and changed my business forever. Would love to see something wild change like that. No clue on what that would be but just something the whole photography market is hyped for.
-Arlene

 

[SonicStudios]

I just wonder when we'll get something really crazy.
-Arlene

The RF 200 - 500 just might be that something really crazy, especially if it had a built in TC on a zoom.

 

[john1970]

The RF 200 - 500 just might be that something really crazy, especially if it had a built in TC on a zoom.

That would be an ideal lens, but I would be concerned about weight and length. If too heavy or too long it would be difficult to use for extended period of time and challenging to travel with on airplanes. We shall see. I would anticipate any big whites being announced in the April-May timeframe.

 

[kred]

will we see any more 'DO' style lenses to get us something similar to the 11 year old 400 f4 DO IS II or like Nikons 400 f4.5 offering? Canon is lacking there and that gap needs to be filled for wildlife primes.

 

[neuroanatomist]

will we see any more 'DO' style lenses to get us something similar to the 11 year old 400 f4 DO IS II or like Nikons 400 f4.5 offering? Canon is lacking there and that gap needs to be filled for wildlife primes.

“Needs” is a bit strong. Canon doesn’t seem to be suffering for lack of them, and I expect the 600/11 and 800/11 (which are technically DO lenses) are more profitable for Canon than the >$3K PF lenses are for Nikon.

Time will tell. Nikon’s lenses are quite good, maybe Canon will follow suit.

 

[kred]

“Needs” is a bit strong. Canon doesn’t seem to be suffering for lack of them, and I expect the 600/11 and 800/11 (which are technically DO lenses) are more profitable for Canon than the >$3K PF lenses are for Nikon.

Time will tell. Nikon’s lenses are quite good, maybe Canon will follow suit.

It's the single largest gap in the entire Canon RF lineup. Prime super telephotos ranging from F2.8+F4 -> F11 is way too large of a gap. Too many photogs are settling for 10+ year old EF primes because of the price. There's no middle RF prosumer range today.

 

[EricN]

It's the single largest gap in the entire Canon RF lineup. Prime super telephotos ranging from F2.8+F4 -> F11 is way too large of a gap. Too many photogs are settling for 10+ year old EF primes because of the price. There's no middle RF prosumer range today.

Some would argue the gap is tilt shift and ultra wide L lenses. Then there's the 35mm f1.2 that some people have been lusting after. I guess most of us have at least one lens or group of lenses we fantasize about...

 

[kred]

Some would argue the gap is tilt shift and ultra wide L lenses. Then there's the 35mm f1.2 that some people have been lusting after. I guess most of us have at least one lens or group of lenses we fantasize about...

Yup, fair enough, everyone has their lens wants & needs. I think my case was being made for super telephoto primes being a $11,000 USD gap from the 400 f2.8-> 800 f11, and nothing in between.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Yup, fair enough, everyone has their lens wants & needs. I think my case was being made for super telephoto primes being a $11,000 USD gap from the 400 f2.8-> 800 f11, and nothing in between.

Perhaps Canon feels nothing in between is needed. It’s possible their demographic data suggest people willing to spend $4-6K for a lens are also willing to spend >$12K for one.

Keep in mind that Canon dominates the market. Nikon probably feels a need to do something that Canon isn’t doing, because Canon isn’t doing it. If you’re a smaller mammal, competing for the bamboo stalk being eaten by the 800-lb gorilla is unwise.

 

[koenkooi]

Some would argue the gap is tilt shift and ultra wide L lenses. Then there's the 35mm f1.2 that some people have been lusting after. I guess most of us have at least one lens or group of lenses we fantasize about...

Long macro lenses!!

 

[EricN]

Long macro lenses!!

Sign me up!

 

[SirIssacNewton]

I want an asp/c 200-600 f5.6-8 is with usm motor for a grand! Is that possible

 

[neuroanatomist]

I want an asp/c 200-600 f5.6-8 is with usm motor for a grand! Is that possible

It won't happen. For that focal range, there is zero advantage to making a lens for a crop sensor since the image circle would cover a FF sensor anyway. Check out the OM 150-600 f/5-6.3...it's 'for m4/3' (2x crop) but the lens is the same size as 150-600mm lenses for FF DSLRs.

 

[EricN]

I don't expect it will be as good as you imagine, but if you're willing to go with a used ef sigma or tamron, you can get something close for around a grand.

 

[koenkooi]

It won't happen. For that focal range, there is zero advantage to making a lens for a crop sensor since the image circle would cover a FF sensor anyway. Check out the OM 150-600 f/5-6.3...it's 'for m4/3' (2x crop) but the lens is the same size as 150-600mm lenses for FF DSLRs.

And people still praise OM systems for creating a ‘crop’ supertelephoto! So such a lens might have value, if purely for marketing.

 

[Quack]

And people still praise OM systems for creating a ‘crop’ supertelephoto! So such a lens might have value, if purely for marketing.

Nobody praises OM's 150-600 for creating a crop super telephoto as everyone understands that it is the build and optical formula of Sigma's FF lens. OM gets hammered and criticized for it. Unjustly so, in my opinion, as supertelephotos's size is mostly based on the entrance pupil size, so when it comes to supertelephoto lenses, only the last optical elements can have a smaller diameter, thus reducing size and weight only minimally. If one compares the Olympus 150-400 lens with the 150-600, you will notice the only size reduction is in the last few inches of the lens. The advantage of an MFT crop sensor is obviously the fact that it gives you approximately a 2x reach advantage compared to a similar focal length lens and a similar MP sensor. For many, this is the BIG advantage of a crop sensor camera.

And when it comes to non-supertelephotos, then the lenses can be smaller in diameter, making the whole kit smaller and more manageable. From left to right: Canon 14-35 f4, OM 8-25 f4, Canon 24-105 f4, OM 12-100 f4, and the incredibly compact OM 70-300.

I understand the sophisticated camera users on forums and YouTube love to trash the Micro Four Thirds System and crop cameras in general, as they obviously want to preach the superiority of FF, and that only an ignorant fool would choose otherwise. And yet, despte their great intelligence, they are too stupid to understand that the constant negative publicity on social media - where most people today get their information - only hurts, and possibly will put, OM Systems out of business. It will make many happy, but if your system went out of business because of all the negative publicity, with thousands of dollars invested in it, wouldn't you rather people just shut up?