Pricing for the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM and RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM has leaked

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,155
1,908
Kentucky, USA
Well, I was quite off with my guess of $349 for the 50mm f1.8. Wow - $199! - that'll shake up the R mount entry level!

But I was pretty close with my guess of $1499 for the 70-200 f4L. I think that's going to be a GREAT lens for a lot of people! I'm looking forward to seeing resolution/contrast tests for it vs. the f2.8L version.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EOS 4 Life

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,911
1,250
I used recently my 16-35 4L IS with my 5DMkIV. It's small size and very good IQ was the decision factor. It produced excellent results.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,332
2,183
I'm having trouble coming up with a zoom to accompany my RF100-500. The 24-105 f/4L and 24-240 STM are at similar price points and both have good reviews for the things I want to do with it.

I have the EF24-105L and EF70-200 f/4L non-IS, but both were kinda "meh" on the RP and the R5 makes them look even worse when cropping :(

My understanding is the RF 24-105L is a big improvement over the EF version, so the EF's lackluster performance on the RP shouldn't be a factor in your decision making.

The 24-240 by contrast has to do a lot of in-camera distortion correction at the wide end. That to me marks it off as lower quality than the 24-105 but by no means a terrible lens given the correction in camera, and the correction is done well. That's the tradeoff you're looking at, a bit more genuine optical quality versus extra range and only you can answer whether you're more interested in that extra range or whether you are a purist and want optics that need less correction.
 
Last edited:

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,332
2,183
I could see an RF camera bag with the 24-105F4L, 70-200F4 L, and a prime of choice (35/50/85) being a complete travel kit.

That makes a whole lot of sense. My RF bag right now has the 15-35, 24-105 and the old EF 100-400 II L (and yes it's heavy). No prime, as of yet (or I can bring over one of my non-L ones from EF-land, most likely the 85mm f/1.8--that's a SECOND bag with EF lenses in it--the bags live in the trunk/boot of my car), those L primes are expensive and so far I've not zeroed in on a "category" of photography where one would be $2000+ worth of useful.
 

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,681
1,554
My understanding is the RF 24-105L is a big improvement over the EF version, so the EF's lackluster performance on the RP shouldn't be a factor in your decision making.

The 24-240 by contrast has to do a lot of in-camera distortion correction at the wide end. That to me marks it off as lower quality than the 24-105 but by no means a terrible lens given the correction in camera, and the correction is done well. That's the tradeoff you're looking at, a bit more genuine optical quality versus extra range and only you can answer whether you're more interested in that extra range or whether you are a purist and want optics that need less correction.
I’ve rented the RF24-105L a few times and was very happy with the results, even if it does make my EF gen 1 look like it has jelly on the front element.

I don’t mind corrections, that’s that DPP4+DLO is for :)

Ideally the combo would be 24-105, 70-200, 100-500, but that’s mostly GAS talking :)
The coming months won’t have a lot of opportunities to use them, due to weather and other restrictions.

So I predict I will get the new RF50 and with a portion of the money saved rent the RF28-70 for the next family vacation in May. And put a picture of the RF70-200 f/4 on my nightstand ;)
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,332
2,183
I’ve rented the RF24-105L a few times and was very happy with the results, even if it does make my EF gen 1 look like it has jelly on the front element.

I don’t mind corrections, that’s that DPP4+DLO is for :)

Ideally the combo would be 24-105, 70-200, 100-500, but that’s mostly GAS talking :)
The coming months won’t have a lot of opportunities to use them, due to weather and other restrictions.

So I predict I will get the new RF50 and with a portion of the money saved rent the RF28-70 for the next family vacation in May. And put a picture of the RF70-200 f/4 on my nightstand ;)

Yeah, now the RF 28-70 is TOTALLY redundant, its range is entirely within that of the 24-105. :ROFLMAO: The GAS you were talking about would give you lenses with overlap (and one that is entirely overlapped by other lenses) but at least no one lens in that lineup covers everything one of the other lenses does.
 

Nord0306

EOS RP
CR Pro
Nov 11, 2018
6
3
I'm having trouble coming up with a zoom to accompany my RF100-500. The 24-105 f/4L and 24-240 STM are at similar price points and both have good reviews for the things I want to do with it.

I have the EF24-105L and EF70-200 f/4L non-IS, but both were kinda "meh" on the RP and the R5 makes them look even worse when cropping :(

I have an EF24-105 gen 1 and a 24-240, I haven't compared them directly, but have no complaints about the 24-240. I also have the 100-400mm II and use it a lot on my RP. Most of the time I have the 24-240 or 100-400 mounted. I would echo the other comment about what you are looking for, but I am happy with the 24-240.

As to the OP topic, I have the EF50 1.8 and the control ring adapter. I'm not yet sure the size alone is worth the $100 difference, I was hoping for IS (which I'm sure would have pushed it over $300). Also, since I have the 24-240, I would just use that over the 70-200 f/4 and I sometimes think I need/want 2.8, so I may still get that 2.8.
 

mpphoto

EOS M6 Mark II
CR Pro
Dec 15, 2013
86
8
Yongnuo can sell a 50mm 1.4 for $170. What's terrific about $200 for 1.8?
I'm not sure comparing a Yongnuo lens to a Canon lens is an apples-to-apples comparison, but I agree with your sentiment. $200 for a likely average 50mm f/1.8 is kind of expensive in my opinion. I pre-ordered the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM because at $130 or whatever it was at the time, I figured there wouldn't be much of a decrease in price over time because the price was so low. Not much of an early adopter tax. However, for my budget, $200 is more of a price I have to think about. It's not a no-brainer. At $150, I would've been in. Instead, I'll be waiting for the refurb to become available (probably around $160). I doubt we will see the lens below $180 anytime soon.
 

GMCPhotographics

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Aug 22, 2010
1,690
409
50
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
As usual, included VAT makes the biggest difference in US vs European prices. The rest is mostly higher employee costs due to higher income taxes and better protections.
I actually confronted Canon in a letter to thier UK head offices asking them to justify the vast relative price difference between the US and UK prices of the (then new to market) 1DmkII. It took them about 3 months to reply...they sent me a really nice photography book and a letter from their UK CEO. It basically said...there is no relation to real world costs, there is a perception of value in each economy that allows them to sell for that price...ie...they do becuase they can. It's as simple as that. The British buyers buy lots at the over inflated price so taht sets the price point. If no one bought them...then the price would be keener at launch. The letter was 2 pages long and really well thought out and nicely written.
 

navastronia

EOS RP + 5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
713
845
I actually confronted Canon in a letter to thier UK head offices asking them to justify the vast relative price difference between the US and UK prices of the (then new to market) 1DmkII. It took them about 3 months to reply...they sent me a really nice photography book and a letter from their UK CEO. It basically said...there is no relation to real world costs, there is a perception of value in each economy that allows them to sell for that price...ie...they do becuase they can. It's as simple as that. The British buyers buy lots at the over inflated price so taht sets the price point. If no one bought them...then the price would be keener at launch. The letter was 2 pages long and really well thought out and nicely written.

That's refreshingly honest of them. Kudos to whoever wrote that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

Sharlin

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 26, 2015
1,365
1,267
Turku, Finland
I actually confronted Canon in a letter to thier UK head offices asking them to justify the vast relative price difference between the US and UK prices of the (then new to market) 1DmkII. It took them about 3 months to reply...they sent me a really nice photography book and a letter from their UK CEO. It basically said...there is no relation to real world costs, there is a perception of value in each economy that allows them to sell for that price...ie...they do becuase they can. It's as simple as that. The British buyers buy lots at the over inflated price so taht sets the price point. If no one bought them...then the price would be keener at launch. The letter was 2 pages long and really well thought out and nicely written.

Yeah, sure, that's how supply and demand works. But my point still stands. The "over inflated price" looks much much closer to the US price once you subtract the included VAT, which obviously is not going to Canon. US prices never have sales taxes included because they vary too much from place to place. (They're also typically much lower than UK/EU VAT but that's another story.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger