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

[H. Jones]

My current 77mm filters can be used on my RF70-200mm, EF24-105 and EF16-35mm/4. CPL/6 stop ND and 10 stop ND are screw in and my grads are 100mm wide on 77mm thread.

Moving from my EF16-35mm/4 to RF would mean new filters for >77mm thread. That will be expensive for me. 82mm for the RF15-35mm/2.8 and would be larger if it is 14-35mm.
Unlikely that a 14-35mm lense would accept a front filter thread ie bulbous and need a special setup like the Nikon 14-24mm or EF11-24mm.
I have my Samyang 14mm/2.8 if I need wider but it is mostly for astrolandscapes ie not using filters
I'm sure that a new RF wide angle zoom will be great but it would add another AUD1k minimum for the new filters.... Much more if 150mm grads would be needed.

I don't think that will necessarily be the case, as the Nikon Z 14-30mm F/4 accepts 82mm filters without any kind of special set-up. Mirrorless lens mounts make wide-angle lenses a lot more manageable to design, so 14mm is possible with filters.

For my own uses, I already have all of my filters on 82mm and use a 82mm adapter on my 100mm Lee square filters, due to the 24-70mm f/2.8L II needing them already.

(Apologies that this a little off-topic on this thread!)

 

[heysavnac]

Yep. Totally snagging a 50 to go with my RF 35 and 85! Wish I could get the F4, but I’ll work for it

 

[Mr Majestyk]

LOL RF pricing f/4 is the new f/2.8. Another hard pass. With Canon's criminal price gouging in Australia this will run close to $3K.

 

[scottkinfw]

What's the catch? Seems unexpectedly reasonable for Canon.

 

[danfaz]

LOL RF pricing f/4 is the new f/2.8.

You know, that's a pretty realistic statement. I thought spending $1600 on a refurbished 70-200 2.8 was crazy a few years ago. Now, most of the lenses are $2300+ and $1600 sounds almost like a bargain!

 

[David - Sydney]

LOL RF pricing f/4 is the new f/2.8. Another hard pass. With Canon's criminal price gouging in Australia this will run close to $3K.

Just need to wait for a sale. @USD1599, it would be ~AUD2500 based on mid market exchange rate and 10% GST.
Digidirect has had a 15% off and then a 20% off sale over the last few months. No deals on the R5 pricing though. If local pricing for RF70-200/4 is AUD3k then 20% sale will end up cheaper than the US.
We also get a 5 year warranty which also has a cost associated with it which is not built into the US pricing. If the warranty length isn't important then buy via the grey market to get a local 1 year warranty (they send overseas for repairs).
Or use the great EF lenses (new or second hand) and wait for RF lens pricing to settle down over the next year or two.

 

[AJ]

Both of these are inline with their EF counterparts.

The EF 50/1.8 sells for $125. So the RF at $200 is a 60% price increase.

 

[cycomachead]

The 70-200 f/4 seems fantastic at $1300 and not bad at $1600. Definitely not unexpected for current Canon pricing. That's $0 to $300 more than the EF version, and an upgrade delta of ~$1100 to the 2.8 version which is an even wider gap than the EF f4 vs f2.8 comparison. The EF versions right now are $1300 and $2000 (sale), and a comparable savings for the RF f4 would put it in the $1700-1800 range.

The 50mm is too much. I suppose I'll still pick one up at some point...but it's a huge jump. I was really hoping for $160, and $150 if we got lucky.
Given that EF adapters are cheap/almost free with a body on sale, and you can find the EF version for $100, I wouldn't use that as a price comparison. It's a wash, but at the small size, you really will notice not having the adapter in the way.

 

[tataylino]

I was expecting the 50mm to be around 149 because the EF version is 125.

 

[JordanCS13]

Fine with the 50 price simply because the EF 50 has had the same optical design for over 30 years. It's literally the same lens as the 50/1.8 mark I from 1987 with a different focus motor. Makes sense that a refined design is more expensive. The 70-200/4 is too much at $1600, though. Big price increase over an essentially brand new lens.

 

[hobbodanno]

Fine with the 50 price simply because the EF 50 has had the same optical design for over 30 years. It's literally the same lens as the 50/1.8 mark I from 1987 with a different focus motor. Makes sense that a refined design is more expensive.

The new design also has the control ring, which I expect to increase the price. Personally, I think $200 is pretty fair price, but once the new-ness wears off, I wouldn't be surprised to see the lens offered on sale at $150 on a pretty regular bases.

 

[EverydayPhotographer]

So I guess we can look for a release announcement tomorrow or perhaps Wednesday? It seems that when we get prices, official announcement seems to follow within 24ish hours...

 

[KT]

That's Tamron kind of pricing dressed as a Canon product. They must be serious about moving some R6 bodies this winter.

 

[Sporgon]

What's the catch? Seems unexpectedly reasonable for Canon.

One catch might be that the 50mm appears to be an update of Canon's 1960s era Canonet 45mm f/1.7 rangefinder lens. I don't know what reputation that lens had.

 

[Joules]

That's Tamron kind of pricing dressed as a Canon product. They must be serious about moving some R6 bodies this winter.

Nope, CR guy just misquoted his source.

The 70-200 4.0 is actually $1599. That is Canon pricing through and through. They'll move alright nonetheless.

 

[jolyonralph]

The new design also has the control ring, which I expect to increase the price. Personally, I think $200 is pretty fair price, but once the new-ness wears off, I wouldn't be surprised to see the lens offered on sale at $150 on a pretty regular bases.

All the old designs have a focus ring so that's no excuse.

New lenses are more expensive because Canon is trying it's best to stay profitable in a difficult market. No doubt there will be deals and I'll probably just get them on the grey market as usual and save a heap of cash.

 

[koenkooi]

One catch might be that the 50mm appears to be an update of Canon's 1960s era Canonet 45mm f/1.7 rangefinder lens. I don't know what reputation that lens had.

The one I used 13 years ago gave me great results, but I scanned the negatives at 12MP or so, so without locating an enlarger I can't say how it would perform on 50-ish MP

 

[Exploreshootshare]

The pricing for the 50mm seems very reasonable to me in comparison to the EF version because one has to consider that the EF 50mm has been around for several years. The current version has been in stores since 2015 - older version with the same optical design have been around for nearly 30 years or even more.

 

[wockawocka]

<EF version goes on ebay>

 

[Traveler]

My current 77mm filters can be used on my RF70-200mm, EF24-105 and EF16-35mm/4. CPL/6 stop ND and 10 stop ND are screw in and my grads are 100mm wide on 77mm thread.

Moving from my EF16-35mm/4 to RF would mean new filters for >77mm thread. That will be expensive for me. 82mm for the RF15-35mm/2.8 and would be larger if it is 14-35mm.
Unlikely that a 14-35mm lense would accept a front filter thread ie bulbous and need a special setup like the Nikon 14-24mm or EF11-24mm.
I have my Samyang 14mm/2.8 if I need wider but it is mostly for astrolandscapes ie not using filters
I'm sure that a new RF wide angle zoom will be great but it would add another AUD1k minimum for the new filters.... Much more if 150mm grads would be needed.

Exactly my thoughts! I was hoping for RF15-35 f/4 and the same filter thread.
With the 2.8 version, they managed to keep the 82mm from EF16-35 f/2.8 on the RF15-35 f/2.8 despite it being wider.
So I guess they could do it too with a 15-35 f/4. But 14mm is too much I think