Rumors are slow, let’s talk RF lens wish lists

[dvmnxk]

Primes:
---------------
35mm f/1.0 IS USM L (statement lens)
35mm f/1.4 IS USM
50mm f/1.0 IS USM L (statement lens)
50mm f/1.6 USM (pancake)
50mm f/1.4 IS USM
85mm f/1.0 IS USM L (statement lens)

Zooms:
-------------
10-50 f/2 IS USM L (statement lens)
50-100mm f/2 IS USM L (statement lens)
24-200mm f/4 IS USM L

 

[SteB1]

Okay, I still use DSKRs, 7D mkII, 5Ds, and some other crop bodies, but here is what I think Canon needs from a nature and macro photographer's perspective. As well as the usual long fast telephotos, I think Canon need something in the class of Sony's 200-600mm f6.3 and the Nikon 500mm f5.6 PF. These are both lenses which have changed how nature photographers can shoot. There are no Canon equivalents, and really Canon should learn from how well these lenses have been received. Canon also needs a long macro lens in the 180-200mm range, because the EF 180mm f3.5 was already a very outdated lens, which really needed to be updated with IS and faster AF. Probably an RF replacement for the unique MP-E 65mm would be useful. I'd recommend starting at less than 1:1, say 1/2 or 1/3 life size, to make it more versatile.

This is in addition to the lenses we are likely to get i.e. normal macro lenses and long fast telephoto zooms. I think one thing Canon needs to consider, which would be especially useful for macro photographers is greater than life-size, say 2:1 like the Laowa lenses. This could negate the need for an MP-E type lens. This massively increases the versatility of such lenses. Having to remove macro lenses in the field to add extension tubes is far from ideal because this massively increases the risk of getting debris like pollen grains on the sensor.

 

[cayenne]

I definitely want a 15-35 f/4. I want it as sharp as the f/2.8 version at equal apertures, equal or better coma control, and better vignetting. Smaller, lighter, and cheaper as well, of course. Basically the RF version of my 16-35 f/4. I'd be on the preorder list for that lens.

I wanted the 2.8 but decided the vignetting was disqualifying for my use cases. It does look awesome otherwise.

In the meantime I can wait and use adapters.

Just curious.
With vignetting so easily fixed in post...why is it such a deal breaker for you?

Thanks in advance!!

cayenne

 

[cayenne]

Can we actually have a new EF 135mm f/2.0 IS for ****** sake?!?!

Just my best guess, but I seriously doubt there will be any new EF lens development and release.

I think Canon firmly believes the RF lens line is the future and that's where their development dollars will be spent.

Sure, they will support and continue to produce the current EF lenses for a good while to come, but I don't see them going forward with new designs or releases on the EF mount which seems to be at this point a dead end and RF being the road forward with Canon.

Just my thoughts....and and $0.50 still won't buy you a cup of coffee.


cayenne

 

[RickD]

Would love to see an affordable UWA from Canon, doesn't have to be an L.

 

[SilverBox]

More high quality compact primes!

 

[David_E]

Continue reading...

100mm macro, 1:1. 180mm macro 1:1, this time with IS.

 

[David_E]

I second this.

Which do you second—the desire for the lens, or the infantile use of unnecessary crude language in a public forum?

 

[Deleted member 68328]

Just my best guess, but I seriously doubt there will be any new EF lens development and release.

I think Canon firmly believes the RF lens line is the future and that's where their development dollars will be spent.

Sure, they will support and continue to produce the current EF lenses for a good while to come, but I don't see them going forward with new designs or releases on the EF mount which seems to be at this point a dead end and RF being the road forward with Canon.

Just my thoughts....and and $0.50 still won't buy you a cup of coffee.


cayenne

I know...

That said, they released a new 1DX and left Canon pro shooters with poor/outdated 50mm lenses and an old 135mm w/o IS. This is no so great if you've just bought the latest 1DX III as you're obviously involved in that system for many years to come.

 

[neurorx]

A 200mm-600mm f/5.6 would be pretty awesome and an RF 135 f/2. That's my wish list

I second this!

 

[Ronny Wertelaers]

I have my R5 received with the 85 F1.2 RF and 50 F1.2 RF. Waiting for the 35 F1.? to complete my setup. The 35 is a really important lens for wedding photographers, so i am a little surprised that canon is waiting so long to bring this out.

 

[HarryFilm]

I personally want the Canon version of the Sigma Sports Zooms like this one:

Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens for Canon EF

Buy Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports Lens for Canon EF featuring EF-Mount Lens/Full-Frame Format, Aperture Range: f/5 to f/22, Two FLD Elements, Three SLD Elements, Super Multi-Layer Coating, Hyper Sonic Motor AF System, OS Image Stabilization, Fixed, Rotating Tripod Collar, Rounded...

www.bhphotovideo.com

but as L-series glass with more reach!

I need MINIMUM 135mm to 650mm at f/4 to f/5.6 Sports Zoom Lens at $4500 USD or less.

....BUT....

if it can be done for $6500 USD or less, a Canon L-series

Sports Zoom Lens at 100 mm to 800 mm at f/2.8 to f/5.6 .... WOULD BE WICKEDLY AWESOME !!!!!

--

I always need that sort of reach in Soccer (football), hockey, basketball, skiing and F1 racing and now in my NEWEST sports photo activity of Unlimited Class Powerboat Racing:

We're building a few of these monster unlimited class boats (i.e. the parent Aerospace company -- Owner is a powerboat racer and an F1 team partner) by Lake Okanagan in Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada but we are WAAAAAAAY upping the shaft horsepower up to 30,000 Horsepower (2 x 15k HP) using twin turbines mated to full immersion water jet (impeller) propulsion. Hydrodynamics limit us to a maximum possible of about 350 MPH (580 kmh) on a TWIN-CAT hull on flat water but it will DEFINITELY be a sight to see! Ergo, my need for that fancy 100 mm to 800mm sports lens for less than $6500 USD.


V

 

[Bonich]

I honestly really want an RF 85mm F/1.4L IS. The EF version is soooo nice and I love that lens, but I'm not getting anymore EF glass and it's hard to justify the additional price and weight of the RF 85 F/1.2. The 85mm F/2 looks nice, but F/2 is too slow and I don't expect wonders from the STM focusing. If Canon announced an RF 85 F/1.4L IS for $1800 I would pre-order it right off the bat.

Outside of that, I'm eagerly awaiting a RF 300mm F/2.8L of some sort, as well as a RF 100mm F/2.8 1x macro. Those are really the only three lenses I feel like I'm missing from my gear at the moment.

Use the EF version, it just works great @ EOS R.

 

[tron]

A 500mm f5.6 DO lens of similar weight to Nikon’s 500mm f5.6 PF lens and a 200-600mm f6.3 zoom.

Yes and Yes!

 

[Christoph Müller]

I want an EF 100mm F2.8 1:1 Macro equivalent for RF mount

 

[tron]

Use the EF version, it just works great @ EOS R.

Coincidentally I have tested this combination (85 1.4 with R) and I concur!

 

[pbspence]

20mm f/1.8

 

[tron]

A 500mm f5.6 DO lens of similar weight to Nikon’s 500mm f5.6 PF lens and a 200-600mm f6.3 zoom.

Yes and Yes!

That one! And/or a 600 f/5.6 DO lens (OK I basically repeat myself here!) or a 600 f/6.3 DO lens (a proper high quality DO lens like the 400 4 II not the 600mm or 800mm tubes )

 

[RajatMishra]

70-135 f2
35 1.2

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I'd like a 150-200mm macro F/4 or 5.6 would be fine since I always stop down macro shots. Advanced IS that was useful to 1:1 or greater as well.