The State of RF – 5 Years of Lenses

[neuroanatomist]

Canon are constantly looking for innovations and features that justify theur super-expensive and lofty pricing.

On the other end of the spectrum, Canon also offers very good lenses at affordable prices. The RF 15-30, RF 100-400, and RF 800/11 are examples of lenses less expensive than what’s available from others, ayet delivering very good IQ.

It’s certainly true that it’s possible to get a 3rd party f/2.8 trinity for cheaper than with Canon (especially if you’re unfortunate enough to live in the UK), and for some that’s important. But there’s no free lunch. If you pay half the price for a similarly spec’d lens, you’re not getting the same performance.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

They're simply milking it. Squeezing every drop of $$$ profit from EF.

Those days are gone and they are not coming back.
EF was the standard autofocus lens for video.
Now everyone has their own mirrorless mount.
RF is only Canon and RED.
If anything Canon discontinued EF lenses too soon.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Went with the A7C ultimately since E mount has the 20-70 F4

I still am holding out hope for an RF 24-70 f/4 IS.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Agreed.

I disagree.
The word is "fewer" not "less".

 

[EOS 4 Life]

didn't include extenders as a lens

You already know the extender that I am waiting for.

 

[Del Paso]

I still am holding out hope for an RF 24-70 f/4 IS.

With macro setting, hopefully.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Question is if Canon will gear up with RF-S lenses.

I doubt it will happen to any great extent. I’d guess even fewer offerings than for EF-M. It was different for the M line since the corresponding EF/EF-S lenses needed an adapter. With RF, they don’t.

Lenses like the 16/2.8, 28/2.8 and 50/1.8 are in the right price range, and the frequent discounts on the 24/1.8 and 35/1.8 put those into the right price range and cover the need for a macro lens (even though they aren’t 1:1).

Also consider that the R8 is relatively inexpensive, and the still-available RP is even cheaper. Canon wants people to move to FF, and these more affordable RF full frame bodies and lenses will likely facilitate that. Keeping RF-S offerings limited will probably help.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I disagree.
The word is "fewer" not "less".

Pedant.

 

[Bahrd]

Now where's that Canon RF 50mm F1.4?

Right after the long line of RF-S lenses, I suppose.

 

[Walrus]

When I compare Canon lenses to the competition (3rd party), their lenses aren't as sharp, have flare issues, isn't built to the same standard, their AF isn't as accurrate and their IS systems are way behind.

Any Sigma Art is as good as the Canon counterpart, and they're built as good or often way better, at least in dslr mount (never had an e-mount Sigma in my hand); can't really agree with you, sorry

 

[neuroanatomist]

Any Sigma Art is as good as the Canon counterpart,

I looked a few.

• The Canon RF 24-70/2.8L is sharper than the Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art.
• The Canon 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L are similar to the Sigma Art lenses when you stop the Canon lenses down 1/2-stop to match the narrower f/1.4 max aperture of the Sigma primes.
• The Canon 70-200/2.8L…oh, wait, Sigma doesn’t make a 70-200 Art.
• The Canon 15-35/2.8L is not as sharp as the Sigma 14-24/2.8, but the former is a 2.3x zoom while the latter is only 1.7x.

So I’d say the evidence shows your statement is patently false. It’s more of a mixed bag, with the advantage to Canon (commensurate with the higher cost).

I believe you’ve also complained about breadth of lens selection. There are 19 Sigma Art lenses for DSLRs and 19 for MILCs, while there are far more Canon L lenses covering a much broader range focal lengths and apertures. So that’s a big win for Canon there, too.

 

[kaihp]

In France, Germany and Italy, you cannot officially preorder lenses and cameras like in the USA or, I guess, Canada.

Same here in Denmark. Despite the R3 development announcement, I couldn't preorder it until the official announcement with the shipping date came out.
And Denmark got all of 3 bodies for 26th November 2021, as far as I know (I was around number 20 on the preorder list). The second 'lot' for the preorders was several months later. Apparently there were a number of R3 bodies that was delivered to specific named pro customers during this period.

It was only until June 2022 that they started arriving in earnest, and shortly after I received mine (June 13th), the complete preorder list was fulfilled and it was suddenly available for immediate pickup.

 

[rbr]

It’s certainly true that it’s possible to get a 3rd party f/2.8 trinity for cheaper than with Canon (especially if you’re unfortunate enough to live in the UK), and for some that’s important. But there’s no free lunch. If you pay half the price for a similarly spec’d lens, you’re not getting the same performance.

That might be true for telephoto lenses, but it certainly isn't true for wide angles. No Canon L wide angle lenses I have ever owned can hold a candle to Sigma Art lenses.

 

[Bonich]

That might be true for telephoto lenses, but it certainly isn't true for wide angles. No Canon L wide angle lenses I have ever owned can hold a candle to Sigma Art lenses.

In the FD and most of the EF area Canon wasn't good in fast wide primes. There is evidence this is no more the case:
- The only wide Canon L prime I own is the EF 35 1.4 II. I can't remember Sigma's 35 ART for DSLR to be any better.
But now we have a 35 ART for mirrorless and we are still waiting for Canon's to hit the market.
- In the meantime I do have exceptional fun with the RF28 pancake - an exceptional nice little but greatly performing biest.

 

[David - Sydney]

Manufacturing process have been automated more than trifold also. So I would dissagree. Canon is rather slow milking their lens roll out. They were still selling EF lenses for basic photographic needs and for Cinema use. They had no incentive to produce lenses quickly. They're simply milking it. Squeezing every drop of $$$ profit from EF.

I would milk profits if I could as well... wouldn't you?

R&D capacity is finite and will dictate their ability to release new products. They definitely has/had a roadmap but it would have varies over time especially with covid/supply chain issues. Production capacity is also limited. The ability to setup new products takes time especially for first time quality systems/processes. Too many = more quality issues.

We can wish for lots of things but reality is based on compromises.

EF lenses are clearly getting to be end-of-sale now. Last manufacturing runs are done so everything left will be finished goods inventory either at Canon or at larger retailers. Spare parts also put into repair inventory... generally at a higher inventory level than normal as suppliers use up the last of their raw components. I am not referring to items that are used in other current bodies/lenses but the overlap wouldn't be high. This last part of product lifecycle increases Canon's costs vs cash-cow run rate. They knew it would be coming so it was just a matter of when.

 

[David - Sydney]

Pedant.

Pedant: a person who is excessively concerned with minor details and rules or with displaying academic learning

While didactic can have a neutral meaning, pedantic is almost always an insult. It typically describes an irritating person who is eager to correct small errors others make, or who wants everyone to know just how much of an expert they are, especially in some narrow or boring subject matter.

 

[David - Sydney]

Any Sigma Art is as good as the Canon counterpart, and they're built as good or often way better, at least in dslr mount (never had an e-mount Sigma in my hand); can't really agree with you, sorry

When you make such a broad claim, you know that you will be proven wrong.
There are some Art lenses that Canon has never made as equibalent but noisy AF, weight/size are a compromise. The only one I own is the 20/1.4 and I wouldn't use it for video except manual focus as the AF is too noisy. Dustin Abbott describes it as "It is (by a good margin) the largest lens in its class" and weighs almost a kilo. Built well but coma is not great even in the center so is a major compromise in general. Yet despite all that is probably the best option for EF/RF for astro landscape.

 

[David - Sydney]

That might be true for telephoto lenses, but it certainly isn't true for wide angles. No Canon L wide angle lenses I have ever owned can hold a candle to Sigma Art lenses.

I am surprised by your statement... the EF16-35/4 and the RF14-35/4 are very good. Are the equivalent Art lenses that much better?
Happy to read a review showing the differences if you can point to them.

 

[Del Paso]

Some people just want to convince themselves and others that the lenses they can't or don't want to afford are not better than the ones they buy.
Many categorical statements have no objective or proven basis.

 

[Walrus]

When you make such a broad claim, you know that you will be proven wrong.

Don't want, or need, to be proven either right or wrong I just freely express my personal opinion (which is actually, tbh, with more grounds then yours, as I have the 40 and the 85, and I had the 50, the 135 and the 24-105 in the past, so I got to see and use much more Sigma's then you).

I didn't say "you're wrong", I said "I don't agree with you", it's pretty different