The State of RF – 5 Years of Lenses

I think the issue isn't how many Canon is releasing but instead they're not really lenses that people want. A lot of them are just filler while we still have no f/1.4 lenses or third party alternatives (unlike literally every other brand now with Nikon having Tamron/Sigma), and you have to choose uber large and expensive or super cheap and flimsy with no middle.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0
Feb 21, 2020
289
440
I think the issue isn't how many Canon is releasing but instead they're not really lenses that people want. A lot of them are just filler while we still have no f/1.4 lenses or third party alternatives (unlike literally every other brand now with Nikon having Tamron/Sigma), and you have to choose uber large and expensive or super cheap and flimsy with no middle.
The 24-105 f/2.8 is the dream lens for many photographers and videographers, the 28mm f/2.8 is a fantastic pancake for almost everyone who likes pancakes, and people have asking for the RF-S 10-18mm for months (if not years).

All this amazing glass and people are really here begging for f/1.4 primes as if half a stop of light will make them a better photographer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
30,899
12,579
I think the issue isn't how many Canon is releasing but instead they're not really lenses that people want. A lot of them are just filler while we still have no f/1.4 lenses or third party alternatives (unlike literally every other brand now with Nikon having Tamron/Sigma), and you have to choose uber large and expensive or super cheap and flimsy with no middle.
LOL. No. Just lenses you don't want. News flash: Canon doesn't care about you personally, and they know the camera market a heck of a lot better than you do.
 
Upvote 0

Snapster

EOS R5
Nov 28, 2022
45
61
Lenses that I need and would buy in a heartbeat, that already exist:

Viltrox 16mm f/1.8 (fantastic lens, fantastic value, even takes 77mm filters, RF has nothing like this)
Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG DN (RF 35mm f/1.8 has a sucky STM and no weather sealing, not happy with it)
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG DN (RF 85mm f/2 with the same STM motor and no weather sealing, not interested. 85mm f/1.2L - expensive brick = not interested. Also, just knowing the Sigma exists makes me not want to ever buy the 85L for triple the price, double the weight and a questionable increase in image quality.)

For 70-200 I'll stick with my RF because of best possible AF. It's the only lens I really want from Canon's current lineup. Perhaps the RF 200-800 after some reviews.

I would also get a Sigma 16-28mm or Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 over RF 14-35mm f/4L because I don't need 35mm from an ultrawide lens and speed does matter. Don't want the 15-35 f/2.8L either because all my filters are 77mm and an ultrawide f/2.8 zoom doesn't have to be over 77mm.

I'd like to stick with Canon but it's getting increasingly annoying not getting those lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I considered buying several Sigma Art lenses for EF mount. They performed really well (sometimes better than Canon) on black and white wall charts. However, every time I dug deep into pro reviews, I found that, in the real world, AF performance was pretty poor. This may not matter on wide angles where DOF hides lack of focus precision but, for my work, it is critical. Generally, they are also very heavy and not always cheaper. IMO, the biggest benefit from going to the R mount was greatly improved AF performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
3,169
4,042
I considered buying several Sigma Art lenses for EF mount. They performed really well (sometimes better than Canon) on black and white wall charts. However, every time I dug deep into pro reviews, I found that, in the real world, AF performance was pretty poor. This may not matter on wide angles where DOF hides lack of focus precision but, for my work, it is critical. Generally, they are also very heavy and not always cheaper. IMO, the biggest benefit from going to the R mount was greatly improved AF performance.
And a 100% certainty that manual focus lenses will be perfectly focused. This was my main gripe with DSLRs. Focusing luminous teles was often a matter of chance, since I dislike wearing reading glasses to use the rear LCD .
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
30,899
12,579
I expect Sigma to fill in the RF 1.4 lens gaps while Canon concentrates on it specially lenses.
Don't hold your breath. Canon stated, "We'll consider requests from 3rd party vendors to make RF lenses on a case-by-case basis." That's like when a child asks to have 20 friends over for a sleepover the next night, and a parent replies, "We'll see."
 
Upvote 0
I think the issue isn't how many Canon is releasing but instead they're not really lenses that people want. A lot of them are just filler while we still have no f/1.4 lenses or third party alternatives (unlike literally every other brand now with Nikon having Tamron/Sigma), and you have to choose uber large and expensive or super cheap and flimsy with no middle.
"People" is doing a lot of work here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
3,169
4,042
I think the issue isn't how many Canon is releasing but instead they're not really lenses that people want. A lot of them are just filler while we still have no f/1.4 lenses or third party alternatives (unlike literally every other brand now with Nikon having Tamron/Sigma), and you have to choose uber large and expensive or super cheap and flimsy with no middle.
I would be interested in your definition of the "people".
Because, according to your post, it seems quite restrictive...I feel excluded.:cry:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
3,169
4,042
Lenses that I need and would buy in a heartbeat, that already exist:

Viltrox 16mm f/1.8 (fantastic lens, fantastic value, even takes 77mm filters, RF has nothing like this)
Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG DN (RF 35mm f/1.8 has a sucky STM and no weather sealing, not happy with it)
Sigma 85mm f/1.4 DG DN (RF 85mm f/2 with the same STM motor and no weather sealing, not interested. 85mm f/1.2L - expensive brick = not interested. Also, just knowing the Sigma exists makes me not want to ever buy the 85L for triple the price, double the weight and a questionable increase in image quality.)

For 70-200 I'll stick with my RF because of best possible AF. It's the only lens I really want from Canon's current lineup. Perhaps the RF 200-800 after some reviews.

I would also get a Sigma 16-28mm or Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 over RF 14-35mm f/4L because I don't need 35mm from an ultrawide lens and speed does matter. Don't want the 15-35 f/2.8L either because all my filters are 77mm and an ultrawide f/2.8 zoom doesn't have to be over 77mm.

I'd like to stick with Canon but it's getting increasingly annoying not getting those lenses.
Here we go again...
 
Upvote 0
Needed lens:
- RF Fisheye
- 50mm 1.4 (ofc)
- 400 f4.5 like Nikkor.
Do we need a RF fisheye? The EF8-15/4 is great but is a pretty niche lens. RF version would be nice but wouldn't sell a lot compared to a 50/1.4 for instance.
Given that all EF lenses are to be discontinued at some point, you would assume a replacement but maybe Canon will let 3rd parties fill the gap if they don't want to.
I would put the fisheye in the same category as a long macro and a >2x macro (MP-E 65mm replacement). Nice to have but low volume.
 
Upvote 0
I think they are doing good by mostly getting new RF lens to what DSLR EF mount cannot do, say the 28-70 F2.0, or the crazy super tele zooms which can have apertures too narrow for DSLR to AF. Since the late 90s at most, the lens image quality becomes so good that what I actually desired for L lens, is the constant aperture zooms to not worry about aperture setting when I zoom in and out for recomposing, sure every gen is improving in IQ, but say in 2023, give me a first gen 24-70 F2.8L (provided the dreadful tendancy of decentering after bump isn't there) I will still be perfectly happy for the IQ despite the now obsolete corner sharpness, which beside pixel peeping do not matter much.
 
Upvote 0
Do we need a RF fisheye? The EF8-15/4 is great but is a pretty niche lens. RF version would be nice but wouldn't sell a lot compared to a 50/1.4 for instance.
Given that all EF lenses are to be discontinued at some point, you would assume a replacement but maybe Canon will let 3rd parties fill the gap if they don't want to.
I would put the fisheye in the same category as a long macro and a >2x macro (MP-E 65mm replacement). Nice to have but low volume.
Well, I need one for next summer among all other underwater photographers.
 
Upvote 0
Sep 20, 2020
2,982
2,355
Well, the discussion was about all RF lenses being new optical formulas. I brought up the fact that that is not true for the prime exotics. Doesn't matter how recent they are, they still existed as EF lenses before the "new" RF ones
It depends on what you mean by "new".
Those EF lenses were relatively new.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

roby17269

R5, H5X + IQ1-80, DJI Mini & Mavic 3 Pro, GoPro 10
Feb 26, 2014
405
495
New York
rdmfashionphoto.com
It depends on what you mean by "new".
Those EF lenses were relatively new.
I am sorry I fail to see where the confusion lays... :unsure:
The discussion was about RF lenses having new optical designs compared to EF lenses.
The RF big white exotic 400mm and 600mm primes are copies of the existing EF big white mkIII exotic primes. Therefore the RF ones are not new designs.
They may be called "recent" designs, but they are not new.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
I considered buying several Sigma Art lenses for EF mount. They performed really well (sometimes better than Canon) on black and white wall charts. However, every time I dug deep into pro reviews, I found that, in the real world, AF performance was pretty poor. This may not matter on wide angles where DOF hides lack of focus precision but, for my work, it is critical. Generally, they are also very heavy and not always cheaper. IMO, the biggest benefit from going to the R mount was greatly improved AF performance.
My experience with AF on DSLR (6D, so certainly not the best AF module in Canon reflex lineup) was spot on with all my Sigma Art; and when you move to mirrorless, the eventual slight front/back focus, if any, becomes a non issue, if you know the difference of how AF is done on a DSLR vs ML, as on the latter you focus directly on the image sensor.
That's why ML cameras don't have the AF microadjust function, that was implemented in all relevant DSLR bodies.
 
Upvote 0