There are at least 3 more PowerZoom lenses coming [CR3]

[Canon Rumors Guy]

We have been sitting on this information for a while waiting on approval, and with Richard showing off a patent for an RF-S 15-60mm f/2.8 USM Z optical formula, we’re able to move forward with a bit more information in regards to the PowerZoom line. Canon introduced the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z back

See full article...

 

[Navism]

RF-S 15-60mm may be a cinema lens.
They released compact-servo lens for EF mount.
I think it is RF mount for C70 and the future C300 and C200.

 

[Maximilian]

I can understand that PowerZoom is interesting for some, esp. for some cine and video use cases.
Personally I am not into that.
I appreciate seeing WA zooms for APS-C with wide apertures.
As I am into the 70-200 market, I am not sure what that internal zoom lens means to the existing one and which to prefer.
I love the small design of the existing 70-200/2.8, but I would love to use Extenders on it as well.
I am not sure if I would like an EF-sized 70-200/2.8 just for the extender.
As I said PowerZoom is not a factor for me.

 

[afterimage]

I can see some advantages of Canon's approach for some of the more heavy-duty pro video lenses, with a separate zoom motor.

However, I think they've missed a trick when it comes to lighter weight offerings. In their 16-35 f/4 PZ, Sony put both the internal focus and zoom lens groups on linear motors - and that led to a lens with both focus and zoom by wire. So you get that functionality 'for free' without bolting on some external gizmo.

Can't help feeling the all-automated route is more future proof.

 

[cpreston]

“we think there needs to be something more video focused to pair with a PowerZoom RF-S lens.”

You mean the C70?

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I can see some advantages of Canon's approach for some of the more heavy-duty pro video lenses, with a separate zoom motor.

However, I think they've missed a trick when it comes to lighter weight offerings. In their 16-35 f/4 PZ, Sony put both the internal focus and zoom lens groups on linear motors - and that led to a lens with both focus and zoom by wire. So you get that functionality 'for free' without bolting on some external gizmo.

Can't help feeling the all-automated route is more future proof.

The 16-35 f/4 PZ is kind of meh.
It is not in the same league.

 

[DhlcadR6]

R7 need this 15-60....

 

[neuroanatomist]

In their 16-35 f/4 PZ, Sony put both the internal focus and zoom lens groups on linear motors - and that led to a lens with both focus and zoom by wire. So you get that functionality 'for free' without bolting on some external gizmo.

Can't help feeling the all-automated route is more future proof.

I haven't used a zoom-by-wire ILC lens. I don't mind focus-by-wire, mainly because I only rarely manually focus. I'm not sure I'd like a zoom-by-wire lens, unless the control was manual-like in terms of zoom speed.

 

[afterimage]

The 16-35 f/4 PZ is kind of meh.

Really? How so?

It's small, sharp, quick focussing and good value. What more do you want?

 

[blackcoffee17]

Really? How so?

It's small, sharp, quick focussing and good value. What more do you want?

Its not a Canon

 

[Stig Nygaard]

If Canon was to release a RF-S 15-60/2.8 lens, it would be Canon's first interesting RF-S lens for me.
I don't do video, and don't care about powerzoom option. But definitely sounds like a perfect replacement for my EF-S 17-55/2.8.

I would probably miss something in the long end if making it my standard walk-around lens instead of the EF-S 15-85mm. But it has the important 15mm in the short end, so if weight of an RF-S 15-60mm/2.8 was closer to the EF-S 15-85mm than to the 17-55mm/2.8 (which I hope is realistic with the shorter flange distance of a mirrorless lens?), it might still be considered for that too.

Oh well. I'm thinking to much about it. It is still only a "random" lens-patent coupled with a not so specific rumour

 

[nunataks]

It's a bit confusing that all those rumors of multiple cameras and lenses and Canon has yet to release anything so far this year.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

It's a bit confusing that all those rumors of multiple cameras and lenses and Canon has yet to release anything so far this year.

I agree. What´s even more confusing to me are the high CR2/ CR3 ratings. There are so many contradicting rumors, yet they all seem very plausible. Canon having released nothing in 2024 yet makes it more confusing. As I stated several times: imho Canon has pretty much shut down the rumor mill entirely. We only hear what Canon would like us to hear e.g. more Z zoom lenses are coming...

 

[blackcoffee17]

I agree. What´s even more confusing to me are the high CR2/ CR3 ratings. There are so many contradicting rumors, yet they all seem very plausible. Canon having released nothing in 2024 yet makes it more confusing. As I stated several times: imho Canon has pretty much shut down the rumor mill entirely. We only hear what Canon would like us to hear e.g. more Z zoom lenses are coming...

Did it ever happen before Canon not to release anything before March?

 

[Deleted member 393539]

If we're lucky enough, those 3 PowerZoom lenses are released before the RF 35mm f/1.2 L is...

 

[john1970]

At first, I was against buying the 70-200 mm internal zoom, but I am now strongly considering it as a companion to the 24-105 mm lens.

 

[ashmadux]

Sounds like the current 70-200RF will become the 'cheaper' (but not cheap!) version to make way for that premium experience.

Being that this canon, that's 3000/3200$ easy.

Who needs a 50 1.4 update anyways

 

[danfaz]

At first, I was against buying the 70-200 mm internal zoom, but I am now strongly considering it as a companion to the 24-105 mm lens.

Mmm hmm.

 

[neuroanatomist]

At first, I was against buying the 70-200 mm internal zoom, but I am now strongly considering it as a companion to the 24-105 mm lens.

Not for me, unless it offers something other than internal zoom and PZ attachment. The latter doesn’t interest me, and I had the former with the EF version that I happily swapped for the smaller, lighter RF version.

 

[danfaz]

Sounds like the current 70-200RF will become the 'cheaper' (but not cheap!) version to make way for that premium experience.

Being that this canon, that's 3000/3200$ easy.

Possibly, but I think longer teles are easier to make than wide-short teles.
Someone correct me if wrong, of course.