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

[EricN]

How big are your pockets?!

I don't know the method for measuring pockets. They are fairly cheap jeans sold at Targe for around $17.99, but that was about 6 years ago.

 

[snappy604]

I have an RF24-70 2.8L and entertained the 24-105 RF-Z until I saw the price... I'm clearly not the target audience, but I am sad. These others sound interesting, but could never justify.

 

[danfaz]

I don't know the method for measuring pockets.

These bad boys can easily fit a lens in a pocket!

 

[becceric]

View attachment 215232
These bad boys can easily fit a lens in a pocket!

But they can barely fit the wearer's butt!

 

[DhlcadR6]

View attachment 215232
These bad boys can easily fit a lens in a pocket!

That'll be millions of pencils for John, enough to create peace from SoNitrolls

 

[EricN]

View attachment 215232
These bad boys can easily fit a lens in a pocket!

Maybe an ef200 f/2 could fit in there!

 

[RobbieHat]

Not sure if it would qualify as a “power zoom” but still hoping for a fast ultra wide in the 10-24 to 12-24 f2.8 range. Some day.

 

[EricN]

Not sure if it would qualify as a “power zoom” but still hoping for a fast ultra wide in the 10-24 to 12-24 f2.8 range. Some day.

It might be as big, heavy and expensive as the 24-70 f/2, but it should be possible.

 

[LAProducer]

I liked the Canon CN-E 18-80mm Servo Zoom becuase it was physically parfocal with a backfocus adjustment. That lens works perfectly on the BMPCC 6K, but won't even work on the Canon EOS R7 with any Official Canon EF-RF Adapter.

I never used the Servo-Zoom for that lens. I only did whip fast manual zooms at Awards Shows.

The new 24-105mm Z lens is great because of the constant F/2.8 aperture and extended range over the 24-70mm, however the lack of being physically parfocal is a big bummer.

Canon's Servo Zooms at this price range are whimpy and unusable for me where fast crisp zooms are necessary.

 

[Richard CR]

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...

Oh.. please throw shade at those APS-C cameras I can't be the only one tossing shade around in here

 

[Richard CR]

I liked the Canon CN-E 18-80mm Servo Zoom becuase it was physically parfocal with a backfocus adjustment. That lens works perfectly on the BMPCC 6K, but won't even work on the Canon EOS R7 with any Official Canon EF-RF Adapter.

I never used the Servo-Zoom for that lens. I only did whip fast manual zooms at Awards Shows.

The new 24-105mm Z lens is great because of the constant F/2.8 aperture and extended range over the 24-70mm, however the lack of being physically parfocal is a big bummer.

Canon's Servo Zooms at this price range are whimpy and unusable for me where fast crisp zooms are necessary.

I saw a patent application that seemed to suggest that canon was looking at automating keeping a lens parfocal. but the Japanese translation was too garbled to explain it. so they may be looking at other ways to improve this.

 

[HMC11]

Oh.. please throw shade at those APS-C cameras I can't be the only one tossing shade around in here

As you commanded - throwing on some shades........

 

[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

UPDATE: (Still thinking to much about it...) Just studied the referenced patent. It seems the lens in patent has a fixed length of 14.4cm. So pretty long, and it is of course because it is an internal zoom (probably needed for video and powerzoom compatibility?). So I guess it will be a pretty big lens.
Would still be an interesting lens, but probably not a potential standard-zoom to replace my EF-S 15-85mm...