There will be lens announcements in November

[neuroanatomist]

The article says "We do not believe it will have a built-in teleconverter, as there is a new teleconverter coming." Has there been anything reported about the teleconverter recently? I've been tracking any news and haven't seen anything. Also, are we still expecting it to be a variable teleconverter? Thanks.

I nave not seen anything recently (in the past few months). I suspect if there's a fancy new TC, it will be a 1.4x-2x switchable. That would be pretty coo, though the one patent on it made it look rather unwieldy. The discussion of a 1x-1.4x-2x switchable TC sprung out of a misinterpretation of a different patent application and a lack of knowledge about optics.

 

[tomscott]

Snore... there's a reason I stopped contributing seems not much changes. Either way, answer for anything.

 

[David - Sydney]

I can't understand the lack of a RF fisheye instead of the old EF 8-15 mm at this point.

Like the EF180 macro, the MP-E65, the EF8-15mm/4 is in a pretty niche area. Canon had plenty of time over the last 30 years to bring out interesting EF lenses but haven't updated a lot of them over that time. The EF15mm fisheye wasn't the best performer and has sort of disappeared completely now.

I don't find many issues with my EF8-15mm/4. The fringing on the 8mm circle can be cropped out but not "fixed". The sharpness is acceptable given the astro and underwater use case for me. If a RF version came out, I probably wouldn't upgrade but picking one up second hand is good value.

What is your use case (and business case) for an updated version?

PS: Canon has released some pretty interesting (compelling?!?) RF lenses over the last 5-6 years that Sony/Nikon haven't copied.

 

[David - Sydney]

Fisheye is for underwater photography, needed to avoid big domes.

As far a I know, you need a dome for a fisheye to enable almost 180 degree field of view. I use a 8". For circular fisheye for APS-C then something like a 6" dome would be sufficient. You certainly couldn't use a flat port.
I use fisheye for astro and other abstract/weird perspective architectural shots.

Can you elaborate?

 

[David - Sydney]

For astro-landscapes it helps because coma is more easily corrected with a fisheye than with standard rectilinear lenses (see Sigma 14 f/1.4 vs 15 f/1.4 fisheye coma performance). Of course, the disadvantage is that you have to de-fish in post.

Given the scale of the field of view, the size of the stars are very small. How large would you need to print to be able to see the coma?

 

[David - Sydney]

So hell ye im going to shout out some annoyance.
If you dont mention anything then nothing ever happens.

But this forum is not the place if you really want Canon to listen.
I don't believe that we have any link back to Canon's marketing department.

Try giving direct feedback via Canon's support pages with your suggestions for why it is best for them to produce the lenses you want.

 

[David - Sydney]

Having the Rf 10-20mm f/4L, I can't understand the NEED for a fisheye.

The RF10-20 is wide but not 180 degree wide. Let me know what your process is to shoot a similar image to below
I can see that the RF10 could be used with post processed keystone correction for TS-E lenses but not for circular fisheye usage.

Ikelite did an edge sharpness comparison between the 2 lenses if you are interested. Qualitative rather than quantitive review
https://www.ikelite.com/blogs/revie...n-canon-ef-8-15mm-fisheye-vs-canon-rf-10-20mm

 

[Gogo7]

Mainly to fulfil the wildlife category that Nikon is serving well.

TBH I dont know why you have to be so snarky with every reply, it's really quite tiring tbh almost every post of yours is the same.

It is perfectly acceptable to want more from what canons RF range is offering. Ive been shooting canon for 20 years and not interested in changing but observing another brand making good product is also positive, competition is positive.

Im one of many asking for other options watch wild Alaska, Duade Patton, Jan Wagner etc etc there are a lot of people wanting different options for wildlife.

 

[Gogo7]

He only is looking for trouble. Trolling non stop. Don’t even listen to him

 

[neuroanatomist]

He only is looking for trouble. Trolling non stop. Don’t even listen to him

Says the guy spouting the conspiracy theory that Canon had the R1 ready in 2021 but panicked because of Sony and Nikon and renamed it the R3. If you’re looking for a troll, find a mirror.

Meanwhile, someone posts a statement about lenses Canon needs to release (or else what?), but questioning why Canon must do that is somehow snarky. Okay fine. People make unsupported claims, and when called on their BS they prefer to shoot the messenger, likely because they know their claims are unsupportable.

Incidentally, how do you know that Canon panicked and renamed the R1 as the R3 in 2021? Did you ever dig up that internal Canon memo? I didn’t think so.

 

[sanj]

Actually, reality doesn’t offend me, but it is comical when people clap back to you how that offends you, gets you insecure as well as other things I bet and that makes me happy so I will have a great day. You are my favorite troll because you are so simple. You disguise insecurities with knowledge to make everyone look at you like an authority

Neuro is not a troll. An extreme fanboy, blunt and rude, but not a troll.

 

[frankchn]

Given the scale of the field of view, the size of the stars are very small. How large would you need to print to be able to see the coma?

I agree it is diminishing returns at some point, but astro folks will buy specialized liquid cooled sensors to get photos, so this is nothing to them. They will chase every last pixel.

 

[David - Sydney]

I agree it is diminishing returns at some point, but astro folks will buy specialized liquid cooled sensors to get photos, so this is nothing to them. They will chase every last pixel.

Yes, but that is for deep sky imaging rather than fish eye

 

[xmarijan]

Are there any news about RF-S lenses?

With the exception of special dual fisheye lens we still don't have an RF-S prime.

 

[koenkooi]

Are there any news about RF-S lenses?

With the exception of special dual fisheye lens we still don't have an RF-S prime.

With all the RF-S bodies being larger than needed, with the exception of the R7, moving over the EF-M primes isn't a priority. The R8 being so compact and yet feature laden for a decent price indicates to me that RF-S won't get nice things.

 

[xmarijan]

With all the RF-S bodies being larger than needed, with the exception of the R7, moving over the EF-M primes isn't a priority. The R8 being so compact and yet feature laden for a decent price indicates to me that RF-S won't get nice things.

Maybe it is not a priority, but also I cannot imagine not releasing a wide angle fast prime at all. I think there was at least one planned RF-S lens release for Q3 2024.

 

[stillviking]

I don't find many issues with my EF8-15mm/4. The fringing on the 8mm circle can be cropped out but not "fixed". The sharpness is acceptable given the astro and underwater use case for me. If a RF version came out, I probably wouldn't upgrade but picking one up second hand is good value.

What is your use case (and business case) for an updated version?

Smaller lens with same minimum focus distance = smaller dome needed. EF adapter needs an extra extension port always because of +2cm.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Maybe it is not a priority, but also I cannot imagine not releasing a wide angle fast prime at all.

I suppose it depends on how you define wide angle. I learned the definition as wider than 35 mm (full frame equivalent FOV), and with that definition did Canon ever make a wide angle prime for APS-C? The M22/2 is close at just longer than 35mm. The widest EF-S lens was 24mm (and not very fast at f/2.8).

Given that Canon never released a wide, fast APS-C prime even before they started placing more emphasis on FF, I can quite easily imagine them not doing so now.

If you want a wide, fast(ish) prime on your APS-C camera, the RF 16/2.8 is quite possibly the closest you’re going to get.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think there was at least one planned RF-S lens release for Q3 2024.

In addition to the RF-S dual fisheye, there was a development announcement for a second RF-S lens that should start shipping soon, but that was also aimed at VR (7.8mm dual lens).

I’m not aware of any recent rumors regarding more crop lenses this year. As @koenkooi suggested, I would not expect much love for crop lenses from Canon in the future. The best hope is that they are now allowing third-parties to make them.

 

[xmarijan]

In addition to the RF-S dual fisheye, there was a development announcement for a second RF-S lens that should start shipping soon, but that was also aimed at VR (7.8mm dual lens).

I’m not aware of any recent rumors regarding more crop lenses this year. As @koenkooi suggested, I would not expect much love for crop lenses from Canon in the future. The best hope is that they are now allowing third-parties to make them.

I consider FOV of 40-70mm as normal lenses on FF cameras. I had in mind something like RF-S 22mm, i.e. EF-M lens being adapted for the RF mount. I don't think it is far-fetched that Canon release such lens. For 32mm I am not so sure.