These are a few of the RF lenses coming in 2021 [CR2]

[Joules]

Still no 135mm. All we have is the lone 24 year old EF version. Ridiculous.

We don't even know what else will be coming in 2021. And being 24 years old, it took Canon many years after the release of the EF mount to make that lens. Everything in RF is going at pretty brisk paste. Eventually all market niches should be happy. For the meantime, the EF lenses work well on RF and DSLR alike.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Still no 135mm. All we have is the lone 24 year old EF version. Ridiculous.

Everyone wants their own lens but i think Canon is doing quite well. Having 20 RF lenses in 2 years is a lot.

 

[brad-man]

Everyone wants their own lens but i think Canon is doing quite well. Having 20 RF lenses in 2 years is a lot.

I don't know what you mean by that, but Canon is certainly not doing quite well until they release the RF 70-200 f/4L IS...

 

[Deleted member 381342]

I don't know what you mean by that, but Canon is certainly not doing quite well until they release the RF 70-200 f/4L IS...

There is a f/2.8 version out that no one else can match. And Nikon just got their 70-200 f/2.8 out with no sign of the f/4. I get wanting a 70-200 f/4, but it is a little off to say that they are doing bad until that lens comes out. We all want our go to lens to be updated or our dream lens.

 

[brad-man]

There is a f/2.8 version out that no one else can match. And Nikon just got their 70-200 f/2.8 out with no sign of the f/4. I get wanting a 70-200 f/4, but it is a little off to say that they are doing bad until that lens comes out. We all want our go to lens to be updated or our dream lens.

It was meant to be funny. I guess it missed...

 

[Deleted member 381342]

It was meant to be funny. I guess it missed...

Apologies for miss reading your intent. There are a lot of legitimate post regarding their favourite lens as a must have both here and on the Nikon side.

 

[Architect1776]

They have made an EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM lens, it wasn't very good, but it was in 2004, technology have gone a long way since them.

So yes, in a much smaller and simpler lens it may not cost that much to produce and it may perform well.
So far, they haven't really missed the marks for most RF lenses, and these new lenses weren't very good in practice, they wouldn't release them in the first place.

I hope so.

 

[Starting out EOS R]

They've released the 24-240 already as a superzoom, I think it's unlikely they'll revisit the 28-300 L line because to be honest, you can't really do a good enough quality superzoom without it being enormously heavy and enormously expensive.

I looked at the 24-240 and for the price, it's quite impressive. some of the reviews were happy with the results but highlighted that there was a fair bit of lens correction happening via software and without that, the results were not good.

I don't suppose it matters much how the results are achieved but overall I decided to not buy that lens as it didn't feel that robust. Your right about the weight of the 28-300 L, it's very heavy, I got to the shop to actually buy one and asked to put it on a body to try it in the shop. in about 5 seconds, I realised that unless I did some weight training I just wouldn't be able to use it handheld.

I have the RF 70-200MML and it's light and useable compared to the EF version which is why I wondered if an RF 28-300MM version may be lighter and more usable. You're probably right though as the number of elements / blades would mean it could only be reduced so much and still be pretty weighty.

 

[blackcoffee17]

I don't know what you mean by that, but Canon is certainly not doing quite well until they release the RF 70-200 f/4L IS...

But that's still not enough. Canon is doomed until they don't have a 24mm 1.2 and 135mm 1.2.

 

[lawny13]

Zero sarcasm. Canon has released 2 RF L primes. How many EF L primes are there? No way Canon ignores prime users going forward.

Never said they would. But they don’t exactly have affordable lenses out. So there needs to be some balance.

Pretty sure I stated that they should release some affordable primes and not just L ones. And it isn’t just about cost, But also size and weight. I personally like having a 50mm for on the go. The 50f1.2 is most definitely not that kinda lens.

So should canon bring out more L primes? Of course. But should they do just that and no affordable lenses while they are trying to get the mount adopted? Of course not. Most people won’t drop 3k for every lens they buy. Just saying.

 

[padam]

Pretty sure I stated that they should release some affordable primes and not just L ones. And it isn’t just about cost, But also size and weight. I personally like having a 50mm for on the go. The 50f1.2 is most definitely not that kinda lens.

After this year, they will have a cheaper 35-50-85, they have the 24-105/4 from the start, they will have the 70-200/4, and you can adapt from EF, which is probably cheaper. They also have more Samyang lenses coming after the 14/2.8 and 85/1.4
Not sure what's your problem exactly, for a two year old system it has many options, rest is available from EF, the adapter is a must have for any complainers who buy it anyway. If they don't invest in the system, they have 0 reasons to complain...
Simply put, the more you wait, the more options you'll get.

 

[blackcoffee17]

After this year, they will have a cheaper 35-50-85, they have the 24-105/4 from the start, they will have the 70-200/4, and you can adapt from EF, which is probably cheaper. They also have more Samyang lenses coming after the 14/2.8 and 85/1.4
Not sure what's your problem exactly, for a two year old system it has many options, rest is available from EF, the adapter is a must have for any complainers who buy it anyway. If they don't invest in the system, they have 0 reasons to complain...
Simply put, the more you wait, the more options you'll get.

In 2 years Canon will get from 1 to 10 affordable non-l primes and zooms. Plus EF lenses can almost be considered native too, compatibility is perfect.

 

[highdesertmesa]

They've released the 24-240 already as a superzoom, I think it's unlikely they'll revisit the 28-300 L line because to be honest, you can't really do a good enough quality superzoom without it being enormously heavy and enormously expensive.

LOL have you paid for and used an RF 28-70, 85 1.2, or 50 1.2? Canon ain’t shy about expensive, big and heavy.

 

[chellm]

Hm, 24mm macro sounds weird for me. Is this a usefull lense? I never heard of anything like that...

With my Leica R 21mm f. 4 III I can focus as close as 20 cm (8") and I can get a 1:2 of small objects.. I found it very useful w/out mounting anything between camera and lens..

 

[TonyPM]

Hm, 24mm macro sounds weird for me. Is this a usefull lense? I never heard of anything like that...

Well, I have the Efs 24mm f2.8 macro stm.

And the 18-45 is stm does look like an apsc lens.

 

[David - Sydney]

How about a 2000mm f22?! ...

We need more f11+ lenses!!!!1 who the fk needs heavy wide open lenses...if you have a tripod and buildings to photograph or landscapes

Still waiting for a really great wildlife lens!

wellll... the 800mm f11 with 2x extender would be 1600mm @ f22 (if the TCs are RF-RF)

 

[Richard CR]

I don't know what you mean by that, but Canon is certainly not doing quite well until they release the RF 70-200 f/4L IS...

If canon stays the blistering pace of around 7 lenses per year, it will take them 9 years to do the entire catalog. When you think of it that way, maybe things will sort themselves out, but Canon has to look at global priorities for lenses, which may be different than what you want.

 

[navastronia]

If canon stays the blistering pace of around 7 lenses per year, it will take them 9 years to do the entire catalog. When you think of it that way, maybe things will sort themselves out, but Canon has to look at global priorities for lenses, which may be different than what you want.

Just please let them make the niche lenses last instead of the lenses most recently refreshed in EF mount -- I'm looking at you, 35/1.4 L II (est. 2016).

 

[Mr Majestyk]

The fact that the EOS RP + 24-105 f4-7.1 is currently 999$ at B&H is a solid proof that we won't see aps-c RF cameras. Also, there is the M line for small and compact camera.

Link if you wanna grab this super sweet deal:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1558260-REG/canon_3380c132_eos_rp_mirrorless_digital.html

I'll take a fully featured APS-C over a heavily crippled FF any day of the year. It proves nothing.

 

[jedy]

Hm, 24mm macro sounds weird for me. Is this a usefull lense? I never heard of anything like that...

I once had a Sigma 24mm f1.8 macro and the macro (not true 1:1) was next to useless imo. The field of view close up was too distorted and when trying to take photos of flowers, for example, because I had to stand so close, there would always be unwanted shadows in the shot. Macro should really be left to longer focal lengths.