This is likely Canon’s lens roadmap for 2020

[Sharlin]

Where is my 24mm / 35mm F1.2? Where is the 70-135mm F2? WHERE ARE ALL MY L LENSES?!?!?!

Canon just can't win, can they? When they release expensive groundbreaking L lenses, people ask where all the affordable midrange options are. When they release affordable midrange lenses, people demand more expensive groundbreaking L ones.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Canon just can't win, can they? When they release expensive groundbreaking L lenses, people ask where all the affordable midrange options are. When they release affordable midrange lenses, people demand more expensive groundbreaking L ones.

People want everything and at the same time. When Canon releases this 85mm F2 lens, im sure many will complain about the lack of 1.4 version or 1.8 version.

 

[chris_overseas]

The 800 f/11 struck me as odd at first glance, but I suspect its IS combined with the R5's IBIS would make it a very handy and lightweight lens to have around for stationary wildlife, even if the light isn't ideal.

Out of interest I just had a look at the metadata for my photos taken on the 800mm f/5.6. The breakdown of number of photos (keepers only) by aperture is as follows:

f/5.6 - 5995
f/6.3 - 1741
f/7.1 - 560
f/8.0 - 326
f/9.0 - 135
f/10 - 42
f/11 - 54
f/13 - 22
f/14 - 6
f/16 - 9
f/18 - 5
f/25 - 1

A lot of the f/11 and smaller aperture shots are of distant landscapes but there's a high percentage of wildlife shots in there too. I guess fairly predictably, the photos with aperture below f/11 tend to have been taken in poor light or have some movement/action happening, but having a shallow DoF is a significant factor in them too. The 800 f/11 + R5 would obviously struggle with the last two factors, but (optical quality differences aside) the extra stabilisation might mean it can still hold its own for still scenes in less than perfect lighting compared to a 5D IV + 800 f/5.6 setup.

 

[padam]

I expected Canon to make 500mm & 600mm f/5.6 DO to compete with Nikon's primes. I half expected 600mm f/6.7.

Do customers really prefer those two f/11 primes over a combo of 400mm f/5.6 + 1.4x TC + 2x TC? The 1.4x TC is supposedly on the way, is Canon going to skip over either the 400mm f/5.6 prime or 2x TC?

No reason to rush expensive telephotos at this point before the R1, the 400/5.6 is still available to use, but it's likely to be not nearly as good or portable.

 

[Sharlin]

what the hell do you do with a Canon RF 800mm f/11 ? Definitely not for nighttime shooting.

Shoot the moon. With a tracking mount, planets as well, and potentially deep-sky objects too. At daytime (with a solar filter) shooting the sun is also a use case.

 

[Otara]

F11 is less of an issue for video. I'm dubious though.

 

[fabao]

f/11 makes a lot of sense considering the Panasonic 100-400 4-6.3 that's very popular in the micro43 world. It's comparable to a 200-800 8-12.6 in FF. It could make the argument of choosing micro43 for its tiny lenses obsolete.

The Pana 100-400 performed great on a recent Safari trip! So portable and yes, as long as light levels are decent, f/11 is not an issue, and gives you more depth of field anyway to keep more of the animal in focus. For shorter focal lenses I just relied on FF.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

If true, it's interesting Canon is trying new things possible in mirrorless RF-mount world. As long as EF-lenses can still be used, it makes absolutely sense to make lenses of a kind never seen before. Interesting to see how big/heavy and "cheap" they will be.
Will they be popular lenses? Probably not even Canon knows for sure yet, but there's definitely potential to reach some new users who couldn't effort - or where not ready to carry the weight and size of - "similar" EF-lenses.

 

[mpb001]

It would be nice to see an RF 15-35 f4L?

 

[Viggo]

At least you won’t get any pointy harsh bokeh when “stopped down”

 

[Mark3794]

The big mistery for me is: what are the teleconverters for?

 

[Skux]

I wouldn't wish f/11 on my worst enemies.

 

[Bambel]

The big mistery for me is: what are the teleconverters for?

Maybe they are EF to RF TCs?

 

[padam]

For anyone in doubt, just look at the Olympus Zuiko Pro 300mm f/4 lens with a 1.4x teleconverter.
It has nearly the same FOV (840mm) and equivalent aperture around f/11, but probably better to step down slightly), it is perfectly capable of taking nice pictures with a lot of subjects, the double stabilisation will help out a lot, and it can also be carried anywhere.
This should be a better version of that. With the STM motor it should be perfect for video, too, where you don't need high shutter speeds and it does not necessarily need a huge tripod.

 

[Ph0t0]

600mm f11?
I can certainly appreciate a light lens. But Wow- with a brightest aperture of f11 this lens would have an extremely limited use.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

Seriously maybe an 800 f/8 would be ok, but 600 f/11 how pathetic. Maybe I won't be coming back to Canon with this barrage of ultra slow zooms. I don't care how good the ISO is of any new camera, even f/8 is a major impediment in anything but good light.
Hopefully this is incorrect as IMO it's absurd. It basically means they cannot produce a DO element larger than 100mm.

Where the hell are the 500 f/4 and 300 f/2.8 not this ultra slow rubbish.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Seriously maybe an 800 f/8 would be ok, but 600 f/11 how pathetic. Maybe I won't be coming back to Canon with this barrage of ultra slow zooms. I don't care how good the ISO is of any new camera, even f/8 is a major impediment in anything but good light.
Hopefully this is incorrect as IMO it's absurd. It basically means they cannot produce a DO element larger than 100mm.

Where the hell are the 500 f/4 and 300 f/2.8 not this ultra slow rubbish.

Just ask a wildlife photographer how many of his/her shots are made at F11. You will be surprised.

 

[fox40phil]

f/11.... no way :'(!
Why not f/8 ??? Especially 6.3 would be smaller as the 4.0/5.6 primes currently.

 

[Joules]

Hopefully this is incorrect as IMO it's absurd. It basically means they cannot produce a DO element larger than 100mm.

Come on. There are plenty of expensive big whites for the EF Mount out there.

Just because Canon leverages the advantages of on sensor AF here to produce what looks like affordable telephoto RF lenses, it doesn't mean that they can't or won't invest into less radical designs in the future. But it's not a priority at the moment since at the high end, you already have great options for use with adapters anyway.

 

[Deleted member 381342]

A 500mm f/5.6 and a 600mm f/5.6 would be ideal. After seeing the Nikon 500mm f/5.6 in person I am sold. F/11 is just not going to work here unless it’s at ISO 18000 in a forest.

Edit: I missed these are rumoured to be STM lenses so they aren’t aimed at me anyway. I am wanting a 500 or 600 f/5.6 L lens with all the weather sealing it can have so I can have a light prime for going on long walks.