This is likely Canon’s lens roadmap for 2020

[padam]

Exactly what I was thinking. I have crop sensor right now, thinking about upgrading to FF. If I buy an RF camera I'll buy it with the 24-105 f/4, and I have the EF 100-400, but that leaves me needing a wide angle, and I personally cannot justify paying the price for the 15-35 f/2.8, wonderful as that lens may be. If they are going to introduce the tele member of the f/4 trinity, would be nice to also have the f/4 wide angle. Right now there's no affordable wide angle (35 is just barely wide angle).

They really don't need to re-create every lens right away, that already exists in EF-mount. (another reason for the light and slow primes, you can still use your fast EF telephotos if you want to)
It would be an RF 16-35 f/4 IS to keep it smaller and lighter than making it more expensive to push it to 15mm.
All the f/2.8 zooms either gained IS or a smaller size plus extra sharpness, they are not just 'minor' updates going from EF to RF.

It makes much more sense to do an RF 10-24 f/4L that is way lighter and smaller than the EF 11-24 f/L and it can still be sold at a profit.

 

[tron]

Here we go again! And once again I have to state: I've done a TONNE of wildlife shooting with the 500L+2x extender stopped down to f/10. Close enough to be relevant to an 800 f/11 lens. And this on aged Canon sensors! Mostly small birds and certainly not always in good light. People need to stop accepting received wisdom and open their minds a little.

*However* it does seem odd that the two extenders still appear to be orphaned. Even I would doubt a combination of 1600mm f/22 (although I did used to stack extenders and shoot handheld at 1400mm f/11).



Erm... what would you be shooting at night at 800mm anyway? Well there's the moon of course, in which case this lens would be ideal.

I also have used my 500mm 4L IS II with 2XIII at f/8 f/9 and f/10 with my 5DsR. But there is always the option to use it at f/8 to be close to DLA (f/6/7) and at the same time to enjoy 1000mm. And I realy have enjoyed the results!

But 1000mm at f/8 is not the same as 800mm at f/11. Of course portability is a totally different matter. But for that there is always D500 + 500mm f/5.6 PF !!! A really portable combo.

Now if only they made 800DO a stop brighter (but that would be rather big like 400DO +2X big).

 

[stevelee]

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?

Put a 2x converter on an f/5.6 lens, and you get about f/11, right?

[I've edited this back to the right version. Thanks to those who sent me corrections.]

 

[tron]

Maybe they are EF to RF TCs?

That I would love to have!

 

[Richard CR]

I also have used my 500mm 4L IS II with 2XIII at f/8 f/9 and f/10 with my 5DsR. But there is always the option to use it at f/8 to be close to DLA (f/6/7) and at the same time to enjoy 1000mm. And I realy have enjoyed the results!

But 1000mm at f/8 is not the same as 800mm at f/11. Of course portability is a totally different matter. But for that there is always D500 + 500mm f/5.6 PF !!! A really portable combo.

not to mention cost. if we have the right patent application for these lenses, then I can't see them being very expensive. it appears they are only 9 elements in 6 groups or so.

(I'm not sure what's going on with the forums. i'll have to talk to Craig.. viglink is doing some weird stuff.

 

[JustUs7]

I'm certainly no expert in the big whites area, having never owned or used one. Just a question. If they have a stable of big whites in the EF mounts all costing $5,000 - $13,000 - how many owners are going to be rushing out to replace a lens that expensive? How many have been holding off spending $10,000 on a lens just waiting for an RF version? Given the size and weight requirements for a fast, long lens like that - the weight penalty of an adapter is negligible. You're also not going to be hand-holding anyway.

Makes sense that Canon would produce something with reach that's much lighter and more affordable than anything in the EF world. They'll have R and RP owners that had no Canon glass options willing to buy 600mm and 800mm lenses that would never spend the kind of money needed for fast glass with that kind of reach. Assuming they aren't already adapting Sigma or Tamron 150 - 600.

 

[Pixel]

Sort of makes sense. There’s still no “pro” body on the radar for this year so that’s probably the reason for the lower end lenses. I think the real innovation and higher end lenses have to be on track for next year with the EOS 1R.
Although the extenders don’t make any sense.

 

[AlanF]

Put a 1.4x converter on an f/5.6 lens, and you get about f/11, right?

You can that nicely with a 100-400mm II on the R , RP, newer M series or the 5DIV and 90D in liveview as well as other cameras. I would see an R5 with the 100-500mm for general nature use and an 800mm at hand for those distant shots as a nice package.

 

[Richard CR]

Well if you're hand-holding, and if the IS is only worth 3 stops, the old "sunny 16" rules would say you could shoot 800mm at:

f/16 1/100 ISO100 (sunny)
f/11 1/100 ISO100 (hazy)
f/11 1/100 ISO200 (partly cloudy)
f/11 1/100 ISO400 (overcast)
f/11 1/100 ISO800 (shade)

But in fact the IS is usually 4-5 stops these days, PLUS in-camera IBIS. You might be able to shoot f/11 1/100 ISO100 handheld and still get 95% keepers.

Then add in any kind of tripod and it's better yet.

And that's all just the 800mm. The 600mm/11, with perhaps a 58mm front filter,\ will be 1/2 stop better.

Really the question almost why you'd need a bigger aperture than f/11. (And I say that as an 600/4IS owner.)

that isn't how you'd do it. you'd be shooting at ISO 800 or ISO 1600. 1/100 is going to be too slow. there's motion blur usually.

 

[tron]

I also have used my 500mm 4L IS II with 2XIII at f/8 f/9 and f/10 with my 5DsR. But there is always the option to use it at f/8 to be close to DLA (f/6/7) and at the same time to enjoy 1000mm. And I realy have enjoyed the results!

But 1000mm at f/8 is not the same as 800mm at f/11. Of course portability is a totally different matter. But for that there is always D500 + 500mm f/5.6 PF !!! A really portable combo.

not to mention cost. if we have the right patent application for these lenses, then I can't see them being very expensive. it appears they are only 9 elements in 6 groups or so.

Yes cost should be minimized just as size. That would be another advantage. But I see more 800/f11 as having a point. A 600/f8 would be more like it. But we do not know size and/or price yet so there is that.

 

[Antono Refa]

Put a 1.4x converter on an f/5.6 lens, and you get about f/11, right?

Wouldn't that be f/8?

 

[Deleted member 381342]

Put a 1.4x converter on an f/5.6 lens, and you get about f/11, right?

Nope you get a f/8. You need a 2x converter to make a f/5.6 into a f/11.

 

[gruhl28]

Put a 1.4x converter on an f/5.6 lens, and you get about f/11, right?

A 1.4x converter on an f/5.6 lens gives you f/8. A 2x converter gives f/11.

 

[Antono Refa]

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.

The EF 400mm f/5.6 is priced @ $1,150. The RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM is priced @ $2,699. That leaves Canon a large margin for an upgrade before the R1 release.

 

[stevelee]

A 1.4x converter on an f/5.6 lens gives you f/8. A 2x converter gives f/11.

Right. That's what I wrote in the first place, and then for some mental lapse edited it to 1.4x. Thanks for the correction.

 

[Sibir Lupus]

No love for the m mount

I'm confused, is this list only for RF lenses or all Canon lenses for this year? I know there is another post about 5 rumored EF-M lenses for this year.

 

[Tom W]

F/11 doesn't really make sense to me. I mean, yeah, the AF might handle it, but unless the high ISO performance of the new bodies is 2-3 stops better than my 5D4, then it won't be useful for birding in the dark shadows of the forest. I'm already in situations with the Sigma 150-600 because of its slow f/6.3 aperture at 600 mm, where I'm shooting at 6400 at times.

Bright sunny day, yeah, f/11 would be Ok maybe.

I would think that these f/11 lenses would be very inexpensive and small, compared to the f/4 600, say, but I'm just not sure how effective they'd be anywhere but in the best of lighting.

 

[Marximusprime]

'I can add to this information that both the RF 600mm f/11 IS STM and RF 800mm f/11 IS STM will be DO lenses as well.' Forgive my ignorance...but what does, 'DO' mean?

It stands for Diffractive Optics. Canon has used the tech in other lenses (400 f/4 DO I and II, for example). I'm not too keen on all the science but it basically enables the construction of more compact lenses.

 

[padam]

The EF 400mm f/5.6 is priced @ $1,150. The RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM is priced @ $2,699. That leaves Canon a large margin for an upgrade before the R1 release.

Does not make much sense, people don't want a slower 400mm prime when they can get the same level of optical quality in a 100-400 ii zoom or they have the new RF 100-500 to upgrade and pair it with a teleconverter if needed.
They also have the EF 400/4 ii DO and plenty of other options, very different price category, you double the amount of light and the price instantly doubles as well, same with having more reach.

Small and slow 600mm and 800mm primes make perfect sense for a lot of people, if they are priced right.
Not everyone of course, if they can buy an EF 400/2.8 iii or whatever they like, that's fine.

EF development might came to a halt, but they are very much in production and selling, same with EF-mount cameras and DSLRs.
The assumption, that there is "no world outside RF" is a very wrong one.

But, I think EF-M users might become a bit annoyed, that they may not see a native telephoto prime/high-quality tele zoom in their lens lineup (their cameras are pretty tiny anyway), they just need to keep adapting from EF, unless some third party manufacturer steps in.

 

[Tom W]

I don't know. There are people who use lenses like the 100-300mm 4.0-5.6 or 100-400mm 4.0-6.3 Panasonic lenses. These primes are equivalent on the long end in terms of field of view and noise.

Obviously there will be compromises, but there is a market for compact-is telephoto equipment and the STM might indicate rather competitive pricing. And being primes could also allow for decent optical performance as long as one is aware of the sharpness compromise when used on anything but an R6.

Ok, so lets say you're birding in the dark shadows of the woods. You need some shutter speed so you're shooting at 1/1000, f.5.6, ISO 3200 for proper exposure. Lets go to f/8 - now you're at iSO 6400, or you give up more shutter speed. At f/11, you're at ISO 12800 for the same exposure. Unless 12,800 in the new camera can give me the same noise characteristics as today's ISO 3200, then it's a non-starter for me.