This is likely Canon’s lens roadmap for 2020

[blackcoffee17]

My main problem with Canon lenses is they either have fast (f1.2 or f1.4) lenses that are great, well made, feel solid OR they have slower aperture lenses (f1.8, f2) that are cheap, loud, and plastic-y.

I'd love a set of F2 primes (24, 35, 85) and awesome to see an 85mm F2 IS - that's a great combo. However, if it is made like the 35mm f1.8 IS (which I'm guessing it will be), it will be loud, plastic-y, and cheap. That was the same with their EF lenses.

Why won't Canon make good, solid slower primes like Sigma (with their Sigma 45mm f2.8) Fuji (all their F2 primes are excellent and small)? F2 primes that are 300-450 grams, solidly built, and with quiet autofocus is the best balance of speed, weight, and usability.

I totally agree with that. It's like someone who doesn't want to lug around a 3kg 1.2 prime does not want weather sealing or better build quality either.

 

[Aussie shooter]

My main problem with Canon lenses is they either have fast (f1.2 or f1.4) lenses that are great, well made, feel solid OR they have slower aperture lenses (f1.8, f2) that are cheap, loud, and plastic-y.

I'd love a set of F2 primes (24, 35, 85) and awesome to see an 85mm F2 IS - that's a great combo. However, if it is made like the 35mm f1.8 IS (which I'm guessing it will be), it will be loud, plastic-y, and cheap. That was the same with their EF lenses.

Why won't Canon make good, solid slower primes like Sigma (with their Sigma 45mm f2.8) Fuji (all their F2 primes are excellent and small)? F2 primes that are 300-450 grams, solidly built, and with quiet autofocus is the best balance of speed, weight, and usability.

They do have the mid range of lenses. At least in the EF. Things like the 100mm USM macro etc. That line is the mid range. Although they are old designs so they fall short of the third party manufacturers somewhat

 

[Phil]

f/11 makes no sense. Sorry, I'll stick to carrying my heavy 600mm f/4 II. #DREAD

I live with the 1.4x tele, so I would be fine dealing with f/5.6 by default if they made the lens lighter/smaller (a la Nikon 500). But otherwise? No thanks. I'm not in the "make cheaper glass" arena so lighter and smaller would be my main reason for getting a new/additional 600mm.

It's bad enough I was considering the new RF 100-500 with the long end at f/7.1...

Look, I love my EOS R. I love my RF Glass (28-70mm f2, 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.2, 85mm f1.2, 70-200 f2.8)
I'm the first one to jump on board... but not this time. YEESH.

I can wait though. I have the 1DX3 for now...

Gear bragging post! ;-)

 

[navastronia]

My main problem with Canon lenses is they either have fast (f1.2 or f1.4) lenses that are great, well made, feel solid OR they have slower aperture lenses (f1.8, f2) that are cheap, loud, and plastic-y.

I'd love a set of F2 primes (24, 35, 85) and awesome to see an 85mm F2 IS - that's a great combo. However, if it is made like the 35mm f1.8 IS (which I'm guessing it will be), it will be loud, plastic-y, and cheap. That was the same with their EF lenses.

Why won't Canon make good, solid slower primes like Sigma (with their Sigma 45mm f2.8) Fuji (all their F2 primes are excellent and small)? F2 primes that are 300-450 grams, solidly built, and with quiet autofocus is the best balance of speed, weight, and usability.

I understand your compaints, but there are two main reasons why there's not a lot of mid-range glass of the kind you describe

1) Fuji is making APS-C glass, not full-frame. If it were full-frame, the lenses would be larger and more expensive.

2) Mid-range glass isn't ideal for showing off the capabilities of the new platform.

3) Other companies (Sigma, Tamron) currently fill that void in EF mount. Canon can still sell R bodies to customers with 3rd party EF glass (personally, 3 of my 5 lenses are 3rd-party EF glass, and I use them on an RP).

 

[Phil]

I don't mind a nice shot of a Bin Chicken but tbh it is not something I do on a regular basis

Yep the only thing I would shoot a ibis with has a barrel attached to it!

 

[Dexter75]

Where is the RF 135? The EF 135 f/2 is the oldest lens in Canons lineup, 24 years old and never been updated. Ridiculous.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

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

I just asked myself and it's extremely rarely and I know that of the thousands upon thousands of shots I see on Fredmiranda in the wildlfie threads it's also very rare. I don't just work in ultrabright light and even then why would you stop down to f/11. The increased DoF is still not that huge at 600mm+ when DoF is so small, movinmg form f/5.6 to f/1 is 2x DoF and still small. Also the AF is much slower, if I shoot f/11 on an f/4 lens it's AFing wide open. Even with f/8 max aperture hitting ISO 25600 is easy in low light, animals in forest etc.

 

[Jing G]

F11？？ LMAO... WHY THEY EVEN THINK ABOUT SUCH LENSES?

 

[navastronia]

Where is the RF 135? The EF 135 f/2 is the oldest lens in Canons lineup, 24 years old and never been updated. Ridiculous.

Perhaps because it's less popular than the 85s or the 70-200s, which are all competent portrait lenses, too?

 

[SecureGSM]

Yeah, but that's just you. As I said, there are people who can deal with the compromises for the benefit of small size and lower costs that come as a tradeoff with them. I was responding to a post that stated that one basically never has enough light to use this lens for wildlife. And I don't think that is true.

f/11 is less than two stops slower than my Sigma f/6.3. Would giving up more light make it harder to get good results under many circumstances? Yes. But is a two stop difference the end of the world if your lens ends up smaller and cheaper in return? To many, probably not.

If you're not in the market for these lenses, that's just fine. But there should be a market for them and I find it exciting to see Canon try new things.

2 stop is a helluva difference if you are Exposure limited already.
tell someone running and gunning with a f/2.8 zoom that now they are limited to f/5.6 at the aperture numbeR. Se what happens.
For an enthusiast F11 prime is too slow.
for a curious entrant into the market prime is way too uncomfortable. X1.4 or x2.0 converter on 100-400 / 100-500 zoom sounds like a better option for those folks.
Heck.. they won’t be able to even frame properly a fast moving object. with 800mm due to narrow angle of view of the lens.
yeah. I get what some forum regulars are saying:
I have no experience but I still is able to take photos of birds sitting on my back fence at F11
Yup, point taken you can. In good light and good weather conditions.
My point is though: F11 telephoto is an extremely limiting tools.

 

[SecureGSM]

I've been doing Wildlife Photography for almost 40 years, and I can say almost none. You want enough DOF to cover the entire animal/bird but that's it. Not to mention the fact that with wildlife Shutter speed is king. Even a small bit of movement can give you motion blur and that goes double with high pixel density. You also don't want distracting backgrounds. The highest I go is F8 and that is usually because I have a 2X converter on my 600 F4

Thank you.

I suppose it's a question of what you're shooting: freezing hummingbird wings or just a bird sitting on a branch? For similar subject size in the photo, if 1/100 is enough with 50mm it will be fine with 800mm.

Still, ISO 800 or ISO 1600 (to shoot at up to 1/1600 sunny) aren't horrible even on the sensors we already have. The next gen may be a bit better.

You would hope to be shooting at least 1/800s with 800mm lens even when shooting a dead bird.
yeah, IS and everything I know

 

[Ozarker]

2 stop is a helluva difference if you are Exposure limited already.
tell someone running and gunning with a f/2.8 zoom that now they are limited to f/5.6 at the aperture numbeR. Se what happens.
For an enthusiast F11 prime is too slow.
for a curious entrant into the market prime is way too uncomfortable. X1.4 or x2.0 converter on 100-400 / 100-500 zoom sounds like a better option for those folks.
Heck.. they won’t be able to even frame properly a fast moving object. with 800mm due to narrow angle of view of the lens.
yeah. I get what some forum regulars are saying:
I have no experience but I still is able to take photos of birds sitting on my back fence at F11
Yup, point taken you can. In good light and good weather conditions.
My point is though: F11 telephoto is an extremely limiting tools.

You guys are all reading it wrong. It's f/1 point 1... you just can't see the decimal because 800mm.

 

[SecureGSM]

You guys are all reading it wrong. It's f/1 point 1... you just can't see the decimal because 800mm.

Oh, man. 1.1? Does it come with designation “Hubble” in the name?

 

[navastronia]

Thank you.

You would hope to be shooting at least 1/800s with 800mm lens even when shooting a dead bird.
yeah, IS and everything I know

Just as a test today, I went out this afternoon under totally overcast skies, in the Pacific Northwest, and captured a usable EOS RP photo at f/11, ss 1/1000, at ISO 6400. Original JPG here (shrunken, of course), no noise reduction applied, no IS (this is the Sigma 35/1.4).

Since these new teles will have IS, let's estimate 3 stops of improvement. That would mean that with either of them, I could have expected to shoot this same scene at f/11, ss 1/125, at ISO 800.

Of course, it doesn't help much with action, unless you're good at panning with moving persons/vehicles at slower shutter speeds, but it's still food for thought. If I were shooting action with either of the new teles, under these conditions, I'd opt for f/11, ss 1/2000, ISO 12800, and then plan to work with the RAWs to get grain and noise looking manageable.

Personally, I'm far more interested in the 100-500 4.5-7.1, but everyone can have it their own way.

 

[SecureGSM]

Just as a test today, I went out this afternoon under totally overcast skies, in the Pacific Northwest, and captured a usable EOS RP photo at f/11, ss 1/1000, at ISO 6400. Original JPG here (shrunken, of course), no noise reduction applied, no IS (this is the Sigma 35/1.4).

Since these new teles will have IS, let's estimate 3 stops of improvement. That would mean that with either of them, I could have expected to shoot this same scene at f/11, ss 1/125, at ISO 800.

Of course, it doesn't help much with action, unless you're good at panning with moving persons/vehicles at slower shutter speeds, but it's still food for thought. If I were shooting action with either of the new teles, under these conditions, I'd opt for f/11, ss 1/2000, ISO 12800, and then plan to work with the RAWs to get grain and noise looking manageable.

Personally, I'm far more interested in the 100-500 4.5-7.1, but everyone can have it their own way.

View attachment 190742

All good thoughts and well spoken.

++++I'd opt for f/11, ss 1/2000, ISO 12800, and then plan to work with the RAWs to get grain and noise looking manageable.

A.M. shooting at f/8 would see ISO being at around 6400. That would be an excellent option to have

 

[davidcl0nel]

My main problem with Canon lenses is they either have fast (f1.2 or f1.4) lenses that are great, well made, feel solid OR they have slower aperture lenses (f1.8, f2) that are cheap, loud, and plastic-y.

I'd love a set of F2 primes (24, 35, 85) and awesome to see an 85mm F2 IS - that's a great combo. However, if it is made like the 35mm f1.8 IS (which I'm guessing it will be), it will be loud, plastic-y, and cheap. That was the same with their EF lenses.

I like the EF 35 IS f/2 very much, it is well built and "small".
The RF 1.8 with the changing length (by focus) seems to be more vulnerable and looks poor.

But yes, a RF 35 / 85 with 2 IS would be nice. But because there is a RF35 1.8, there will be many other new lenses before they update this one with a similar (but well-built) pendant....
I don't need a RF 35 1.2 without IS. This is may be superb, but not for my usage.

 

[Aussie shooter]

Just as a test today, I went out this afternoon under totally overcast skies, in the Pacific Northwest, and captured a usable EOS RP photo at f/11, ss 1/1000, at ISO 6400. Original JPG here (shrunken, of course), no noise reduction applied, no IS (this is the Sigma 35/1.4).

Since these new teles will have IS, let's estimate 3 stops of improvement. That would mean that with either of them, I could have expected to shoot this same scene at f/11, ss 1/125, at ISO 800.

Of course, it doesn't help much with action, unless you're good at panning with moving persons/vehicles at slower shutter speeds, but it's still food for thought. If I were shooting action with either of the new teles, under these conditions, I'd opt for f/11, ss 1/2000, ISO 12800, and then plan to work with the RAWs to get grain and noise looking manageable.

Personally, I'm far more interested in the 100-500 4.5-7.1, but everyone can have it their own way.

View attachment 190742

Now do that with an 800mm lens of a little bird sitting on one of the branches in the shaded area under the tree. Because that is what an 800mm lens is for. Not for taking landscape shots of a back garden.

 

[Joules]

For an enthusiast F11 prime is too slow.
[...]
My point is though: F11 telephoto is an extremely limiting tools.

I completely agree with you there.

As I see it, these must be priced aggressively to make any kind of sense. Of they are above 1000 $, I don't see who they'll sell these things at all.*

But if they are cheap enough, I can see how some folks that are more enthusiastic about size and weight might be pulled into the Canon system over MFT for casual wildlife by this.

*Edit: well, people with enough income to own a proper telephoto lens and one of these as a lightweight backup.

 

[Canon-Chas]

F11 is fine for Macro and those rare occasions when light is good etc. but lets be honest an f11 lens is pretty much useless for any action stuff . Yes, we can all show f11 or even f22 shots but they are the exception and not the norm

 

[Daner]

I have been using my EF 85mm f/1.8 for portrait work with my EOS R. I would love to replace it with the RF 85mm f/1.2 DS, but I can't justify the expense at this point. The RF 85mm f/2 Macro IS STM would add both IS and at least some level of Macro capability. I'm also hopeful that it would improve IQ and autofocus speed and accuracy. While not being a direct substitute for the f/1.2 lenses, it is likely to be a significant improvement at a much more affordable price.

Of course, the rumored RF 70-135 f/2 would be even more tempting...