This is the Canon RF lens roadmap

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,915
7,995
They literally show the black corners in an uncorrected photo from the 14mm. I can find more examples, but you just want to argue so I'm going to block you instead. Have a nice day!
Good job hitting the trifecta – posting false information, failing to read the correct information provided, and then ignoring any further information that contradicts your own misguided beliefs. You remind me of the Flat Earthers, they behave in the same way.

Apparently the explanation is beyond you, but just in case anyone else is deluded by your asinine claims, I'll try one more time.

As a first step, read again what I wrote (and @nunataks try to comprehend it, this time): "Correcting the distortion actually fills in the corners, no cropping is needed." Where do I dispute that the corners are black? I don't because they are. I have the RF 14-35, I have looked at uncorrected RAW images from it. So, thanks for providing a link that doesn't contradict what I stated.

You stated that both cropping and distortion correction are required because of the black corners. As I said, that is false because cropping is not needed, the distortion correction is sufficient to completely fill in the black corners resulting from the image circle being too small to cover the full frame sensor.

Canon designed the RF 14-35/4 and 16/2.8 that way – strong barrel distortion left in the design, in lieu of optical elements to correct the distortion which would make the lenses substantially larger, heavier, and more expensive (and in the case of the 14-35/4, preclude the use of 77mm front filters). They did so knowing that after distortion correction, the lenses would deliver the full 14mm or 16mm FoV, respectively.

If that bothers you so much, don't buy the lenses. Actually, I don't know why you even care.

Don't know if I'll ever go back to Canon now.
If you've left Canon why are you here posting false information about their lenses? Trolling, presumably. How novel and droll. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
674
705
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
78
54
They literally show the black corners in an uncorrected photo from the 14mm. I can find more examples, but you just want to argue so I'm going to block you instead. Have a nice day!
Why would anyone care what the uncorrected photo looks like? I really don't understand. Could you show us a corrected 14-35 photo thats worse than a photo by any other lens, especially one for the same price or less? Just show us side by side and everyone will have no choice but to admit you have a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
78
54
Also note that the 16 is 25.6mm equiv. on an R7. That makes a pretty cool combo on the cheap.
What's cheaper than getting an R7 is just using my R5 and cropping :-D In my backpack I always have a 50/1.8 on the R5 and a 16/2.8 floating around. I can crop to 35mm frame and still get 10MP which actually is publishable, though I'm not working professionally any more. Actually I can crop anything up to as small as 50mm frame and still have 4.6MP. In fact I can then crop the 50mm up to 150mm and have 5MP.

In the later 90s I always had a Contax G2 with 28 45 90 in the backpack.
 
Upvote 0

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
674
705
What's cheaper than getting an R7 is just using my R5 and cropping :-D In my backpack I always have a 50/1.8 on the R5 and a 16/2.8 floating around. I can crop to 35mm frame and still get 10MP which actually is publishable, though I'm not working professionally any more. Actually I can crop anything up to as small as 50mm frame and still have 4.6MP. In fact I can then crop the 50mm up to 150mm and have 5MP.

In the later 90s I always had a Contax G2 with 28 45 90 in the backpack.
Yes, I have the same luxury of having the 16 and an R5 (as well as an EF 24 f/2.8 IS), but I was speaking for those on a tighter budget. The R7 offers most of the features of the R5, albeit cropped, at a much more budget friendly price and the cropped area of the 16 makes a creditable near 24mm equivalent. BTW, even having an R5 (and an M6 II), I may well pick up an R7 for the added portability with the 800mm f/11 relative to the same lens on an R5 with a 1.4 TC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
6,952
5,090
69
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
Why would anyone care what the uncorrected photo looks like? I really don't understand. Could you show us a corrected 14-35 photo thats worse than a photo by any other lens, especially one for the same price or less? Just show us side by side and everyone will have no choice but to admit you have a point.
Totally off-topic, but I actually like to look at the uncorrected versions. Sometimes they are more interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
78
54
may well pick up an R7 for the added portability with the 800mm f/11 relative to the same lens on an R5 with a 1.4 TC
I can understand having a back-up body, or a lighter-weight/cheaper-to-lose body, so I'm not against the general idea.
But if I had an R5 and 800/11 and wanted a longer shot, I'd just be cropping. 45MP is a LOT of MP. You can crop 80% away and still have 4k resolution. Cropping is hampered far more by the len's ultimate resolving power than the sensor.
 
Upvote 0

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,611
2,506
Totally off-topic, but I actually like to look at the uncorrected versions. Sometimes they are more interesting.

I haven't done anything serious with this yet, but Tamron EF-S lenses do not trigger the automatic crop mode on my RP and R5. Although they don't distort like the 16mm, the tunnel vision effect might be useful someday.
 
Upvote 0

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
674
705
I can understand having a back-up body, or a lighter-weight/cheaper-to-lose body, so I'm not against the general idea.
But if I had an R5 and 800/11 and wanted a longer shot, I'd just be cropping. 45MP is a LOT of MP. You can crop 80% away and still have 4k resolution. Cropping is hampered far more by the len's ultimate resolving power than the sensor.
If you do the math, the "pixels on the bird" with the R5 and the 1.4 extender is very close to the same as the R7 without the extender. That makes for a smaller, lighter package with very similar IQ at the pixel level (smaller pixels, but a stop brighter). And yes, cropping works well with the R5, but shooting hummingbirds, I find the TC to often be necessary. The attached example is at about 70 ft distance. Any less pixels would be detrimental to the result.
 

Attachments

  • 2W4A6320_DxO-Edit.jpg
    2W4A6320_DxO-Edit.jpg
    333.7 KB · Views: 14
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
78
54
If you do the math, the "pixels on the bird" with the R5 and the 1.4 extender is very close to the same as the R7 without the extender.
Right, you explained what I meant to be saying, thanks!
And absolutely gorgeous little bird! Agreed the pixels (or lens resolution) feels like it's about at its limits,
 
Upvote 0

jeffa4444

EOS 5D Mark IV
Feb 28, 2013
1,578
242
68
Dont the managers of the site think it’s overdue to redo the RF lens roadmap? After four years Canon have been really slow in getting lenses out particularly f1.4L lenses and now they have RF-S wide angles for APS-C are badly needed. Actually in the main RF mount wide angle primes are few with the RF 16mm f2.8, RF 24mm f1.8 and the RF 35mm f1.8 and zero L lenses.
Sony are leagues ahead in this area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

SwissFrank

1N 1V 1Ds I II III R R5
Dec 9, 2018
78
54
After four years Canon have been really slow in getting lenses out particularly f1.4L lenses and now they have RF-S wide angles for APS-C are badly needed.
Agreed. I hate Canon's policy of blocking third-party AF lens makers, but in theory at least, if they had not slipped their lens schedule it wouldn't be so bad.

That said I feel like I've never had it so good WRT wide-angles. I freaking love the 14-35/4 and 16/2.8, after shooting since the 90s the EF/2.8 and 17-35's and 16-35's that were far bigger yet not as sharp. It's only two lenses, granted, but I personally am not moaning the lack of a fisheye, and while I don't do astro, I think the super-fast third-party wide-angles are mostly MF anyway and work fine.
 
Upvote 0

AlanF

Desperately seeking birds
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
10,336
16,808
When will we see some EF-M lenses get ported to the RF-S like the 11-22mm, 22mm and 32mm???
Should be a quick one for Canon, just use the existing optical design, add plastic housing and lens mount instead, increase f-stop and price.
If they use the existing design, then they will use the same f-stop as increasing the f-stop will mean changing the design. The EF-M 18-150 has already been ported to the RF-S version with the same design and f-stops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Oct 31, 2020
361
460
The roadmap is now almost exactly two years old and has been very precise so far. If I'm correct there are a only a few lenses missing:

RF TS-R 14mm F/4L
RF TS-R 24mm F/3.5L

RF 10-24mm F4 L
RF 35mm F1.2L
RF 500mm F/4L IS USM


These are all very exclusive lenses, I doubt Canon will release them all within one year. Since Canon stated to release about 6-8 lenses annually, I wonder what is coming next. What about...

...RF 300mm F2.8
...RF 200mm F1.8?

...RF 180mm macro

The missing F2 trinity lenses? A rumored 14-28 F2 and 70-135mm F2?

I'd wish for at least a one supertelezoom option such as a RF 250-750mm.

But especially:
What about all the (possible) F1.4 primes? And RF-s lenses? Are they bringing more EF-m lenses over? Or are there possible new design e.g. for RF-s tele lenses.

Is there a way to update the roadmap and maybe list the already released lenses separately? That´d be a great help! Thx in advance!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AlanF

Desperately seeking birds
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
10,336
16,808
The roadmap is now almost exactly two years old and has been very precise so far. If I'm correct there are a only a few lenses missing:

RF TS-R 14mm F/4L
RF TS-R 24mm F/3.5L

RF 10-24mm F4 L
RF 35mm F1.2L
RF 500mm F/4L IS USM


These are all very exclusive lenses, I doubt Canon will release them all within one year. Since Canon stated to release about 6-8 lenses annually, I wonder what is coming next. What about...

...RF 300mm F2.8
...RF 200mm F1.8?

...RF 180mm macro

The missing F2 trinity lenses? A rumored 14-28 F2 and 70-135mm F2?

But especially:
What about all the (possible) F1.4 primes? And RF-s lenses? Are they bringing more EF-m lenses over? Or are there possible new design e.g. for RF-s tele lenses.

I'd wish for at least a one supertelezoom option such as a 250-750mm

Is there a way to update the roadmap and maybe list the already released lenses separately? That´d be a great help! Thx in advance!
What f-numbers for the 250-750?
 
Upvote 0