This is the Canon RF lens roadmap

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
650
777
Not sure I follow you.
You want affordable 600+mm lenses but don't like the current small/light/affordable/sharpish RF600/800mm primes.
Assuming that the RF100-400 will not be a "L" lens then it will be cheap and cheerful
The price for the RF100-500mm will drop. I got mine on a 15% off sale. Still expensive but getting closer to a current EF100-400Lii + 1.4 TC + R mount adapter. It is amazing for a 5x zoom.
It seems that you want cheap, fast, long focal length and I can't see that happening anytime soon. Don't forget that you can adapt all the EF lenses from Canon, Sigma and Tamron etc.

What i want is something middle range. Like Sony or Nikons upcoming 200-600. High quality, weather sealed lenses but still on the affordable side and not super dark like the Canon cheap primes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canfan

Khatgs

I'm New Here
Oct 29, 2019
14
5
What i want is something middle range. Like Sony or Nikons upcoming 200-600. High quality, weather sealed lenses but still on the affordable side and not super dark like the Canon cheap primes.
Same here..

how can you be satisfied with an aperture of 7.1 for the 100-500..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canfan

Stig Nygaard

7DII, 11 lenses and a G5XII
CR Pro
Jul 10, 2013
118
209
Copenhagen
www.flickr.com
Biggest question in my mind is price and color of the 100-400 with the 7.1 at the long end, I think it's reasonable to debate whether or not that'll be a "L" lens. Either way though I'd hope to see a modest price tag.

Agrees, that one is a "mystery". There's a patent for that specs looking like an APS-C lens. However APS-C camera rumor says there wont be any APS-C lenses. Rumor says there will be some fullframe lenses also targeting APS-C use. And that frightends me a bit. I hope it wont be a fullframe lens with optical sacrifices like the cheap/light 24-105, to make it compact like it was an APS-C lens.

I would love to see it as a true APS-C lens, but most importantly enthusiast optical quality. Rather a "real" fullframe than a "tweaked for fullframe use too" lens with optical compromises that needs to be corrected in post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IcyBergs

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
650
777
Agrees, that one is a "mystery". There's a patent for that specs looking like an APS-C lens. However APS-C camera rumor says there wont be any APS-C lenses. Rumor says there will be some fullframe lenses also targeting APS-C use. And that frightends me a bit. I hope it wont be a fullframe lens with optical sacrifices like the cheap/light 24-105, to make it compact like it was an APS-C lens.

I would love to see it as a true APS-C lens, but most importantly enthusiast optical quality. Rather a "real" fullframe than a "tweaked for fullframe use too" lens with optical compromises that needs to be corrected in post.


I think the 100-400 in the roadmap will be a cheap lens without weather sealing and focused on small size. Should be much smaller than the 100-500.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daner

Khatgs

I'm New Here
Oct 29, 2019
14
5
The 100-500 is fine with that aperture because of the size, its a small lens. But very expensive, basically another £1000 over the EF 100-400.

Yes it is so expensive.

compared to the 100-400 ii, 100mm more but increased to 7.1 instead of 5.6 for a much higher price .. i don't understand... that’s bad for use at dawn and dusk.
 

gzroxas

Canon EOS R / Travel and Landscape
Oct 3, 2018
59
75
Italy
Really interested in the 14-35! I love wide angles but I believe they need to be a little flexible sometimes, so a zoom lens is best.
Of course, if money wasn’t a problem, the 2.8 would be amazing (low light shooting and such), but I guess it’s going to be at least 1000-1200$ more expensive than the f4, and since it’s a landscape lens I usually use it above 5.6 anyway

A Great lens selection is coming!
 

Franklyok

EOS 90D
Oct 24, 2018
124
45
Do the extenders fit into the 85mm? ISTR the rearmost element is quite close to the sensor.
Sorry❗ I googled, and it is dissaponting to say about the new rf extenders compatiblity. Not compatible. Canon really skillfully chases profit. Lets wait a few years.

At the same time I'd say to crop 135 mm image out of 85 mm from R5 45 mpx, ibis sensor would be good enough for me. Sharpness is still there, and really good for small prints / web usage.
 

ozturert

EOS 90D
Jan 16, 2019
140
109
What i want is something middle range. Like Sony or Nikons upcoming 200-600. High quality, weather sealed lenses but still on the affordable side and not super dark like the Canon cheap primes.
Same here..

how can you be satisfied with an aperture of 7.1 for the 100-500..

Sony is f6.3 at 600mm. Canon 600mm f11 is 1.7 stops darker but it is much smaller, much lighter, much less expensive.
Canon 100-500mm is about 700 USD more than Sony but it can be found cheaper if you hunt for it (10-15%). It is 10cm (!!!!!) shorter and 800 grams lighter.
Looking at above data, I think Canon 100-500mm is a huge value compared to that Sony lens. It is a real L lens. If Canon can come up with a cheaper 100-500mm lens for less than 1400 USD, than that will be better of course but Sony 200-600mm isn't better today.
 
D

Deleted member 68328

Guest
Would definitely have preferred a RF 135mm f/1.8 L IS rather than f/1.4 to add yet some extra stabilisation to the system. More useful than half a stop extra that can easily be compensated with ISO or a slightly longer exposure if subject is static. As for bokeh, the EF version at f/2.0 is already as creamy as it gets. No need for f/1.4 of f/1.8 for that.
 

Khatgs

I'm New Here
Oct 29, 2019
14
5
Sony is f6.3 at 600mm. Canon 600mm f11 is 1.7 stops darker but it is much smaller, much lighter, much less expensive.
Canon 100-500mm is about 700 USD more than Sony but it can be found cheaper if you hunt for it (10-15%). It is 10cm (!!!!!) shorter and 800 grams lighter.
Looking at above data, I think Canon 100-500mm is a huge value compared to that Sony lens. It is a real L lens. If Canon can come up with a cheaper 100-500mm lens for less than 1400 USD, than that will be better of course but Sony 200-600mm isn't better today.

200-500 F5.6 will be much better for me! F11 and f7.1 is only good during the day or in countries with an appropriate climate
 
  • Sad
  • Like
Reactions: Canfan and scyrene

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,579
3,979
Irving, Texas
Sorry❗ I googled, and it is dissaponting to say about the new rf extenders compatiblity. Not compatible. Canon really skillfully chases profit. Lets wait a few years.

At the same time I'd say to crop 135 mm image out of 85 mm from R5 45 mpx, ibis sensor would be good enough for me. Sharpness is still there, and really good for small prints / web usage.
The extenders didn't fit the EF 85mm or EF 50mm lenses either. That design has nothing to do with wanting to force you to buy other lenses, it has to do with what is and is not possible under the design parameters.
 

Fran Decatta

EOS R6
Mar 6, 2019
83
83
That's pretty steep, a $2500 jump from the EF version?

Of course, the 135 f2 was launched in 1996, there 1000$ was probably really expensive. Now, with better IQ + one stop more and, again, making an unique lens, I dont doubt that will cost +3000$. 200mm f2 costs arround 5k-6k$. This lens with teleconverter have almost the same properties. Then, 3500$ would be even "cheap" as a lens itself. Unless it dont let you use the teleconverter to protect this 200mm f2....
 

Alam

EOS M50
Dec 24, 2019
27
12
Most anticipated of this list for me would be the 14-35 f4 IS.

Biggest question in my mind is price and color of the 100-400 with the 7.1 at the long end, I think it's reasonable to debate whether or not that'll be a "L" lens. Either way though I'd hope to see a modest price tag.

As far as i remember there's no L letter included on the name so most probably it is have modest price, my buying list along with apsc rf body
 
  • Like
Reactions: IcyBergs

fox40phil

5DIV & RP
Apr 12, 2013
230
135
Germany
www.phileas-schoenberg.de
Im still not happy about the telephoto selection. We ether have cheap and slow like the 100-400 7.1 or expensive like the 100-500. Or super expensive like the 400+ primes.
Still not affordable quality lens to go above 600mm. Not counting the super slow DO primes.
This!
What I m always saying...
Nothing like the ~1300€ Nikon 200-500 or ~1750€ Sony 200-600...

everything in this area is more expensive in Canon RF, less „mm“ and more darker...
 

amorse

EOS RP
Jan 26, 2017
797
1,084
www.instagram.com
200-500 F5.6 will be much better for me! F11 and f7.1 is only good during the day or in countries with an appropriate climate
I think it really depends on what you're shooting with it. I am really excited about the 100-500, but I plan on using it for landscapes so the 7.1 aperture is a non-issue for me. The 100-500 is a lot more attractive to me than the other options because with it I can make a 3-lens kit that goes from 15mm to 500mm with no gaps and still fits comfortably in a regular sized backpack, and without compromising image quality.

For my use case, the size and weight savings are much more important than having a faster aperture, but obviously your milage may vary depending on what you're shooting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daner and usern4cr