This is the Canon RF lens roadmap

[unfocused]

I don’t see that, tilting makes calculating the plane of focus much more complicated to no effective benefit over a perpendicular plane of focus. It is immeasurably easier to focus stack a series of images from a normal, not tilted, lens than one where tilt or swing has been applied. Indeed given the nature of the plane of focus from applying tilt there are areas of the image that cannot achieve focus, this is not true of a normal lens.

I can see auto focus stacking becoming a thing, heck we had multiple point depth of field modes years and years ago, but I don’t see how tilt makes that more likely.

Wouldn't focus stacking sort of defeat the purpose of a tilt-shift lens? (Mostly I've seen tilt-shift used to reduce the plane of focus not increase it.)

 

[privatebydesign]

Wouldn't focus stacking sort of defeat the purpose of a tilt-shift lens? (Mostly I've seen tilt-shift used to reduce the plane of focus not increase it.)

Well that is the ‘reverse tilt’ or ‘toy’ look that became very popular after Vincent Lafouret started using it. Though of course he wasn’t the first, just the one that seemed to kickstart the look.

But used in the traditional sense, going back to view cameras, tilt was used to maximize (increase really is the wrong word) the placement of the wedge of focus. And that really is the key, as soon as you take the plane of focus off parallel to the sensor it is no longer a plane of acceptable focus but it becomes a wedge of acceptable focus. So, for instance, you can use your lens at it’s maximum resolving aperture and put the plane of focus onto the area of the frame most important, generally in landscapes that is the ground.

I have examples from when I was testing my TS-E17 of everything from a dock across a lake and into the far background being pin sharp at f4, not acceptable focus, pin sharp, but the trees not far in front of me are outside that dof wedge so they blur out very quickly vertically. I’ll try and find one or two examples.

EDIT: Here is one from the TS-E17 at f4 with the plane of focus laid onto the dock. This means the dock is in optimal focus all the way to the horizon but the handrail on the same vertical plane of the dock falls out of focus vertically until it enters that wedge of acceptable focus.

 

[becceric]

Well that is the ‘reverse tilt’ or ‘toy’ look that became very popular after Vincent Lafouret started using it. Though of course he wasn’t the first, just the one that seemed to kickstart the look.

But used in the traditional sense, going back to view cameras, tilt was used to maximize (increase really is the wrong word) the placement of the wedge of focus. And that really is the key, as soon as you take the plane of focus off perpendicular to the sensor it is no longer a plane of acceptable focus but it becomes a wedge of acceptable focus. So, for instance, you can use your lens at it’s maximum resolving aperture and put the plane of focus onto the area of the frame most important, generally in landscapes that is the ground.

I have examples from when I was testing my TS-E17 of everything from a dock across a lake and into the far background being pin sharp at f4, not acceptable focus, pin sharp, but the trees not far in front of me are outside that dof wedge so they blur out very quickly vertically. I’ll try and find one or two examples.

You know, l can’t seem to explain the benefits of tilting without using my hands for demonstration. I’ll have to paraphrase your second paragraph in future emails. I’m sure you’ve got copyrights on it

 

[slclick]

Now that I have the R6 and the 35 STM I am excited to ditch my HEAVY adapted 24-105L ll for a 24 and 85 prime. Let's see that 24 consumer RF lens!

 

[JohnC]

Rakuten is doing 15% cash back at canon USA if you guys are interested. I ordered some stuff this morning including the upcoming RF 100 macro.

 

[Viggo]

Short rant//

Do Canon actually expect people to get as heavy into lenses etc with the prices they’re released at when comparing EF vs RF? It seems there is a premium to pay when they’re new and they slowly get discounted in the US at least. There is NO such thing here, even in bodies they cost the same from day one until maybe the new version is released and it’s a ridiculous low discount , but never lenses.

the RF’s have increased in price even though out currency has strengthened a lot.

where I could afford a 1-series and 6 L’s of the highest quality I can’t really afford a 5-series body and two L’s which are already a lot more … all prices go up and there is no way for hobbyists here to get into the system compared to DSLR’s and EF glass.
It seems Canon are determined to further shrink the user base and ultimately the market.

I paid $14000 dollars for a 5-series and 50+85 L.. insane…

it doesn’t work to double the prices when you’re selling half as many products…

 

[jd7]

Short rant//

Do Canon actually expect people to get as heavy into lenses etc with the prices they’re released at when comparing EF vs RF? It seems there is a premium to pay when they’re new and they slowly get discounted in the US at least. There is NO such thing here, even in bodies they cost the same from day one until maybe the new version is released and it’s a ridiculous low discount , but never lenses.

the RF’s have increased in price even though out currency has strengthened a lot.

where I could afford a 1-series and 6 L’s of the highest quality I can’t really afford a 5-series body and two L’s which are already a lot more … all prices go up and there is no way for hobbyists here to get into the system compared to DSLR’s and EF glass.
It seems Canon are determined to further shrink the user base and ultimately the market.

I paid $14000 dollars for a 5-series and 50+85 L.. insane…

it doesn’t work to double the prices when you’re selling half as many products…

Actually, literally it does work for Canon to sell half as many products at twice the price. Canon gets the same revenue for less cost. In all other ways I agree with you though! I just cannot see the value, particularly for a hobbyist, in the RF gear at the prices Canon charges, especially when you look at what you can get elsewhere.

 

[privatebydesign]

I have been saying this repeatedly, from an output perspective I haven’t seen anything new from the RF system that compels me to buy into it, particularly given the cost. It’s always nice to have shiny new toys but unless, in the case of cameras, they provide me with more compelling images the investment is normally better spent elsewhere.

Mind you this move up in price structure has been laid out in all camera manufacturers business plans to shareholders in their annual reports for several years, so nobody should be surprised that Canon are doing it more successfully than most...

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

I have been saying this repeatedly, from an output perspective I haven’t seen anything new from the RF system that compels me to buy into it, particularly given the cost. It’s always nice to have shiny new toys but unless, in the case of cameras, they provide me with more compelling images the investment is normally better spent elsewhere.

Mind you this move up in price structure has been laid out in all camera manufacturers business plans to shareholders in their annual reports for several years, so nobody should be surprised that Canon are doing it more successfully than most...

For me it was the RF 50mm 1.2 that got me into the R system. I had waited over a decade for an EF 50mm Prime that I could use wide open and get crisp results without any obvious fringing etc. - it never came. Sure, probably no one will notice the difference in the finished image at the end of the day (especially at the most common modern day viewing sizes)... it’s just a really nice feeling picking up the RF 50mm and knowing my images won’t be compromised by the lens at any aperture I choose to use. Has made me enjoy shooting a lot more knowing that the auto focus is also extremely accurate and repeatable. In the last year I have not had to discard a favourite image because the focus was missed for example... that makes the whole process a lot more exciting for me. Different for everyone I guess? (And yes I probably could have bought a third party lens instead of waiting so long, but that’s not the point I’m making haha)

 

[privatebydesign]

For me it was the RF 50mm 1.2 that got me into the R system. I had waited over a decade for an EF 50mm Prime that I could use wide open and get crisp results without any obvious fringing etc. - it never came. Sure, probably no one will notice the difference in the finished image at the end of the day (especially at the most common modern day viewing sizes)... it’s just a really nice feeling picking up the RF 50mm and knowing my images won’t be compromised by the lens at any aperture I choose to use. Has made me enjoy shooting a lot more knowing that the auto focus is also extremely accurate and repeatable. In the last year I have not had to discard a favourite image because the focus was missed for example... that makes the whole process a lot more exciting for me. Different for everyone I guess? (And yes I probably could have bought a third party lens instead of waiting so long, but that’s not the point I’m making haha)

That really is my point, we, the photographer , ‘feel better’ but the viewer really doesn’t see the difference. Now it depends why we have this gear, who we are shooting for etc etc. if we are shooting for ourselves and we have the disposable income then the new stuff is a no brainer. If we are shooting for others on a budget the equation is very different.

 

[Dragon]

Short rant//

Do Canon actually expect people to get as heavy into lenses etc with the prices they’re released at when comparing EF vs RF? It seems there is a premium to pay when they’re new and they slowly get discounted in the US at least. There is NO such thing here, even in bodies they cost the same from day one until maybe the new version is released and it’s a ridiculous low discount , but never lenses.

the RF’s have increased in price even though out currency has strengthened a lot.

where I could afford a 1-series and 6 L’s of the highest quality I can’t really afford a 5-series body and two L’s which are already a lot more … all prices go up and there is no way for hobbyists here to get into the system compared to DSLR’s and EF glass.
It seems Canon are determined to further shrink the user base and ultimately the market.

I paid $14000 dollars for a 5-series and 50+85 L.. insane…

it doesn’t work to double the prices when you’re selling half as many products…

What kind of dollars were you using? R5 +50L +85L =$10k USD. Still definitely expensive, but everything is expensive post-COVID because all currencies have been unscrupulously inflated. Note that there are also darn few discounts on EF stuff these days. I think that holds true for other brands as well unless they are clearing models or starting a goin-out-of-business sale.

 

[privatebydesign]

What kind of dollars were you using? R5 +50L +85L =$10k USD. Still definitely expensive, but everything is expensive post-COVID because all currencies have been unscrupulously inflated. Note that there are also darn few discounts on EF stuff these days. I think that holds true for other brands as well unless they are clearing models or starting a goin-out-of-business sale.

Scandinavian dollars, they are almost 1:1 with rupees.

 

[Peter Bergh]

What kind of dollars were you using? R5 +50L +85L =$10k USD. Still definitely expensive, but everything is expensive post-COVID because all currencies have been unscrupulously inflated. Note that there are also darn few discounts on EF stuff these days. I think that holds true for other brands as well unless they are clearing models or starting a goin-out-of-business sale.

In most of Europe, the price for anything includes a Value-Added Tax that varies from (ballpark) 20 to 40 percent. I don't know what the VAT rate is in Sweden, but the VAT alone accounts for most of the price difference. Also, the advertised prices in the US do not include sales tax, possibly because the sales taxes vary a lot between communities.

 

[JohnC]

If you sit back and observe this forum and others photographers are constantly asking for/demanding higher performance. More DR, sharper wide open, better IS, less distortion, etc etc etc.

Do we collectively think that kind of performance doesn’t cost a lot in r&d? I’m not sure why we are so surprised it costs more.

Peraonally, regarding lenses I don’t see higher performance with RF, but that is in comparison to manual focus primes so I’m not surprised. The camera bodies, at least the R5, has indeed allowed me to get images I could not get before however....most of that to do with af performance.

 

[Del Paso]

I'm into the RF system! But...
I got my EOS R with a huge discount, my 24-104 L VAT free in a European fiscal "paradise".
And that's it. All other new lenses I bought since were EF (85, 135, 35). I just can't (don't want?) to afford the new RF lenses, not needing extreme apertures or super high MP bodies. If I started photography today, the new Canon RF price structure would deter me from entering Canon world. As the saying goes, other mothers have beautiful daughters too...
Don't tell me there's the RP and non L lenses, I want sensor quality in the 5 DIV range, and non L lenses (I own a few) lack weather sealing...
Therefore, I'll go on using the R with vintage lenses and adapted EFs, the 5 DIV with all the same relatively affordable great EF L lenses.
Next buy is the EF 11-24 L.
Yet, the R3 is really tempting, the TS 14mm too

 

[slclick]

So many articles (marketing) stating 'Which EF lenses to upgrade to RF First!'
Meanwhile, all your EF glass works just fine or even better on RF. So.....if EF works fine, I read it as buy the focal lengths you don't have already. For many of us that translates into keeping everything or scoring a great deal on adapted EF lenses on your wishlist. The RF gear is very polarizing price point wise. They really need some middle ground primes, ala EF IS 2.8's.

 

[JohnC]

So many articles (marketing) stating 'Which EF lenses to upgrade to RF First!'
Meanwhile, all your EF glass works just fine or even better on RF. So.....if EF works fine, I read it as buy the focal lengths you don't have already. For many of us that translates into keeping everything or scoring a great deal on adapted EF lenses on your wishlist. The RF gear is very polarizing price point wise. They really need some middle ground primes, ala EF IS 2.8's.

Agreed. I still shoot my zeiss ze lenses for the most part and considering adding an 85mm to that collection. I did buy a 15-35 and 24-70 but only because I didn’t already have zooms in that range. I also ordered the upcoming 100 macro for the same reason.

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

That really is my point, we, the photographer , ‘feel better’ but the viewer really doesn’t see the difference. Now it depends why we have this gear, who we are shooting for etc etc. if we are shooting for ourselves and we have the disposable income then the new stuff is a no brainer. If we are shooting for others on a budget the equation is very different.

100% agree. For myself my situation is a mix of both, so I decided to upgrade for my own piece of mind mainly.

I will say though, the technical qualities of the final output are just one part of the equation to consider when you’re shooting with a team of people (on a fashion shoot for instance). The improved autofocus means I don’t have to ‘overshoot’ to ensure I have a good frame with perfect focus. I can move on to the second and third look with more confidence - saving time and being in a more positive mindset / less stressed. I suppose that helps everyone feel a bit better on the shoot in those situations. But once again it’s a ‘nice feeling’

 

[Dragon]

In most of Europe, the price for anything includes a Value-Added Tax that varies from (ballpark) 20 to 40 percent. I don't know what the VAT rate is in Sweden, but the VAT alone accounts for most of the price difference. Also, the advertised prices in the US do not include sales tax, possibly because the sales taxes vary a lot between communities.

Ah, yes taxes. In Oregon we don't have sales tax so I have gotten out of the habit of figuring it into the cost of stuff. In any case, COVID inflation is in full swing so expect prices of everything to continue to climb. Lumber prices are insane. We have a mill in town and they are running around the clock but the local lumberyards can't get lumber from them because their entire output is booked for months in advance.

 

[Viggo]

Ah, yes taxes. In Oregon we don't have sales tax so I have gotten out of the habit of figuring it into the cost of stuff. In any case, COVID inflation is in full swing so expect prices of everything to continue to climb. Lumber prices are insane. We have a mill in town and they are running around the clock but the local lumberyards can't get lumber from them because their entire output is booked for months in advance.

Same here, lumber materials went up 40(!!) % April first…