This is the Canon RF lens roadmap

[Viggo]

As for anecdotal improvements in my pictures I disagree completely… the freedom to AF wherever I want in the frame with absolute precision and fast lenses sharp enough in the corner to match that is a complete game changer for composition. And the face/eye tracking means I can hold my subject in frame when they move without having to depend on my single AF point. I can’t tell you how many full body portraits that are cropped too close at the feet because my dslr’s didn’t have af points far enough out. I shoot to not crop in post and this is a huge upgrade with mirrorless.

and the AF speed and precision with the RF50L and RF85L compared to their EF counterpart couldn’t be bigger. The RF’s are everything I’ve ever wanted in those lenses where the EF glass on DSLR was a reeeeaaaal PITA to use…

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

As for anecdotal improvements in my pictures I disagree completely… the freedom to AF wherever I want in the frame with absolute precision and fast lenses sharp enough in the corner to match that is a complete game changer for composition. And the face/eye tracking means I can hold my subject in frame when they move without having to depend on my single AF point. I can’t tell you how many full body portraits that are cropped too close at the feet because my dslr’s didn’t have af points far enough out. I shoot to not crop in post and this is a huge upgrade with mirrorless.

and the AF speed and precision with the RF50L and RF85L compared to their EF counterpart couldn’t be bigger. The RF’s are everything I’ve ever wanted in those lenses where the EF glass on DSLR was a reeeeaaaal PITA to use…

I agree that the AF combined with the great RF 85L and RF 50L really does improve things noticeably - much more enjoyable shooting when the equipment gets out of the way and let’s you focus on the more creative aspects. That is bound to make you miss less shots and probably improve the creative output also.

Having said that though, some of my favourite photos were taken years ago with a (now) lowly 5D Mark ii combined with the EF 50mm f1.4. That combination was pretty awful for me when it came to autofocus accuracy and I found the outer focus points particularly useless on that camera. Resorted to focus and recompose for every shot using the middle focus point only. Even with that worse equipment, I suppose you just learn to work around it and can still find ways to produce good results.

Funnily enough, moving to a 5D Mark III felt like a game changer to me at the time because I could finally use outer focus points reliably. And I suppose if you had a 1D level camera, the AF would have been even better... perhaps why some people here don’t feel compelled to move to mirrorless. I was sceptical at first, but after owning the EOS R and then now the R5 I would never go back to a DSLR, nor would I recommend anyone else (who does similar work to me) to buy anything but a good mirrorless camera. I get much more excited about shooting these days, because I don’t have to think about the equipment nearly at all. That’s truly a nice feeling

All I need now is a 35mm F1.2L! Common Canon!

 

[koenkooi]

[..]Funnily enough, moving to a 5D Mark III felt like a game changer to me at the time because I could finally use outer focus points reliably. And I suppose if you had a 1D level camera, the AF would have been even better...[..]

When I tried to rent an R5 last year the rental place double booked it and offered an 1DX3 instread at the same price. Almost everything on that 1DX3 was miles ahead of my RP, except the AF. I couldn't get past how clumped together the AF points were and how little they covered. It felt less than on my 1D, but that cheats by being APS-H

The shoot was dragonflies at dawn in a peat bog, so not much AF was needed, but still, it was jarring when looking through the viewfinder and trying to move the AF point to the edges and failing.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

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.

Is there also 15% cash back on RF lenses?

 

[Exploreshootshare]

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.

The prices between the US and most of Europe do make a difference, VAT does it's share. The RF 100-500mm is about 800 $ more expensive in Germany (compared to Texas VAT which is 8.25%) and the difference is even more significant when compared to Oklahoma (VAT 4.5%) or Oregon (0% VAT).

So RF gear in Germany is extremely costly with its 19% VAT...

 

[JohnC]

Is there also 15% cash back on RF lenses?

yes there is, I ordered the not yet released 100 macro and picked up the 70-200 f4 zoom.

as far as I know the only limit is the refurb items which have a smaller cash back.

Now, I THOUGHT yesterday was the last day, but I"m not positive about that.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

yes there is, I ordered the not yet released 100 macro and picked up the 70-200 f4 zoom.

as far as I know the only limit is the refurb items which have a smaller cash back.

Now, I THOUGHT yesterday was the last day, but I"m not positive about that.

Thx for the reply. I'll check it out right away

 

[Viggo]

The prices between the US and most of Europe do make a difference, VAT does it's share. The RF 100-500mm is about 800 $ more expensive in Germany (compared to Texas VAT which is 8.25%) and the difference is even more significant when compared to Oklahoma (VAT 4.5%) or Oregon (0% VAT).

So RF gear in Germany is extremely costly with its 19% VAT...

Indeed, and we have 25% vat…

 

[Finn]

Still waiting for a 14-28mm f/2.

My trinity setup would be:

14-28mm f/2, 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8. The 28-70 f/2 is a great lens but too heavy and not wide enough for me for a standard zoom range. Also, super bummed the 70-200 doesn't take a teleconverter...really stupid. But we have see whispers of new style teleconverters for RF.

 

[FrenchFry]

Still waiting for a 14-28mm f/2.

My trinity setup would be:

14-28mm f/2, 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8. The 28-70 f/2 is a great lens but too heavy and not wide enough for me for a standard zoom range. Also, super bummed the 70-200 doesn't take a teleconverter...really stupid. But we have see whispers of new style teleconverters for RF.

Got a link to those whispers?

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Still waiting for a 14-28mm f/2.

That'd be super awesome, especially for astrophotography! And to complete the trinity I'd love to see a 70-135mm F2... although at this point I'm not sure which lense I'd get. At the moment, I'm desperately waiting for the RF 14-35mm F4...

There seems to be no F2 lense on this roadmap. Is there any news whether Canon will eventually "complete" a F2 trinity? CR Guy reported a CR1 rumor about a 16-28mm F2 lense in 2019, since then I haven't read anything about it in terms of "f2 trinity"...

 

[Dragon]

Still waiting for a 14-28mm f/2.

My trinity setup would be:

14-28mm f/2, 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8. The 28-70 f/2 is a great lens but too heavy and not wide enough for me for a standard zoom range. Also, super bummed the 70-200 doesn't take a teleconverter...really stupid. But we have see whispers of new style teleconverters for RF.

If Canon doesn't make them, Kenko will .

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Nokishita leaked the RF 14-35mm today. I hope it will be available this year! So excited

https://twitter.com/x/status/1405076564627181578

 

[Chig]

Conspicuous in their absence from the list: 300mm f/2.8 or any DO lenses...

Yep , imagine a RF 300mm f/2.8 DO with built in 1.4 and 2.0 T.Cs and similar size and weight to the EF 400 f/4 D.O ii ?

 

[Chig]

Do you think telephoto lens (400 2.8, 500 f4,...) will be shorter in term of size than EF versions?

Only if they're D.O. freznel lenses otherwise they'll be same as EF other than the flange distance.
Can't understand why Canon aren't using their freznel technology more

 

[Chig]

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.

How can they make a high quality 600mm + lens cheap ?
No company ever has before !
High quality = expensive
Cheap = compromise

 

[Chig]

Below would be my lens wishlist target weights and physical dimension

• Canon RF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM at 2kg or lighter
• Canon RF 500mm f/4L IS USM at 2kg or lighter
• Canon RF 600mm f/4L IS USM at 3kg or lighter
• Canon RF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM at 3kg or lighter
• Canon RF 1200mm f/8L IS USM at 4.5kg or lighter and 44.8cm or shorter.

That's the major selling point of newer gear... weight reduction and better portability.

If I were still actively photographing wildlife and a 800mm or 1200mm became available at half their weight I'd be induced to upgrade.

Sadly for people who steal photos/videos of Philippine wildlife I will not be making that expenditure on their behalf.

They are welcome to buy the equipment and pay for the trips if they can actually afford it without donations.

Even using their D.O. freznel elements those weights aren't likely ( the EF400 f/4 DO ii which is about as good as it gets is 2kg so can't see a 400mm f/2.8L being under 2.5kg even with DO ), maybe if the lens bodies are made from magnesium instead of aluminium (I presume the lens barrels are made of aluminium) it might be doable ?

 

[blackcoffee17]

How can they make a high quality 600mm + lens cheap ?
No company ever has before !
High quality = expensive
Cheap = compromise

Take the Sony 200-600 for example. 600mm at under $2000. And great optical quality, fast AF, metal build, weathersealing and internal zoom. No, not asking for 600mm F4 for $1000.

 

[dolina]

Even using their D.O. freznel elements those weights aren't likely ( the EF400 f/4 DO ii which is about as good as it gets is 2kg so can't see a 400mm f/2.8L being under 2.5kg even with DO ), maybe if the lens bodies are made from magnesium instead of aluminium (I presume the lens barrels are made of aluminium) it might be doable ?

Instead of my Nov 2020 posting I wish I spent my time buying more stocks that would have yielded a 500% return by now

 

[deleteme]

I have mixed feelings about the 10-24. I currently use the EF 11-24 with an adapter.
It is wicked sharp and the AF is fast. I tis a huge money maker for me shooting interiors with that and my 17 TS-E. Both are unlikely to be supplanted any time soon and thus I may be out of the game before they come to market.
I guess I was fortunate to be shooting in the golden age of the TS-E and the 11-24 as I know if I had retired before they came out I would be just envious of those who got to use them.

I really appreciate the cameras and lenses we have today as I started out in the 70's with film and every format from 35mm half frame (Olympus PEN the original) to 8x10 view cameras. All had their charms but the image Is get today are many orders of magnitude better than what could be achieved then.
Yes, film is fun but the real benefit of digital is the commercial results I get in less time and higher quality.