What’s next from Canon?

[Besisika]

The EF 100 mm macrolenses didn’t work with extenders either (if my memory serves me well). I do not need a 1.4 magnification ratio, that’s why it isn’t on my wishlist. But if Canon includes it, that is fine with me.

That is true, my EF doesn't take extender, I have to use a third party.
With that said, improvement is always welcome.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

Pretty confusing. I think there was TWO dual-lens RF-S optics announced today.

1) An RF-S 3.9mm F3.5 STM Dual Fisheye which looks like a "little brother" to the previously released fullframe RF 5.2mm F2.8L Dual Fisheye:

Canon announces compact dual fisheye lens for VR content creation

Canon has announced the new RF-S 3.9mm F3.5 STM Dual Fisheye, an APS-C lens for VR (virtual reality) content production.

www.dpreview.com

2) A "pre-announcement" by Apple, telling Canon is developing a dual-lens RF-S 7.8mm f/4 STM. This looking very different (smaller and much closer "eyes") than the other two:
https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/10/24175468/canon-eos-spatial-lens-apple-wwdc-2024-announcement.

So if I'm not completely wrong, Canon will soon have 3 VR-lenses 3 VR/Spatial lenses(*). Or is it one big confusing misunderstanding?

(*) EDIT: I don't think the "Apple thing" actually counts as a "VR thing". Probably just "stereoscopic".

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Pretty confusing. I think there was TWO dual-lens RF-S optics announced today.

1) An RF-S 3.9mm F3.5 STM Dual Fisheye which looks like a "little brother" to the previously released fullframe RF 5.2mm F2.8L Dual Fisheye:

Canon announces compact dual fisheye lens for VR content creation

Canon has announced the new RF-S 3.9mm F3.5 STM Dual Fisheye, an APS-C lens for VR (virtual reality) content production.

www.dpreview.com

2) A "pre-announcement" by Apple, telling Canon is developing a dual-lens RF-S 7.8mm f/4 STM. This looking very different (smaller and much closer "eyes") than the other two:
https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/10/24175468/canon-eos-spatial-lens-apple-wwdc-2024-announcement.

So if I'm not completely wrong, Canon will soon have *3 VR-lenses*? Or is it one big confusing misunderstanding?

Although it'll take time to really use this technology, I´m kind of glad Canon is really invested in it. I'll surely try it sometime in the next years.

 

[Loswr]

So if I'm not completely wrong, Canon will soon have *3 VR-lenses*? Or is it one big confusing misunderstanding?

We must all be confused here. I mean, stodgy old rest-on-their-laurels Canon forging into the burgeoning market of VR? It almost sounds like they might be… —gasp— …innovating. But we all know that’s impossible. Only Sony innovates.

I know what happened, we must have just missed all of Sony’s VR lens announcements that happened years ago so Canon could follow the leader and be late to the VR market. There, now I feel better.

 

[John Wilde]

We must all be confused here. I mean, stodgy old rest-on-their-laurels Canon forging into the burgeoning market of VR? It almost sounds like they might be… —gasp— …innovating. But we all know that’s impossible. Only Sony innovates.

I know what happened, we must have just missed all of Sony’s VR lens announcements that happened years ago so Canon could follow the leader and be late to the VR market. There, now I feel better.

Click on graphic to expand Canon strategy image.

 

[JFx]

What's this 3D VR Lens that Apple showed in their announcement today that have not heard a thing about"

 

[David - Sydney]

Is that now 4 Canon lens YTD? RF35, RF-S 3.9mm F3.5 STM Dual Fisheye, RF-S 7.8mm f/4 STM and the Cine 17-120
Not to mention the 3rd party RF-S lenses...

Not a lot of love for RF (vs RF-S) but the target for 7-8 lens announcements / year seems to be on track ie 4 before mid year.

 

[Loswr]

Not a lot of love for RF (vs RF-S) but the target for 7-8 lens announcements / year seems to be on track ie 3 before mid year.

As Canon counts these things, we're still at zero. Canon counts a lens when it initially begins to ship. The RF 35/1.4L and the RF-S 3.9mm Dual Fisheye are supposed to ship this month, so presumably we'll soon be at two lenses of the planned 7-8. The RF-S 7.8mm Dual Lens was a development announcement, with availability slated for sometime 'Between September 21, 2024, and December 20, 2024'.

To paraphrase Orson Wells shilling for Paul Mason wines, "We will count no lens before its time."

 

[David - Sydney]

From a Petapixel article...
"Apple is pushing immersive video harder. In addition to the ability to capture immersive video using an iPhone, which has been an option since the Vision Pro launched, Apple is also promoting additional ways to capture content. During the presentation, Apple promoted a new lens for Canon cameras — an RF-S 7.8mm f/4 STM — that can capture video and, when combined with Vimeo, allows immersive video to be viewed on Apple Vision Pro. The two lenses appear to mimic the distance between lenses on the back of an iPhone, showing that Canon likely developed this lens to work specifically for Apple Vision Pro immersive content.


The lens appears attached to an EOS R7, indicating that it is likely designed to be used with APS-C cameras, although this is unconfirmed. This ecosystem of hardware and software will be fully rolled out by the end of the year"
https://petapixel.com/2024/06/10/ap...unced-dual-lens-canon-optic-coming-this-year/

 

[Loswr]

The lens appears attached to an EOS R7, indicating that it is likely designed to be used with APS-C cameras, although this is unconfirmed.

Not just APS-C cameras, but specifically just the R7. Canon states, "As of the release date of the RF-S7.8mm STM DUAL lens, the only compatible camera is the EOS R7 (released in June 2022). Requires a firmware update scheduled for release at the same time as the lens." They say the same (R7 only) for the RF-S 3.9mm dual fisheye.

Presumably like the 5.2mm Dual Fisheye for FF, Canon wants to restrict VR content creation to its highest MP count body of the appropriate sensor format.

 

[tron]

I can tell you that my EF 600/4 II easily outresolves my RF 100-500.

Judging by the fact that version II is sharper than version III (especially with teleconverters) the 600 II may be the sharpest big white telephoto lens.

 

[koenkooi]

Not just APS-C cameras, but specifically just the R7. Canon states, "As of the release date of the RF-S7.8mm STM DUAL lens, the only compatible camera is the EOS R7 (released in June 2022). Requires a firmware update scheduled for release at the same time as the lens." They say the same (R7 only) for the RF-S 3.9mm dual fisheye.

Presumably like the 5.2mm Dual Fisheye for FF, Canon wants to restrict VR content creation to its highest MP count body of the appropriate sensor format.

I wonder if that means we get 7k recording out of the R7 with the new firmware.

 

[David - Sydney]

I wonder if that means we get 7k recording out of the R7 with the new firmware.

if the 32mp is split into 2 sides then max resolution should be 3500 pixels. I assume that any SW will downsample to UHD "footage" vs 4k for the R5.

 

[koenkooi]

if the 32mp is split into 2 sides then max resolution should be 3500 pixels. I assume that any SW will downsample to UHD "footage" vs 4k for the R5.

Rudy Winston mentioned that the record mode will the '4k fine' for the whole sensor, I was hoping they'd add an un-downsampled full sensor width mode. The R5 can record compressed 8k to SD, so the R7 should be more than able to record 7k to SD. It can read 7k video and downsample it to 4k already, so cutting out the downsampling shouldn't be a big ask

Hmmm, maybe people can fake it by just using the 30fps burst mode, provided they only need 2-3 second clips

 

[DrJones]

The R6 MK III could be a good replacement for my EOS R. I just wish it kept a resolution higher than 30MP like the R

 

[justaCanonuser]

It is around the size of the R8 and that can accommodate a grip,
Canon never made one but they did make it possible for third parties.

Can the R8 take a grip? I never used any additional grip, because that makes the camera body fatter, and my photo backpack normally already is stuffed tightly with a big white, other lenses, 1.4x and 2.0x TC's, extension tubes, so space is rare.

 

[koenkooi]

Can the R8 take a grip? I never used any additional grip, because that makes the camera body fatter, and my photo backpack normally already is stuffed tightly with a big white, other lenses, 1.4x and 2.0x TC's, extension tubes, so space is rare.

It can "kind of" take a grip. A 3rd party grip will allow 2 batteries, but if you want to use the shutter button on the grip, you'll have to connect a cable from the grip to the remote control port.
And depending on the grip you get, you have to power on the camera with only a single battery inserted and add the 2nd one later. You'll get scary warnings about the battery otherwise.

 

[justaCanonuser]

Oh, my FD 50mm 1.4 is still in stellar shape .....

Good lens, I inherited one with an AE-1 from my father. But my fav 50mm f/1.4 from Canon is this very compact LTM version, about 60 years old now and - shhh - a bit radioactive, its glass contains a Thorium isotope that emits alpha rays (not dangerous as long as you don't tend to incorporate your lenses ).

 

[riker]

It is a $4K camera vs a $6,500 camera, so yes.

I don't share your logic, my argument was purely from technological/availability point of view, price has _nothing_ to do with the story. But OK.

 

[riker]

I'd prefer a bit more reach, even knowing there will be a weight/size increase. 70-200/2 would be ideal, 70-150 at a minimum (either could start at 80mm). Personally, I would not switch but rather bring the 28-70/2 and the longer f/2 zoom for low-light events, and the 24-105/2.8 and 100-300/2.8 (or 70-200/2.8) for better lit or outdoor events.


You can't really say the mount is closed anymore, since Sigma has announced 6 RF mount lenses. But we don't know when/if Canon will allow FF 3rd party lenses. Still, personally I'd take the 28-70/2 over the 28-45/1.8. The much broader focal range makes it far more useful than 1/3-stop of aperture, for me. The limited range of 28-45mm is functionally a prime lens, so if I needed that I'd just buy the 35/1.4 and take one step back or forward as needed.

Yeah I get you, nothing to argue really, these are just minor differences and personal preferences. It's always a tough choice and a compromise at some point.
I used to carry my 100-400 and 100-500 for events when I did not have a 70-200 and was surprised to see I actually took successful shots at 300mm and above. But it's definitely not something I need. I think 150-200mm is the max on the long end on FF sensor but honestly, if I had a 24-120/2, I'd probably go single lens setup. (I have a friend, for events he has switched to single-lens, using Nikon's 24-120/4. And he is a pro, making a living of photography for 30y now.) Events can be very different too. For a 1h protocol I don't care about size and weight. For a whole-day event, maybe including lot of walking as well, I do. For an outdoor event, 2.8-4 is absolutely fine. For indoors, 1.8-2 can often be essential.
For me, zoom lenses are about not needing to change lens. I really don't need all those focal lengths. I mostly shoot around 35mm, 85mm, 135mm. I could do with 3 prime lenses (actually this is what I do now temporarily). So if it saves weight and size for me, I'm fine with 24-40 / 24-50 and 80-135 / 80-150 / 100-200. The 100-300/2.8 is definitely something waaay too big for an event.
I have been using the 28-70/2 it's a great lens, but even that is a bit too heavy for a whole-day event and it's not just heavy but also nose-heavy which makes it considerably more uncomfortable than a usual 24-70/2.8.

Sidenote, I wish there was a lightweight 100-300/4 for travel. The 70-200/4 is really great and super cute, but the reach is just not enough and I really don't care about the 70-100-120mm part. Now I use the 100-500 but it is still too heavy on a backpacker trip. 120-300/4? 120-300/4-5.6? 150-320/5.6? Something that is max 850-900g.

As for Sigma...meh. It's somewhat a good news but I'm sure Canon is demanding a license fee so lenses will be more expensive. In the meantime, I only care about FF Art lenses from Sigma and the fact that all recent pretty great and serious lenses lack the RF edition and there's no sign of such additions in the foreseeable future is very worrisome.