What lenses are coming next for the Canon RF mount?


Jul 11, 2018
24-70/2,8 and 70-200/2,8 seem given if they say they're developing fast 2,8's.
edit: those would come in handy for the emperors abdication event, wouldn't they?
Would expect them to have a 400/2.8 for the olympics. Also, isn't it about time they released a new 300/4?

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2011
I expect a wide zoom like 16-35, and a moderate telephoto like a 70-300. I see little sense in putting out lenses more expensive than $3K for a entry level FF body. When a advanced body comes out, then I expect the big ticket items.

That may happen sometime next Spring if the "R" sells well.

Josh Leavitt

Aug 19, 2018
24-70/2,8 and 70-200/2,8 seem given if they say they're developing fast 2,8's.
edit: those would come in handy for the emperors abdication event, wouldn't they?
Would expect them to have a 400/2.8 for the olympics. Also, isn't it about time they released a new 300/4?

I would love to see some super telephotos for the RF mount, and the upcoming Olympic games is about as good of an excuse as any to make it happen. But I think it's also dependent on Canon's R system models. The base R is somewhat wanting for sports/action capabilities. I think Canon needs to give us a 1D X II equivalent in an EOS R by 2019 to get a good indication as to whether or not we'll be seeing any RF super telephotos in time for the 2020 games. But even if they can't develop an RF super-teles in time, we still have the new EF 400mm f/2.8 & 600/4 coming out this year that will practically behave natively on the R with an adapter.


EOS-R, RF and EF Lenses of all types.
Seems odd that the body seems closer in price to a 6D II than the 5D Mark IV, and that there are isn’t more affordable glass options. I know they aren’t the sexy options, but more non-L would be welcome.
Yes, I agree -- BUT -- I plan to use all my EF lenses with the control ring EF-R adapter. No rush to replace EF (L or non-L) at this time. I will order the RF 24-105 to shoot when my EF 24-70 f/2.8 isn't long enough.
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy


CR Pro
Jan 11, 2018
Minnesota - US
Visit site
Why would Canon create a 70-200 with an RF mount? Especially since they just released a refresh, they are not in the market for canibalizing. I could see a new 24-70 ef to assure the ef users too their commitment and it may even get a I.S. the 16-35 is still new and canon would probably love to sell adapters and get rid of their stock in the current line up before coming up with a new lens line up of 2.8 apertures. There is not much logic in them eating up profits on stuff they need to rid themselves of. I love the idea of the variable ND in the new lens adapter. I think the eos r is currently junk but using ef with their new adapters is a great marketing idea and they gave people enough of an incentive to buy new lenses that won't be ef and new adaptors to put ef on new mounts. It's quite brilliant.
  • Like
Reactions: Liverpool FC
Sep 6, 2018
Seems like a reasonable selection to start with, but if Canon want to make a model for sports/action then some longer lenses are necessary.


Sep 16, 2016
It would be a good idea to have an 85mm 1.2 as well as a 35mm F1.2

these lenses are either outdated or nonexistent in the EF line, so having them available on the RF mount would further boost its unique selling point.


EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 5, 2018
As long as they keep insane prices, any new lenses are welcome.
(I'd love to see a 135mm f1.4 IS)


Aug 30, 2018
I think they will use the RF mount to showcase lenses they don't have already or are due for update:

1. 180 or 200 mm macro; possibly f2.8 with IS.
2. 100 mm f1.4
3. 135 f1.8 or 2 IS
4. 20 mm f1.8 IS
5. 400 mm f5.6 IS
  • Like
Reactions: nitram


May 4, 2011
Good/reasonable suggestions in the article.

I’m not sure what to make of the new RF system - I like what I see so far, but I’d also like to see some smaller, lighter alternatives to go with the smaller body. In addition to the big stuff, how about

RF 24-70mm f4L IS (compact alternative)
RF 85mm f1.8 IS
RF 50mm f1.4 IS (1.8 may work as well)
RF 24mm f1.4 or f1.8
RF 100mm f2.8L IS Macro (this could have SO much potential with a high-res body)
RF 135mm f2L IS

Also, I know Canon is about the glass - and that’s good, HQ lenses are critical to any system - but I’d also like to see in-body features to encourage adoption of the new system. As cool as the R is, once the “ooh, shiny” factor wears off and reality sets in, I’m left wondering where they want to go with this. Is it worth investing in EF lenses any more? Should I see the writing on the wall and begin off-loading less frequently used EFs (while they still hold some value) in anticipation of RF taking over in the future?
Last edited:


Nov 2, 2016
I don’t see longer tele’s as being a priority. Considering their weight and size, there will just be a shortening of 24mm. How much lighter will a several pound lens get from that? I think the adapters will serve the purpose just fine for a long time to come.


Feb 8, 2012
What's the deal with these weird focal lengths, 58mm and such?
the NOCT was 58mm. This is the new NOCT hence why it is 58mm. As to why the original NOCT was 58mm, I've read it was because at the time it was the best FL to achieve the design goals: point light source reproduction and minimal sagittal comma flare wide open, mainly geared at nighttime photography. Keep in mind this was decades ago. The Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G is similar in that it is mainly geared at sagittal comma flare control and it was outed as an "homage" to the NOCT, but never quite received the NOCT label although it does do what it says it is for: point light source flare control wide open. This being a new true NOCT, and given they are skipping on IS/AF and putting it all into optics (plus none of that damn focus by wire nonsense) probably means it will easily beat the "homage" pseudo NOCT