Back on the general theme of the thread - I'd still love to see an RF pancake lens!
Upvote
0
What lenses do you feel are "missing" from RF still?
- Thread starter nunataks
- Start date
I just discovered this thread and haven't read all posts, so excuse me if I name lenses that have been mentioned before:
Missing wide-angle range:
- RF 10-24mm F4
- RF 12mm F2...basically a killer astro prime
- F2 zoom such as RF 14-28mm
Primes:
-F1.4´s especially 35mm, 50mm, 85mm
Tele-lenses:
- RF 200mm F2
- 250-750mm zoom with a variable aperture for the birder among us
Macro lenses of courses, but I saw people mentioning them and don't know my way around in the macro world.
Missing wide-angle range:
- RF 10-24mm F4
- RF 12mm F2...basically a killer astro prime
- F2 zoom such as RF 14-28mm
Primes:
-F1.4´s especially 35mm, 50mm, 85mm
Tele-lenses:
- RF 200mm F2
- 250-750mm zoom with a variable aperture for the birder among us
Macro lenses of courses, but I saw people mentioning them and don't know my way around in the macro world.
Upvote
0
I would wish something like the following for my nice R7 (APS-C).
an follower for:
RF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS (the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite popular) or
an equivalent for:
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
I would like most if it would be an RF-S 17-40mm f/4 L
or better RF-S 17-40mm f/2.8 L
an follower for:
RF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS (the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM was quite popular) or
an equivalent for:
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
I would like most if it would be an RF-S 17-40mm f/4 L
or better RF-S 17-40mm f/2.8 L
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Those sound lovely (and I owned the EF-S 17-55/2.8, it was the first DSLR lens I bought), but I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for any them. I highly doubt there will ever be an RF-S L lens.
Upvote
0
It has already been said but:
- RF-S 22mm f/2
- RF Pancake
- RF 35mm f/1.xL
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Definitely a pancake
Tbh the current RF line up has pretty much left me wondering WTF is going on.
The fast RF glass is crazy money whilst the cheaper RF consumer glass is a joke.
Who wants 6.3, 7.1, 8 and …..Jesus wept F11!!! maximum aperture? No wonder they have IS!!
Admittedly I bought the 50 & 16 simply because they are small, light and relatively fast. Other than those I’m just adapting my EF archive.
I honestly can’t see me progressing with canon. They seem to enjoy leaving their consumers frustrated.
A 24-50 6.3!!! WTF
Just pointless, likewise 24-105 7.1!!
Complete waste of time and money.
Tbh the current RF line up has pretty much left me wondering WTF is going on.
The fast RF glass is crazy money whilst the cheaper RF consumer glass is a joke.
Who wants 6.3, 7.1, 8 and …..Jesus wept F11!!! maximum aperture? No wonder they have IS!!
Admittedly I bought the 50 & 16 simply because they are small, light and relatively fast. Other than those I’m just adapting my EF archive.
I honestly can’t see me progressing with canon. They seem to enjoy leaving their consumers frustrated.
A 24-50 6.3!!! WTF
Just pointless, likewise 24-105 7.1!!
Complete waste of time and money.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
The majority of Canon’s customers buy a low-end body with the kit lens(es). The slow, variable aperture zooms fit that market by being inexpensive.
Personally, I find Canon’s RF lineup to be great for my needs. The RF 28-70/2 is unparalleled, the RF 70-200/2.8 is relatively light and very packable, the 100-500 is excellent and the inexpensive 100-400 is much smaller and lighter and nearly matches its big L brother for IQ. The RF 14-35 delivers great IQ and is wide enough that sometimes it can replace my EF 11-24/4.
If you’re frustrated with Canon, switch to a brand that meets your needs. For some people, the grass really is greener.
Upvote
0
What I really would appreciate is a TACK-SHARP new version of the EF 24/70 F4 L, with better build (wobbling front tube...), and the same macro abilities.
Maybe I was lucky, but my EF version beats the RF 24_105 L, and the RF 24/70 does no macro. So, less suited as an EDC.
The 50 macro and TS 14mm I've mentioned before.
Maybe I was lucky, but my EF version beats the RF 24_105 L, and the RF 24/70 does no macro. So, less suited as an EDC.
The 50 macro and TS 14mm I've mentioned before.
Upvote
0
A RF 17-70 4-5.6L (an f/4L would be huge) to replace 2 lenses for landscape photography. A bit too much I know but I carry a tele for birding and a second camera is needed for landscape photography but I do not want to carry 2 more lenses for that reason. Wishes...
Last edited:
Upvote
0
20-80mm f/4.
I'm tempted to get a Sony A7C and 20-70mm f/4 as a general purpose travel/hiking setup. I want something slightly wider than 24mm (but I rarely shoot with the widest angles of a 16-35mm) and I also want the mild telephoto range.
I'm tempted to get a Sony A7C and 20-70mm f/4 as a general purpose travel/hiking setup. I want something slightly wider than 24mm (but I rarely shoot with the widest angles of a 16-35mm) and I also want the mild telephoto range.
Upvote
0
