You can now preorder the brand new Canon EOS Rebel T8i and the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM.
The Canon EOS R5 will not be available for preorder until the official announcement, likely a couple of months.
- Canon EOS Rebel T8i Body $749
- Canon EOS Rebel T8i with EF-S 18-55mm IS STM $899
- Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM $399
- Canon EOS R5
- Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM
Oops, I didn't read the specs fully. Apparently the 24-105 is the rumored cheap macro lens. The 7.1 maximum aperture makes more sense now. Still not too happy about the 100-500, but then again no one is forcing me to buy it.
Obviously because it seems like this is their answer to "we want cheaper RF lenses" and it just seems very consumer unfriendly. You can't honestly tell me that you're excited about, or even okay with, a 7.1 lineup.
Boy, bashing for any and every reason sure is in vogue. Imho, I think Canon's moves these days are very 'half full'
No, but you can get faster kit lenses for cheaper. Defending Canon at all costs is also in vogue here it seems. Canon is my favorite camera manufacturer, but I have no problem calling them out on silly decisions like this. Anyway, we'll see how far they take this 7.1 thing. The "macro" lens is fine. The super-telephoto is not, at all. And they're going to charge RF mount prices for it. I'd much rather have had a 100-400 5.6 or a 200-500 5.6. If this 100-500 is going to take up the slot of a faster super-telephoto, yeah, people are going to be mad about it.
It'll be interesting to see well it'll do. There are a bunch of sharp and affordable lenses already available that are 100 mm longer and 1/3 stop faster (i.e. the 150-600 offerings from Tamron and Sigma).
My crop M50 with the kit 55-200 only goes to 6.3 at the far end. For my use, 6.3 lets in enough light. Having the 7.1 on a FULL Frame will give me WAY more light, and keeping the size of the lens much smaller if it was designed <7.1. Price would be lower too. So none of this sounds "silly" to me.
Oh, and by the way, I have their 70-200 L, but that is way heaver than the kit. There is a time and place for each one. The 7.1 might be a good addition to my set of lenses.
There has never been a Canon full-frame lens longer than 300mm that is not L. Also, if it's white, it's L.
L badge usually means optical performance, build quality, weather sealing, and focus performance. Variable aperture hasn’t been a minus point before, or the 100-400 would not have been a L lens.
$399 for a 24-105 non-L at those specs? Very consumer friendly, in my opinion.
Nikon sells a 500mm that only goes to 5.6, and for about $1300 on sale.