Close Menu

    There are at least 3 more PowerZoom lenses coming [CR3]

    By 52 Comments2 Mins Read Canon Lens Rumors
    rf2410528zheader 1536x518 - There are at least 3 more PowerZoom lenses coming [CR3]

    We have been sitting on this information for a while waiting on approval, and with Richard showing off a patent for an RF-S 15-60mm f/2.8 USM Z optical formula, we're able to move forward with a bit more information in regards to the PowerZoom line.

    Canon introduced the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z back in November, but we're still waiting on the Canon PZ-E2 to begin shipping, so there will be a bit of a delay before Canon releases more PowerZoom lenses.

    We have already reported numerous times that Canon will launch an internal zoom RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z likely in the next 4-6 months.

    We have been told that two more PowerZoom lenses are in the works, one of them will be a full-frame wide angle L zoom lens and an RF-S version of the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM, a lens a lot of APS-C shooters would love to see.

    Could the RF-S 15-60mm f/2.8 IS USM Z optical design Richard reported today fit the bill? We think so. Though we cannot confirm that design is in fact what will come to market. Richard does not there is a ton of elements in the design that makes it look a lot like an L lens, but as you all know, Canon never put the L designation on EF-S lenses. They could do it for RF-S if they wanted to, but we'll have to wait and see.

    As for an RF-S PowerZoom lens, we don't think Canon has the ideal APS-C camera yet for such a lens. We aren't throwing shade at the EOS R7, EOS R10 or EOS R50, all of which are great cameras, but we think there needs to be something more video focused to pair with a PowerZoom RF-S lens.

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    52 comments

    2. I can understand that PowerZoom is interesting for some, esp. for some cine and video use cases.
      Personally I am not into that.
      I appreciate seeing WA zooms for APS-C with wide apertures.
      As I am into the 70-200 market, I am not sure what that internal zoom lens means to the existing one and which to prefer.
      I love the small design of the existing 70-200/2.8, but I would love to use Extenders on it as well.
      I am not sure if I would like an EF-sized 70-200/2.8 just for the extender.
      As I said PowerZoom is not a factor for me.
    3. I can see some advantages of Canon's approach for some of the more heavy-duty pro video lenses, with a separate zoom motor.

      However, I think they've missed a trick when it comes to lighter weight offerings. In their 16-35 f/4 PZ, Sony put both the internal focus and zoom lens groups on linear motors - and that led to a lens with both focus and zoom by wire. So you get that functionality 'for free' without bolting on some external gizmo.

      Can't help feeling the all-automated route is more future proof.
    5. I can see some advantages of Canon's approach for some of the more heavy-duty pro video lenses, with a separate zoom motor.

      However, I think they've missed a trick when it comes to lighter weight offerings. In their 16-35 f/4 PZ, Sony put both the internal focus and zoom lens groups on linear motors - and that led to a lens with both focus and zoom by wire. So you get that functionality 'for free' without bolting on some external gizmo.

      Can't help feeling the all-automated route is more future proof.
      The 16-35 f/4 PZ is kind of meh.
      It is not in the same league.
    7. In their 16-35 f/4 PZ, Sony put both the internal focus and zoom lens groups on linear motors - and that led to a lens with both focus and zoom by wire. So you get that functionality 'for free' without bolting on some external gizmo.

      Can't help feeling the all-automated route is more future proof.
      I haven't used a zoom-by-wire ILC lens. I don't mind focus-by-wire, mainly because I only rarely manually focus. I'm not sure I'd like a zoom-by-wire lens, unless the control was manual-like in terms of zoom speed.
    10. If Canon was to release a RF-S 15-60/2.8 lens, it would be Canon's first interesting RF-S lens for me.
      I don't do video, and don't care about powerzoom option. But definitely sounds like a perfect replacement for my EF-S 17-55/2.8.

      I would probably miss something in the long end if making it my standard walk-around lens instead of the EF-S 15-85mm. But it has the important 15mm in the short end, so if weight of an RF-S 15-60mm/2.8 was closer to the EF-S 15-85mm than to the 17-55mm/2.8 (which I hope is realistic with the shorter flange distance of a mirrorless lens?), it might still be considered for that too.

      Oh well. I'm thinking to much about it. It is still only a "random" lens-patent coupled with a not so specific rumour :)
    12. It's a bit confusing that all those rumors of multiple cameras and lenses and Canon has yet to release anything so far this year.
      I agree. What´s even more confusing to me are the high CR2/ CR3 ratings. There are so many contradicting rumors, yet they all seem very plausible. Canon having released nothing in 2024 yet makes it more confusing. As I stated several times: imho Canon has pretty much shut down the rumor mill entirely. We only hear what Canon would like us to hear e.g. more Z zoom lenses are coming...
    13. I agree. What´s even more confusing to me are the high CR2/ CR3 ratings. There are so many contradicting rumors, yet they all seem very plausible. Canon having released nothing in 2024 yet makes it more confusing. As I stated several times: imho Canon has pretty much shut down the rumor mill entirely. We only hear what Canon would like us to hear e.g. more Z zoom lenses are coming...

      Did it ever happen before Canon not to release anything before March?
    16. Sounds like the current 70-200RF will become the 'cheaper' (but not cheap!) version to make way for that premium experience.

      Being that this canon, that's 3000/3200$ easy.

      Who needs a 50 1.4 update anyways o_O
    18. At first, I was against buying the 70-200 mm internal zoom, but I am now strongly considering it as a companion to the 24-105 mm lens.
      Not for me, unless it offers something other than internal zoom and PZ attachment. The latter doesn’t interest me, and I had the former with the EF version that I happily swapped for the smaller, lighter RF version.
    19. Sounds like the current 70-200RF will become the 'cheaper' (but not cheap!) version to make way for that premium experience.

      Being that this canon, that's 3000/3200$ easy.
      Possibly, but I think longer teles are easier to make than wide-short teles.
      Someone correct me if wrong, of course.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment