What’s a “realistic” lens that you’d like to see Canon make?

3serious · Mar 23, 2020

I'd second the RF 135 f1.x; the EF 135 f2 is my favorite lens ever.

That said, I'd also really love to see an RF 600mm f5.6L for us mere mortal hobbyists who either a) can't afford a $12k 600mm f4, or b) wouldn't want to carry that insurance liability around. If sigma can make a 600mm f6.3 zoom for a grand, surely Canon can make an RF 600mm f5.6L prime for $3k-4k.

koenkooi · Mar 23, 2020

A long macro, with IS, e.g. RF200mm f/4L MACRO IS. I don't particularly care about the focus motor, silent would be a plus, as would be raw speed. Also, it has to be black, like the EF180mm L macro

A refresh of the EF400mm f/5.6 with a 1:2 or better reproduction ratio at MFD would also be good, so add an RF400mm f/5.6L MACRO IS as well. For things like dragonflies longer is better and 1:1 is not as important as it is with the 50-150mm range of macro lenses.
A 3rd lens would be the MP-E 65mm f/3.5 IS, like the old MP-E, but with infinity focus and IS. Stopping at 3x instead of 5x would be a trade-off I can live with.

tron · Mar 23, 2020

14mm 1.4L for astro because the 1.2L mentioned does not seem so realistic to me.
Sigma 14mm 1.8 - a very good lens - is already huge.

Anthny · Mar 23, 2020

150mm or 200mm to 600mm USM IS L zoom with the best possible aperture for about $3000

tron · Mar 23, 2020

600mm 5.6 DO would be awesome. Since the 600 4L IS III is already lighter than II and close to the weight of the would be 600 4 DO there is probably no point for a 600 4 DO (apart from the size).

That's how a 600 5.6 DO would fit. One of the following scenarios would apply:

1. Not going to happen: That would be accomplished by 400DO + 1.4
BUT: for DSLRs poses some additional AF adjustment issues and there is the issue of the weight. A combined 400 DO + 1.4 + hood would be about 2.5Kg.

2. It is going to happen: I just got Nikon's 500 5.6PF (And had to buy a D500 to put behind it!) So Murphy's law dictates that this scenario could be possible

jabeling · Mar 23, 2020

RF 85mm F/1.8

SecureGSM · Mar 23, 2020

tron said:
14mm 1.4L for astro because the 1.2L mentioned does not seem so realistic to me.
Sigma 14mm 1.8 - a very good lens - is already huge.

How can this be unrealistic if Tony said it is “doable”? With, let me guess, around 10 stops of vignetting in extreme corners and a bucket sized front element to the boot.

Rivermist · Mar 23, 2020

I am very attracted by the 70-135L f:2 that is already announced, but the price and weight are going to be punishing. How about a 70-135 f:2.5 or 2.8 IS that one can hand-carry for more than 5 minutes, that is of a more mangeable form factor and that does not require one to mortgage the house to purchase it? I see gaps in the RF offering where we are seeing either good, reasonably-priced and quite OK lenses (35mm 1.8, etc..) or $2,500+ super-extraordinary L glass. The EF range has a number of very interesting L lenses in the $800-$1600 price range that appeal to non-professional photographers, will they ever be catered for (the 24-105L was a good start but I see no follow-up)?

kocmonabt · Mar 23, 2020

M 52/2 or even better 2.8
RF 42/2.8 pancake
RF 15-35/4-5.6 non L, plastic, light

less realistic:
M 45-135/4

janhalasa · Mar 23, 2020

RF 20-85 3.5-5.6 0.7 macro
Perfect lens for nature photography and probably quite possible to implement.

Etienne · Mar 23, 2020

A set of well-constructed, weather-proof, affordable, light weight FF RF mount primes with IS from 24mm to 200mm. F stops as follows:

18 mm f/2.8
24 mm f/2
35mm f/1.8 (already available, sort of)
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
135mm f/2
200mm f/2.8

None of these would be exotic headline grabbing lenses, but with the new RF mount they could provide high IQ at a small size and weight.

tcphoto · Mar 23, 2020

Just about all the EOS R L's should be a stop faster because the sensor being closer to the rear lens element. For the price of the R series lens, I'd expect at least so much.

Bob Howland · Mar 23, 2020

M15-45 f/2.8-4, M45-135 f/2.8 or f/2.8-4, M10-20 f/2.8-4. I use lenses on my M5 that are up to 75mm in diameter and have no problems.

Bob Howland · Mar 23, 2020

200-500 f/2.8-4, where the lens maintains f/2.8 up to 350mm then transitions continuously to f/4 at 500mm.

Maximilian · Mar 23, 2020

RF 85 f/1.8 USM, small, newest optical formula and coatings,
no IS, no L, just as small as possible but with best compromise in IQ/bokeh versus size versus price.

slclick · Mar 23, 2020

RF 28 f/2 pancake

FramerMCB · Mar 23, 2020

3serious said:
I'd second the RF 135 f1.x; the EF 135 f2 is my favorite lens ever.

That said, I'd also really love to see an RF 600mm f5.6L for us mere mortal hobbyists who either a) can't afford a $12k 600mm f4, or b) wouldn't want to carry that insurance liability around. If sigma can make a 600mm f6.3 zoom for a grand, surely Canon can make an RF 600mm f5.6L prime for $3k-4k.

How about a Canon RF 600mm f5.6 DO IS [Mk 1] for $7,399?
Or are you talking more like the old but super sharp and fast focusing EF 400mm f5.6?

i_SH · Mar 23, 2020

17(20)-70/4L IS USM

IcyBergs · Mar 23, 2020

RF pancake wide-ish 28 or 35 would be great @ f/2

RF 14-35 f4L (no IS - to keep the price down)

RF 200-400 f/4-5.6L

I'm New Here

EOS 5D Mark IV

EOS R5

I'm New Here

EOS R5

2 x 5D IV

Mirrorless or bust.

I'm New Here

I'm New Here

EOS R

EOS M50

EOS RP

EOS RP

The dark side - I've been there

If Only Campagnolo Made Cameras

Canon 40D & 7D

EOS M50

I have a Sony...TV

Similar threads