# Specifications and pricing for the Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS and Canon RF 24-70 f/2.8L IS



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 27, 2019)

> Great news, pricing for the new RF lenses is less than our currency conversion pricing in USD!
> *Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM*
> 
> Lens construction: 16 elements in 12 groups
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## deleteme (Aug 27, 2019)

Not bad considering the brand new designs and IS. A pro can easily justify the price in the context of business.
After the initial rush I think we can see some decent incentives for the rest of us looking forward to this lens.
What I want today is the RF 70-200 f2.8.


----------



## PGSanta (Aug 27, 2019)

Awesome! Now what are the haters going to harp on? Can’t wait for the 15-35 to drop.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 27, 2019)

About what I expected with pricing. I hoped the wide angle might be a bit lighter but perhaps going to 15mm and having IS and one would guess top notch build and optics makes that harder - it's quite a bit heavier than the Sony GM 16-35 which is actually a high quality design just badly built.

I have been very happy adapting my EF 24-70 2.8L II to the R so I think I'll stick with that and see where things stand in a year or two when the price of the RF lens will have come down. The EF 24-70 2.8 L II is still probably the best all round 24-70 lens anyone has ever made, sharper even than the new Nikon Z 24-70. So it will be fascinating to see whether Canon has been able to improve it. I suppose for many just having IS will be a big improvement.

I had the 16-35 2.8 L III but sold it and have been happy using the Tamron 15-30 VC adapted. If the L lens really gets 5 stops of IS I might swap out soon. Waking around at sunset with a wide angle is so much fun with a stabilised lens.

One thing this really does make me ponder is whether Canon will bring IBIS to their cameras. Interestingly a while back Roger at Lensrentals did a teardown of the R and though he thought there was room for IBIS he didn't think Canon will be adding it any time soon. It would be nice to have with wide aperture primes but for the ways professionals use those lenses I suppose it isn't likely that important - how many professionals would risk shooting a wedding at slow shutter speeds? "Sorry the photo of the moment your new husband put the ring on your finger is blurry but I was trying to shoot at 1/15 so I could have ISO 100 and show off on some internet forums" said no professional ever.

It's a pity for me really because I liked the idea of adding IBIS to all my old adapted lenses but I trust Canon to know what they are doing and adding in lens IS to the holy trinity RF lenses will likely actually be better than IBIS anyway, at least most tests I've seen show in lens to be better than in body stabilisation.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 27, 2019)

Can’t believe I’m saying this, but the 15-35 could become my second RF lens, once it hits the refurbished store. I can be patient, as I don’t use the EF f4 that often and would be perfectly happy with this lens even though it won’t mount on my DSLRs.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 27, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Can’t believe I’m saying this, but the 15-35 could become my second RF lens, once it hits the refurbished store. I can be patient, as I don’t use the EF f4 that often and would be perfectly happy with this lens even though it won’t mount on my DSLRs.



That's the approach I've settled on too - I think there is simply no "perfect" camera because it depends so much on the lens. So I am happy with my 5D IV for the 24-70 L II and 70-200 2.8 L II. I can of course mount them on the R - the 24-70 is ok, though feels nicer on the 5D and the 70-200 is much nicer on the 5D.

However wide angles will become smaller and better on the RF mount and also some primes balance more nicely - I think eventually we'll see other lenses like the RF 35/1.8 which will be very nice to have.

I got the grip for my R and it improves it with long glass but still one can't defeat the laws of physics - a deeper mount and bigger camera will likely always be better on a 300//2.8.

It's also why I like the Ef-m cameras and I think Canon was wise to create a separate smaller mount for crop - horses for courses.


----------



## neo302 (Aug 27, 2019)

Nice! I’d love to own these one day. 2.8 or better is so awesome, especially with IS.


----------



## zogdart (Aug 27, 2019)

I ask for some RF price lens today (85 F1.2+28-70 F2), And I was told that they are not consider for CPS, the buyer confirmed that with the Canon Rep. That sound strange to me I can see that on the U.S. they are! Did you guys tried and get some CPS prices on the RF lens yet?


----------



## PGSanta (Aug 27, 2019)

mjg79 said:


> About what I expected with pricing. I hoped the wide angle might be a bit lighter but perhaps going to 15mm and having IS and one would guess top notch build and optics makes that harder - it's quite a bit heavier than the Sony GM 16-35 which is actually a high quality design just badly built.



A lot of people on this forum like to trash the Sony 16-35 GM, but it’s a better lens than the EF counterpart, early QC variations aside. It’s literally Sony’s best made zoom, and one of the top 2-3 lenses they make period.


----------



## 1Zach1 (Aug 27, 2019)

Oh man that 15-35 must be mine.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 27, 2019)

zogdart said:


> I ask for some RF price lens today (85 F1.2+28-70 F2), And I was told that they are not consider for CPS, the buyer confirmed that with the Canon Rep. That sound strange to me I can see that on the U.S. they are! Did you guys tried and get some CPS prices on the RF lens yet?


I looked yesterday. The RF 85mm f/1.2L is not on the list, but probably because it is so new? The RF 50mm f/1.2L is there. The RF 28-70mm f/2L is there. The R is not. Less expensive RF lenses are there. So maybe they are slow to update?


----------



## zogdart (Aug 27, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I looked yesterday. The RF 85mm f/1.2L is not on the list, but probably because it is so new? The RF 50mm f/1.2L is there. The RF 28-70mm f/2L is there. The R is not. Less expensive RF lenses are there. So maybe they are slow to update?


Where did you see that for Canon Canada? do you have link? Thanks!!!


----------



## Photo Hack (Aug 27, 2019)

Canon execs must’ve been browsing the last thread on pricing since they know the Naysayers are wiser than they.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 27, 2019)

zogdart said:


> Where did you see that for Canon Canada? do you have link? Thanks!!!





zogdart said:


> Where did you see that for Canon Canada? do you have link? Thanks!!!


No. Canon USA. They are probably slow to update things. That surprised me. https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/canon-professional-services/about-cps


----------



## zogdart (Aug 27, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> No. Canon USA. They are probably slow to update things. That surprised me. https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/support/canon-professional-services/about-cps


Did you get CPS prices? or are you talking about the page where you can register your gear? because if that's the case I see I can register a 40mm pancake lens and I'm pretty sure that a 200$ lens is not consider CPS price wise! PS: your link doesn't work I'm assuming it's your CPS portal! ( Edit)your link worked the second time...


----------



## lbeck (Aug 27, 2019)

Finally!! I’ve been waiting for these two pieces of glass. Definitely buying the 15-35 on launch, might wait a bit for the 24-70. Woo!


----------



## Diltiazem (Aug 27, 2019)

With 3 more blades, RF 24-70 is 95g heavier than EF 24-70/2.8 II. It is slightly longer. I guess part of it is due to IS. And the rest may be more aberration correction? It will be interesting to see the optical performance as EF version is already so good.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 27, 2019)

zogdart said:


> Did you get CPS prices? or are you talking about the page where you can register your gear? because if that's the case I see I can register a 40mm pancake lens and I'm pretty sure that a 200$ lens is not consider CPS price wise! PS: your link doesn't work I'm assuming it's your CPS portal! ( Edit)your link worked the second time...


Fixed the link. You were right.

No, we are talking about the page that tells you which products qualify. The link takes you to the page with the different levels of CPS, scroll down to "Qualifying Products" and a drop down comes up telling the point value for each piece. The R isn't there. Neither is the RF 85mm f/1.2L.


----------



## Photo Hack (Aug 27, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> No, we are talking about the page that tells you which products qualify. The link takes you to the page with the different levels of CPS, scroll down to "Qualifying Products" and a drop down comes up telling the point value for each piece. The R isn't there.


“BeCuZ ThE R iSnT a PrO BoDY”....


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 27, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> Awesome! Now what are the haters going to harp on? Can’t wait for the 15-35 to drop.


The same stuff as before.
AVTVM/Fullstop/Mirage/(iforget) will complain that the lenses are too big and have moving parts, and the others will still complain about the bodies.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 27, 2019)

Photo Hack said:


> “BeCuZ ThE R iSnT a PrO BoDY”....


True. Neither is the RF 85mm f/1.2L. But the 6D is. The 7D is, but not the 7D Mark II. There are 30 non-L lenses including EF-s models listed. I won't even go into the accessories.   Seems Canon needs to work on that page. 

Anyway, whether or not it is a pro camera depends entirely on who is using it. That's my opinion.


----------



## PVCC (Aug 27, 2019)

I love my 5D4 and don't have plans for a mirrorless for years.

Do someone think there's a chance that Cannon makes a *EF 24-70 2.8L with Image Stabilization??*

I'm waiting since so long...


----------



## navastronia (Aug 27, 2019)

PVCC said:


> I love my 5D4 and don't have plans for a mirrorless for years.
> 
> Do someone think there's a chance that Cannon makes a *EF 24-70 2.8L with Image Stabilization??*
> 
> I'm waiting since so long...



I don't, to be honest. Wish it weren't so.


----------



## rosstcorbett (Aug 27, 2019)

Great! Are they available on pre-order tomorrow?


----------



## Brikna (Aug 27, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Fixed the link. You were right.
> 
> No, we are talking about the page that tells you which products qualify. The link takes you to the page with the different levels of CPS, scroll down to "Qualifying Products" and a drop down comes up telling the point value for each piece. The R isn't there. Neither is the RF 85mm f/1.2L.



I had no problems registering EOS R on CPS.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 27, 2019)

lbeck said:


> Finally!! I’ve been waiting for these two pieces of glass. Definitely buying the 15-35 on launch, might wait a bit for the 24-70. Woo!


Yeah, see if you can hold on for a little longer. Your wallet (and family) will love you for that


----------



## flip314 (Aug 27, 2019)

I'm torn between trying to wait until the 24-70 is rebated for under $2k or just picking it up... I'll probably wait a little longer and see if any better bodies materialize

On the wide side, I think I'll wait for the f4 zoom to come out since it should be about half the cost of the 2.8.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Aug 27, 2019)

Wow...nice lenses...not so nice pricing...must be an RF lens...


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Aug 27, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> Not bad considering the brand new designs and IS. A pro can easily justify the price in the context of business.
> After the initial rush I think we can see some decent incentives for the rest of us looking forward to this lens.
> What I want today is the RF 70-200 f2.8.



It depends on the genre the pro is working in. As a UK Self employed Wedding photographer...the margins are really tight. I would have my camera bodies (3) on a 4 year replacement cycle, each year I buy one camera body (within a specified price point) and I retire the oldest camera. I buy them before the beginning of the season, not during. The camera is a tool not a life enhancement toy...so it's a business purchase and I'm really not fussed if I'm buying last year's model. Each camera needs "price to features" consideration. Lens wise, I buy one lens per year and are on a 10 year re-fresh. I never buy "new to the market" lenses...I wait until the initial rush is over so the price settles. I tend to run the trinity of f2.8 zooms and a complement of fast Primes too, plus macro and fisheye options.
I know very few wedding Togs' who can afford a direct fire sale and system swap / change up / change out. Currently...my gear services all of my photographic needs very very well and it's proven thing for me.

The Wildlife guys I know...already have their big whites and they look on the EOS R as a nice toy...But they need a 5D4 or 1DXII...these guys have not issue in buying a £4K Schatler fluid head and video tripod...specific gear is important. The sports guys tend to fall in a similar category. 

Landscapers are generally looking to see how the features and pricing settles and the run and gun portrait photographers tend to really like the new EOS R and lenses...but that's because a lot of the new lenses are specifically for them!

If a new Pro oriented RF camera body comes along...great...but not at the initial premium pricing. So for me, the RF mount is on the distant but inevitable horizon. But it's likely 2 years away for me and I need to carefully integrate a new camera into my existing workflow and capabilities...and lets face it the 5D3/4 are amazing cameras. Big shoes to fill and all that.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 27, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> A lot of people on this forum like to trash the Sony 16-35 GM, but it’s a better lens than the EF counterpart, early QC variations aside. It’s literally Sony’s best made zoom, and one of the top 2-3 lenses they make period.



In terms of the optical design it is indeed very good. It's hard to say it's better than the EF III - it is smaller and lighter and about the same sharpness though the GM has much less vignetting. But lenses wider than 24mm is the area we have seen some benefits to a short flange distance. 

But without question it's one of the better GM lenses. However Roger at Lensrentals who sees and tests thousands of lenses and repairs them had to conclude that if one wants a 16-35 GM that is useable at the longer end one would have to test several copies to find that one. I've not seen anything to change that opinion and indeed the same guy has long been adamant that the "later batches improve" theory has no evidence. 

I have dabbled with Sony - drove myself mad trying to find a 35/1.4 that was acceptable given its price. There's no question they have some great lens designers, I believe quite a few came over from Nikon. However they still seem to be building even top lenses as if they are consumer electronics - "good enough" quality control and also rarely building it in such a way that allows easy repairs and adjustment later.

In many respects that is the way the whole industry is going. Nikon too has started down that line in terms of repairs and adjustment.

But Canon does remain better and when it comes to things like quality control, build quality, service etc the 16-35L III will be in another league from the GM.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 27, 2019)

PVCC said:


> I love my 5D4 and don't have plans for a mirrorless for years.
> 
> Do someone think there's a chance that Cannon makes a *EF 24-70 2.8L with Image Stabilization??*
> 
> I'm waiting since so long...



When Nikon brought out the 24-70 VR and given Sigma and Tamron have similar lenses I thought Canon would respond in EF mount but now I really am not sure.

I actually think Canon is serious that they will keep EF and RF mount going - both have different uses and the EF mount will be better in terms of balance for super telephotos etc.

Having said that I think an EF 24-70 2.8 L IS might be both bigger and risk being optically worse and I don't see Canon taking a backwards step. I think it's easy to forget just what an achievement the EF 24-70 2.8L II is - even after all these years it remains in terms of pure optical quality the best 24-70 2.8 anyone has ever built. Even the new Nikon Z 24-70 isn't quite as sharp (though controls flare better). The Sony GM 24-70 is a very sharp lens but actually bigger than the EF L. The Nikon 24-70 VR is enormous and a lot of reviewers seem to believe the optics got compromised (other disagree).

My point is that the 24-70 2.8 L II was an amazing design, a giant step forward, and is probably right on the limits of what is possible. To assume they can just stuff an IS unit in is perhaps mistaken.

Another example would be the Nikon 14-24 - again a lens design that set new standards. All these years later the only model that is stabilised to compete stops at 15mm. When Sigma went head to head with a 14-24 it ended up, despite all the years of tech improvement, very similar size and output. Nikon got it right that time and there doesn't appear, in SLR mounts, much further to go. I suspect the 24-70 2.8 L II might be in the same category.

Although I have doubts that it will happen perhaps one day canon will put IBIS in their SLR bodies.Sooner or later they might decide the technology is good and stable enough and indeed eventually more megapixels, more dynamic range etc etc will no longer sell bodies.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 27, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> It depends on the genre the pro is working in. As a UK Self employed Wedding photographer...the margins are really tight. I would have my camera bodies (3) on a 4 year replacement cycle, each year I buy one camera body (within a specified price point) and I retire the oldest camera. I buy them before the beginning of the season, not during. The camera is a tool not a life enhancement toy...so it's a business purchase and I'm really not fussed if I'm buying last year's model. Each camera needs "price to features" consideration. Lens wise, I buy one lens per year and are on a 10 year re-fresh. I never buy "new to the market" lenses...I wait until the initial rush is over so the price settles. I tend to run the trinity of f2.8 zooms and a complement of fast Primes too, plus macro and fisheye options.
> I know very few wedding Togs' who can afford a direct fire sale and system swap / change up / change out. Currently...my gear services all of my photographic needs very very well and it's proven thing for me.
> 
> The Wildlife guys I know...already have their big whites and they look on the EOS R as a nice toy...But they need a 5D4 or 1DXII...these guys have not issue in buying a £4K Schatler fluid head and video tripod...specific gear is important. The sports guys tend to fall in a similar category.
> ...



Interesting perspective, thanks for writing it. I am not a professional but I am often bemused by the posts on here that seem based on the idea that professionals have unlimited money and will splurge on the new stuff that is an unknown quantity. I know a few professionals and one who is very successful is extremely conservative with gear and still uses two 5D IIIs - for him it's not just wanting to not spend money needlessly but also not taking risks when he has gear that he knows inside and out. I've been guilty of chasing newer technology and he often tells me he would be happy to have a camera with less dynamic range as most people like contrasty photos at weddings!

I think both Nikon and Canon have figured out what you wrote though. And Sony certainly did. Which is why the R is a 5DIV sensor in a body more like a 6D (and in Nikon land the Z7 is a D850 sensor in a D750 like body) - ie aiming them at wealthy prosumers who care more about image quality than build quality. It seems a sensible approach.


----------



## LesC (Aug 27, 2019)

Hmm, do I trade my EF24-70F2.8L MKII in for the RF24-70 or perhaps both EF24-70 & 17-40 for the RF15-35 (as I've been quite impressed with the RF24-105) ??

Ideally I'd like both but think I'll wait for the reviews before doing anything yet as performance will be the important deciding factor. the 15-35 is a lot heavier than my 17-40 and not sure if F2.8 & IS is that important to me. I suspect the UK prices will be more too assuming the US prices don't include sales tax ??


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Aug 27, 2019)

mjg79 said:


> Interesting perspective, thanks for writing it. I am not a professional but I am often bemused by the posts on here that seem based on the idea that professionals have unlimited money and will splurge on the new stuff that is an unknown quantity. I know a few professionals and one who is very successful is extremely conservative with gear and still uses two 5D IIIs - for him it's not just wanting to not spend money needlessly but also not taking risks when he has gear that he knows inside and out. I've been guilty of chasing newer technology and he often tells me he would be happy to have a camera with less dynamic range as most people like contrasty photos at weddings!
> 
> I think both Nikon and Canon have figured out what you wrote though. And Sony certainly did. Which is why the R is a 5DIV sensor in a body more like a 6D (and in Nikon land the Z7 is a D850 sensor in a D750 like body) - ie aiming them at wealthy prosumers who care more about image quality than build quality. It seems a sensible approach.



Yep I've been rocking a pair of 5DIII's for quite a few years. I slowed down my wedding work due to personal circumstances...so my gear budget took a hit too. As much as I'd like a mk4 (and it's a great upgrade) it's not particularly high on my "to do" list. 

I think Canon has been very wise with the Eos R and Rp...it's not the camera anyone wants. But it's new...exciting...and it's got all those lovely posh lenses that no one can afford. When the next camera is launched with more pro features...it'll be over priced and over specced...again...not quite the camera every one wanted. Most people want a Mk4 EOS R variant. So a lot of photographers will buy both because neither quite scratches that itch. Once the Pro model is launched, I can see the S/H market price for the Eos R and Rp dropping like a brick as soon as a Pro orientated body is available.


----------



## Karlbug (Aug 27, 2019)

I am really curious about lens coatings used on RF 24-70, because 21 elements are a lot. Even the RF 28-70 beast has only 19 elements. I hope light transmission, flaring and microcontrast will not suffer.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 27, 2019)

Brikna said:


> I had no problems registering EOS R on CPS.
> View attachment 186192


Hmmmm.... not what I am seeing here. Maybe I have a virus?  That's an awful lot of points for any camera. Where are you?


----------



## Brikna (Aug 27, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Hmmmm.... not what I am seeing here. Maybe I have a virus?  That's an awful lot of points for any camera. Where are you?







__





Canon Professional Services (CPS) - Canon Europe


Whether you’re a seasoned professional or just passionate about photography and filmmaking, Canon Professional Services (CPS) supports your storytelling journey with expert care. Welcome to the family.




www.canon-europe.com


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 27, 2019)

Brikna said:


> I had no problems registering EOS R on CPS.
> View attachment 186192


Neither did I !


----------



## flip314 (Aug 27, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> It depends on the genre the pro is working in. As a UK Self employed Wedding photographer...the margins are really tight. I would have my camera bodies (3) on a 4 year replacement cycle, each year I buy one camera body (within a specified price point) and I retire the oldest camera. I buy them before the beginning of the season, not during. The camera is a tool not a life enhancement toy...so it's a business purchase and I'm really not fussed if I'm buying last year's model. Each camera needs "price to features" consideration. Lens wise, I buy one lens per year and are on a 10 year re-fresh. I never buy "new to the market" lenses...I wait until the initial rush is over so the price settles. I tend to run the trinity of f2.8 zooms and a complement of fast Primes too, plus macro and fisheye options.
> I know very few wedding Togs' who can afford a direct fire sale and system swap / change up / change out. Currently...my gear services all of my photographic needs very very well and it's proven thing for me.
> 
> The Wildlife guys I know...already have their big whites and they look on the EOS R as a nice toy...But they need a 5D4 or 1DXII...these guys have not issue in buying a £4K Schatler fluid head and video tripod...specific gear is important. The sports guys tend to fall in a similar category.
> ...



No, you don't understand, "real" pros can't wait to replace their gear... They need to replace everything (lenses and bodies) NOW or they won't be able to do their jobs. Better to sell everything and move to a new system than wait to see what happens in their current ecosystem.

All the EF lenses and bodies ceased to work once mirrorless came out, and these guys are losing money every day until they buy better dynamic range.


----------



## zogdart (Aug 27, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> True. Neither is the RF 85mm f/1.2L. But the 6D is. The 7D is, but not the 7D Mark II. There are 30 non-L lenses including EF-s models listed. I won't even go into the accessories.   Seems Canon needs to work on that page.
> 
> Anyway, whether or not it is a pro camera depends entirely on who is using it. That's my opinion.


The difference is you can register your gear in the CPS portal, and you guys in the US have a point system, we don't have that in Canada. But you can only have CPS Prices on top lens like L-Series and pro body. It doesn't make any sense that We don't have CPS prices for the RF L series lens! I have contacted Canon CPS Canada I'm supposed to have a call back from a rep over there to try and clarify this. the 85 1.2 and the @8-70 F2 are over 3K in Canada, I sure hope they get there ducks in a row and we can get CPS prices for those!


----------



## David Hull (Aug 27, 2019)

mjg79 said:


> In terms of the optical design it is indeed very good. It's hard to say it's better than the EF III - it is smaller and lighter and about the same sharpness though the GM has much less vignetting. But lenses wider than 24mm is the area we have seen some benefits to a short flange distance.
> 
> But without question it's one of the better GM lenses. However Roger at Lensrentals who sees and tests thousands of lenses and repairs them had to conclude that if one wants a 16-35 GM that is useable at the longer end one would have to test several copies to find that one. I've not seen anything to change that opinion and indeed the same guy has long been adamant that the "later batches improve" theory has no evidence.
> 
> ...



I would love to know what Sony service and support is like with respect to camera equipment. They suck WRT consumer electronics (even their “high end” audio stuff). Canon, on the other hand, is awesome WRT service. You call, they know exactly where your work is and the status, they keep you appraised, etc. This was one of the reasons I decided to stay with Canon, given that I knew that moving to mirrorless would entail upgrading lenses — so now might be a good time to consider a system switch, we’re I so inclined — Canon is so good to work with.


----------



## mjg79 (Aug 27, 2019)

David Hull said:


> I would love to know what Sony service and support is like with respect to camera equipment. They suck WRT consumer electronics (even their “high end” audio stuff). Canon, on the other hand, is awesome WRT service. You call, they know exactly where your work is and the status, they keep you appraised, etc. This was one of the reasons I decided to stay with Canon, given that I knew that moving to mirrorless would entail upgrading lenses — so now might be a good time to consider a system switch, we’re I so inclined — Canon is so good to work with.



Well it's very hard to full say what such thigns are like because of course online one only hears the negatives a lot of the time.

What I think is beyond dispute is that Sony has an approach that is rather like a consumer electronics company. So they will tend to mass produce as much as possible, producing extra units for warranty replacements and try to keep repair work to a minimum. I knew someone who had one of the (very lovely I'll admit) Sony "Zeiss" 50/1.4s and it was a great sharp copy but was in the recall for rear elements that go foggy. He sent it in and it came back wildly decentered. So he phoned them up and got to talk to a real person and it was explained that essentially a greta part of the optics of the system just comes in a pre-sealed group from Sony and get swapped in and out. His well centred group was taken out and a badly centred one put in.

He kicked up enough of a fuss that they gave him a replacement though it was a big fight. Nikon has gone down that same route too - I bought a copy of the Nikon 35/1.4G lens as I've always liked the rendering and have an old D800 and wanted to play with it. I got a very good price on one on ebay so rolled the dice, it arrived and seemed to have a titled element, the plane of focus was at a strange angle. I got in touch with a couple of different repair shops, both authorised ones, and both told me that the lens doesn't allow adjustment, it would be a case of identifying the suspect elements and replacing them.

Now to be fair to Nikon I think with things like their super telephoto lenses they will allow adjustment etc. But clearly at least some of Nikon's glass, even fairly high end stuff, is taking the Sony approach.

Admit I dislike it. I think it's fair enough for a DVD player or TV - if there's a problem swap it and move on. But photography equipment is meant to be used, it might get a bit wet, it might get bumped. It should be adjustable and repairable.

So my biased and without a great deal of, though with a little, evidence suggests that if you care about repairs and service Canon remains the best option. Look at the lens rentals tear downs of the Canon 35mm L II and the 100-400L II - both not only built like tanks but built with easy access to optical adjustments.


----------



## LesC (Aug 27, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Hmmmm.... not what I am seeing here. Maybe I have a virus?  That's an awful lot of points for any camera. Where are you?


 I registered my EOS R in the UK and got 200 points too. Interestingly, for my 6D MKII I got 225 points even though it was substantially cheaper than the R.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 27, 2019)

Brikna said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


USA here


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 27, 2019)

zogdart said:


> The difference is you can register your gear in the CPS portal, and you guys in the US have a point system, we don't have that in Canada. But you can only have CPS Prices on top lens like L-Series and pro body. It doesn't make any sense that We don't have CPS prices for the RF L series lens! I have contacted Canon CPS Canada I'm supposed to have a call back from a rep over there to try and clarify this. the 85 1.2 and the @8-70 F2 are over 3K in Canada, I sure hope they get there ducks in a row and we can get CPS prices for those!


I'm not a CPS member, so that may make a difference. What I am looking at is the qualifying products page where the 3 memberships are listed on the About CPS page. Maybe once inside your CPS account you can register? My gear is registered for warranty. That was not a problem.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 27, 2019)

zogdart said:


> The difference is you can register your gear in the CPS portal, and you guys in the US have a point system, we don't have that in Canada. But you can only have CPS Prices on top lens like L-Series and pro body. It doesn't make any sense that We don't have CPS prices for the RF L series lens! I have contacted Canon CPS Canada I'm supposed to have a call back from a rep over there to try and clarify this. the 85 1.2 and the @8-70 F2 are over 3K in Canada, I sure hope they get there ducks in a row and we can get CPS prices for those!



All my gear is registered in the Canada CPS portal.




I have not looked into CPS pricing but Camera Canada offers it on the 500mm and 600mm F4's (Hope is it ok to post the link)






Welcome to Camera Canada - Canada's dot.com for Cameras







www.cameracanada.com


----------



## xanbarksdale (Aug 27, 2019)

I’d really like the 15-35 for my EOS R, but to be honest I have fallen in love with the 16-35 III and the variable nd adapter. It is so much more convenient then having a filter on the front. Since I shoot mostly video this is necessary and think it would be hard to go back to a “regular” variable nd filter.


----------



## francomade (Aug 28, 2019)

xanbarksdale said:


> I’d really like the 15-35 for my EOS R, but to be honest I have fallen in love with the 16-35 III and the variable nd adapter. It is so much more convenient then having a filter on the front. Since I shoot mostly video this is necessary and think it would be hard to go back to a “regular” variable nd filter.


So true. Im currently using the variable nd adapter with 16-35 iii together with a polariser filter on the lens itself. It's really perfect.


----------



## deleteme (Aug 28, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> It depends on the genre the pro is working in. As a UK Self employed Wedding photographer...the margins are really tight. I would have my camera bodies (3) on a 4 year replacement cycle, each year I buy one camera body (within a specified price point) and I retire the oldest camera. I buy them before the beginning of the season, not during. The camera is a tool not a life enhancement toy...so it's a business purchase and I'm really not fussed if I'm buying last year's model. Each camera needs "price to features" consideration. Lens wise, I buy one lens per year and are on a 10 year re-fresh. I never buy "new to the market" lenses...I wait until the initial rush is over so the price settles. I tend to run the trinity of f2.8 zooms and a complement of fast Primes too, plus macro and fisheye options.
> I know very few wedding Togs' who can afford a direct fire sale and system swap / change up / change out. Currently...my gear services all of my photographic needs very very well and it's proven thing for me.
> 
> The Wildlife guys I know...already have their big whites and they look on the EOS R as a nice toy...But they need a 5D4 or 1DXII...these guys have not issue in buying a £4K Schatler fluid head and video tripod...specific gear is important. The sports guys tend to fall in a similar category.
> ...


Of course a pro has to look at it as a business decision.
A pro that would ditch their 3-5 year old lenses to get these either has a lot of money or they really believe the new lenses will make some difference to their work.
If this is a time for them to replace a well worn lens the prices of the new ones won't make them weep.

I currently use all my EF lenses with adapters and have no need to upgrade any lens other than my 70-200 2.8 L IS as I got it in 2002 and still has decent resale.

I have used all the Canon DSLRs over the years starting with the 10D in a full time pro environment. When I shot weddings (stopped about 5 or 6 years ago) I longed for a FF mirrorless for dark venues and silent shutter. I did use mkIIs and mkIIIs and while they did well, the Panasonic GX-7 left them for dead when silence was needed.
My R is miles better than that GX-7 and in situations that require it (on set of film and video) candids of meetings etc. it is a superb performer.
As for action, the buffer on the R beats the mk4 by a mile . Frame lag is a bit of an issue but not one that so many want to make it out to be.

People spending thousands on 600mm and 800mm lenses are not about to ditch them in favor of an RF version as the IQ will scarcely be significantly better. An adapter will be the best option for them. I suspect that mirrorless bodies will advance far faster than many think and the naysayers will be proven wrong.

Of course some will always stick with DSLRs. Fine.


----------



## deleteme (Aug 28, 2019)

mjg79 said:


> Interesting perspective, thanks for writing it. I am not a professional but I am often bemused by the posts on here that seem based on the idea that professionals have unlimited money and will splurge on the new stuff that is an unknown quantity. I know a few professionals and one who is very successful is extremely conservative with gear and still uses two 5D IIIs - for him it's not just wanting to not spend money needlessly but also not taking risks when he has gear that he knows inside and out. I've been guilty of chasing newer technology and he often tells me he would be happy to have a camera with less dynamic range as most people like contrasty photos at weddings!
> 
> I think both Nikon and Canon have figured out what you wrote though. And Sony certainly did. Which is why the R is a 5DIV sensor in a body more like a 6D (and in Nikon land the Z7 is a D850 sensor in a D750 like body) - ie aiming them at wealthy prosumers who care more about image quality than build quality. It seems a sensible approach.


Pros don't have unlimited money. No one does.
However, unlike enthusiasts who buy and sell seemingly on a daily basis judging by the posts I read, they do not howl about the price of a new tool as it is weighed against need and ROI. They use the metrics of utility.
I have some lenses that are pushing 20 years old. I bought a 17TS-E when it came out and everyone was gasping at the price. It was paid for on the first job and has been regularly used since I bought it. The same with the 11-24.
Every lens I own was bought with the understanding that it would be a significant contributor to my revenue.
I bought the R for that same reason. Two issues make it a mandatory buy for me: AF and silent shooting.
No DSLR is as accurate at focusing as the R and I have had them all. Even with adapted glass the AF is fast and hyper accurate over the whole frame. The DSLRs were pretty good but every once in a while they miss focus slightly. Often still saleable but annoying to me. Sharp images are mandatory for a pro. We don't get to go back and shoot something again or make excuses to the client.The R does not do that. In addition it performs this feat in dark venues when my mk4 gives up.
And the silent shooting is fast and mandatory in a variety of settings.

A good pro is a good businessperson. I know a lot working with older modest gear making a good six figure income. I also know some who are brilliant but can scarcely make ends meet because they load up on the latest shiny stuff. They have spouses with actual jobs that make the rent.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 28, 2019)

mjg79 said:


> Well it's very hard to full say what such thigns are like because of course online one only hears the negatives a lot of the time.
> 
> What I think is beyond dispute is that Sony has an approach that is rather like a consumer electronics company. So they will tend to mass produce as much as possible, producing extra units for warranty replacements and try to keep repair work to a minimum. I knew someone who had one of the (very lovely I'll admit) Sony "Zeiss" 50/1.4s and it was a great sharp copy but was in the recall for rear elements that go foggy. He sent it in and it came back wildly decentered. So he phoned them up and got to talk to a real person and it was explained that essentially a greta part of the optics of the system just comes in a pre-sealed group from Sony and get swapped in and out. His well centred group was taken out and a badly centred one put in.
> 
> ...


And, I might add, CPS repairs are extremely fast!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Aug 28, 2019)

Normalnorm said:


> Pros don't have unlimited money. No one does.
> However, unlike enthusiasts who buy and sell seemingly on a daily basis judging by the posts I read, they do not howl about the price of a new tool as it is weighed against need and ROI. They use the metrics of utility.
> I have some lenses that are pushing 20 years old. I bought a 17TS-E when it came out and everyone was gasping at the price. It was paid for on the first job and has been regularly used since I bought it. The same with the 11-24.
> Every lens I own was bought with the understanding that it would be a significant contributor to my revenue.
> ...


 In Canon marketing world..most pros use pair of 1DXII's, a 5DSR and a 5D4. In reality the most used Pro camera kits are a well worn pair of 5DII or III's. If you have newer kit than that then you are doing very well as a pro.


----------



## SUNDOG04 (Aug 29, 2019)

The 15-35 looks fantastic. A few years ago I sold the 40-70 for the 16-35 f4 and was extremely pleased with an increase in sharpness and no more purple fringing with tree/sky in landscape photos.

I am not switching to mirrorless, but am drooling over that lens.


----------



## deleteme (Aug 30, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> In Canon marketing world..most pros use pair of 1DXII's, a 5DSR and a 5D4. In reality the most used Pro camera kits are a well worn pair of 5DII or III's. If you have newer kit than that then you are doing very well as a pro.


Not just Canon marketing. The impression I get from reading enthusiast posts is that all pros are constantly buying gear and that anything short of top of the line latest bodies and lenses means you can't be taken seriously.
A pro buys gear and amortizes the cost over several years with the revenue generation factored in to yield the greatest ROI.
An enthusiast just hides the credit card bills from their spouse.


----------



## DanCarr (Aug 30, 2019)

zogdart said:


> I ask for some RF price lens today (85 F1.2+28-70 F2), And I was told that they are not consider for CPS, the buyer confirmed that with the Canon Rep. That sound strange to me I can see that on the U.S. they are! Did you guys tried and get some CPS prices on the RF lens yet?



I was told this as well when I talked to The Camera Store. "RF lenses are not considered pro lenses" Then another store told me they only did discounts on L-series lenses and not RF lenses. I tried to explain that there are many L-series RF lenses already, but they just seemed confused and I gave up.

This seems ridiculous. These are the likely the best lenses they have ever produced, and as L-series they are pro level by definition.


----------



## PVCC (Sep 3, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think Canon has been very wise with the Eos R and Rp...it's not the camera anyone wants. But it's new...exciting...and it's got *all those lovely posh lenses that no one can afford. *



I bolded that, it made me smile. Yes, even if they're great lenses, Canon has gone mad...

Some fortunate people may buy them, but I found those prices crazy...


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Sep 3, 2019)

PVCC said:


> I bolded that, it made me smile. Yes, even if they're great lenses, Canon has gone mad...
> 
> Some fortunate people may buy them, but I found those prices crazy...


Yes i recon Canon have done an internal review / cost analysis to see what they stand to loose (profit wise) in the declining market. Then they have passed that profit loss back on to us as the consumer....those lenses are great...but deliberately expensive. There is no technical reason why a RF 24-70 is going to be more expensive than the EF variant. It's in the comparative lenses that the pricing disparity is exposed. After all...it's just an optical formula...optics and plastic. Component wise, most lenses are relatively cheap to develop and make...lenses are a massive profit for Canon, way more than the Cameras.


----------



## Joules (Sep 3, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> There is no technical reason why a RF 24-70 is going to be more expensive than the EF variant


Seriously? The EF version doesn't have IS! 



GMCPhotographics said:


> After all...it's just an optical formula...optics and plastic. Component wise, most lenses are relatively cheap to develop and make...


Any reference for that? It seems hard to believe. Relative to what? Component wise? What does that mean? 

If developing lenses were such an easy and inexpensive task, why would it take so many years for any mirrorless system to flesh out it's lens offerings? And why would the manufacturers not lower prices to compete with smartphones better?


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Sep 3, 2019)

Joules said:


> Seriously? The EF version doesn't have IS!
> 
> 
> Any reference for that? It seems hard to believe. Relative to what? Component wise? What does that mean?
> ...



Joules...I've been here a long time....please don't troll. You may not know much about lens construction....but some of us have been shooting professionally for a very long time. My first Professional Canon camera body was Pre AF....in fact I still have it. I also have an original ef 50mm f1.8 from the first year of EOS. 
Go look up some of my photos....many are to be found on these forum pages.


----------



## flip314 (Sep 3, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> Joules...I've been here a long time....please don't troll. You may not know much about lens construction....but some of us have been shooting professionally for a very long time. My first Professional Canon camera body was Pre AF....in fact I still have it. I also have an original ef 50mm f1.8 from the first year of EOS.
> Go look up some of my photos....many are to be found on these forum pages.



That's a complete non-sequitur... Taking photos doesn't really teach you anything about building lenses. You've also chosen a basic double-gauss lens as an example, probably the simplest optical formula you will see in any modern lens. The RF 24-70 2.8 has 21 elements (even more than the EF II's 18 and FAR more than the 50 1.8's 6 elements). It's also got IS.

I don't think healthy skepticism is "trolling"... You made a claim that the RF 24-70 should cost no more than the EF version, but without evidence. It does seem to me like the extra IS group makes the lens design (and calibration, if not manufacturing) more complex, but then again I don't own a camera without AF so I don't know anything.


----------



## Joules (Sep 3, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> Go look up some of my photos....many are to be found on these forum pages.


No offense, but I fail to see what your artistic skills and experience with this forum have to do with your expertise in lens design and manufacturing.

Optical products appear to be very hard to design and expensive to manufacture from an outside perspective. After all, good glasses aren't cheap, neither are telescopes and microscopes. Photography lenses are far from cheap either.

But you claim such optical formulas and lens elements are relatively simply jn development and production, do you not? So what are the reasons products involving these are so pricy?

I was just asking a question, so since you claim such a deep knowledge of the topic that daring to question it is already trolling, would you kindly give us some insight? Sure, I asked my questions fairly snarky. Sorry for that, I wrote it in the train after a mediocre day of work. But as question, they are still valid I think. 

My understanding is that Canon had to put a lot of upfront investment in a completely new set of lenses that aim to make use of a mount that is new to the designers. Canon already has to invest a lot initially in order to design many new top quality products in relatively short time, for a new system and new market. And on top of that this market is smaller than the DSLR market currently, therefore these higher costs have to be spread out over fewer customers. A jump in price does not seem unreasonable considering we can also expect improvements in IQ and got IS in some cases. If you could point out the flaws in that thought, please feel free to do so.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 4, 2019)

I haven’t really followed this thread so forgive me if this has been covered.

I just read at DPReview that the RF70-200 has an mfd of 0.7m? Is that seriously correct?


----------



## briangus (Sep 26, 2019)

Just picked up the Rf 15-35 F2.8 - long but not too heavy

Comparison against the Rf 50 and the Rf 85


----------



## Karlbug (Sep 26, 2019)

briangus said:


> Just picked up the Rf 15-35 F2.8 - long but not too heavy
> 
> Comparison against the Rf 50 and the Rf 85
> 
> View attachment 186793


For the first time I noticed it's extending at 15mm and not at 35mm.


----------



## Michael Clark (Oct 1, 2019)

zogdart said:


> Did you get CPS prices? or are you talking about the page where you can register your gear? because if that's the case I see I can register a 40mm pancake lens and I'm pretty sure that a 200$ lens is not consider CPS price wise! PS: your link doesn't work I'm assuming it's your CPS portal! ( Edit)your link worked the second time...



What do you mean by "CPS Prices?"



CanonFanBoy said:


> True. Neither is the RF 85mm f/1.2L. But the 6D is. The 7D is, but not the 7D Mark II. There are 30 non-L lenses including EF-s models listed. I won't even go into the accessories.   Seems Canon needs to work on that page.
> 
> Anyway, whether or not it is a pro camera depends entirely on who is using it. That's my opinion.



In the U.S., the 7D Mark II is worth 5 points, the 7D is worth 1 point. The 6D is worth 5 points. The RF 85mm f/1.2L is worth 6 points.






zogdart said:


> The difference is you can register your gear in the CPS portal, and you guys in the US have a point system, we don't have that in Canada. But you can only have CPS Prices on top lens like L-Series and pro body. It doesn't make any sense that We don't have CPS prices for the RF L series lens! I have contacted Canon CPS Canada I'm supposed to have a call back from a rep over there to try and clarify this. the 85 1.2 and the @8-70 F2 are over 3K in Canada, I sure hope they get there ducks in a row and we can get CPS prices for those!



So are you saying in Canada a CPS membership gets you a discount on new lens purchases? 




angrykarl said:


> For the first time I noticed it's extending at 15mm and not at 35mm.



So it's a shorter registration distance scaled down lens concept similar in design to the original EF 24-70mm f/2.8L design that was retrofocus all the way from 24-70mm? Is it all the way retracted at 35mm and all the way extended at 15mm with the barrel only moving in one direction all the way from 15-35mm?


----------



## Michael Clark (Oct 1, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Hmmmm.... not what I am seeing here. Maybe I have a virus?  That's an awful lot of points for any camera. Where are you?



In the U.S.one (1) point is worth about the same as fifty (50) points in Europe.

A CPS Silver membership in the U.S. requires 10 points, a Gold membership requires 20 points.
A CPS Silver membership in Europe requires 500 points, a Gold membership requires 1000 points.


----------



## SteveC (Oct 1, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> In the U.S., the 7D Mark II is worth 5 points, the 7D is worth 1 point. The 6D is worth 5 points. The RF 85mm f/1.2L is worth 6 points.



It looks like my rather pedestrian accumulation of prime lenses is worth 12 points.  Honestly I don't see why the 100mm (non-L) macro (which they will have to pry out of my cold, dead hands) is only worth 2 points, same as the 40mm pancake.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Oct 1, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> What do you mean by "CPS Prices?"
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There is no CPS pricing on RF lens at this time, they are not sure if there will be. There is CPS pricing on the Longer EF Primes in both Canada and the US, just have to ask for it.


----------



## Michael Clark (Oct 2, 2019)

Ramage said:


> There is no CPS pricing on RF lens at this time, they are not sure if there will be. There is CPS pricing on the Longer EF Primes in both Canada and the US, just have to ask for it.



But what, exactly, is 'CPS pricing'? What do you mean when you say "there is CPS pricing on this lens" or "there is not CPS pricing on that lens?" 

The only discount I've gotten from Canon in the U.S. was on a refurbished camera body through the CLP (Canon Loyalty Program), which does not require CPS membership.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Oct 2, 2019)

Michael Clark said:


> But what, exactly, is 'CPS pricing'? What do you mean when you say "there is CPS pricing on this lens" or "there is not CPS pricing on that lens?"
> 
> The only discount I've gotten from Canon in the U.S. was on a refurbished camera body through the CLP (Canon Loyalty Program), which does not require CPS membership.



CPS pricing is special reduce price (?%) for working professionals, to get a list of what is offered talk to CPS. Authorized dealers can also request the current pricing and offered products. *Note* it has been my experience that only the highest end items are offered, the 5 series bodies is not offered for example 

You can then have your local dealer bring in the gear for you at the CPS price. Here is an example of a dealer offering CPS pricing. 






Welcome to Camera Canada - Canada's dot.com for Cameras







www.cameracanada.com


----------

