# Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS to come before EF version [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 24, 2018)

> We’ve mentioned previously that an RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will be coming sometime in 2019 for the Canon EOS R system. We’ve also been told that an EF version of such a lens is also in the works.
> We’re now told that the RF version of the 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will come ahead of an EF version. Though the source did say that it’s possible the EF version never comes, it may come down to how well the EOS R system cameras are received in 2018 and 2019. We do expect to see an entry-level EOS R camera, as well as a “pro” body.
> The EF lens lineup is going to take a backseat to the RF line for the foreseeable future.



Continue reading...


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Oct 24, 2018)

An EF 24-70 IS after an RF version? Ya, and they'll be new a EF 50L 1.2 too


----------



## ethanz (Oct 24, 2018)




----------



## DrToast (Oct 24, 2018)

Are they seriously not going to put IBIS in the R bodies? That’s ridiculous.


----------



## BeenThere (Oct 24, 2018)

Canon moving to the R mount system as quickly as possible. They will need to push out more capable bodies before widespread adoption, but expecting those bodies in 2019.


----------



## Graphic.Artifacts (Oct 24, 2018)

Guess I'll be sticking with my f4 IS for a while longer.


----------



## tron (Oct 24, 2018)

Graphic.Artifacts said:


> Guess I'll be sticking with my f4 IS for a while longer.


And me with my 24-70 2.8 II 

P.S If something works...


----------



## ethanz (Oct 24, 2018)

tron said:


> P.S If something works...


... you save money I guess .


----------



## tron (Oct 24, 2018)

ethanz said:


> ... you save money I guess .


And you keep getting the same nice results from a top L lens. Now if they make an EF 24-70 2.8L IS that is at least equal to the II version I might reconsider


----------



## JonSnow (Oct 24, 2018)

oh boy DSLR are dying faster than i thought... 

not a SINGLE EF lens in 2019?!

not even a new 50mm ....  how much longer must people wait for a new L 50mm?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 24, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> oh boy DSLR are dying faster than i thought...
> 
> not a SINGLE EF lens in 2019?!
> 
> not even a new 50mm ....  how much longer must people wait for a new L 50mm?


No biggie.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 24, 2018)

DrToast said:


> Are they seriously not going to put IBIS in the R bodies? That’s ridiculous.


No biggie. Not for stills photographers.


----------



## Talys (Oct 25, 2018)

That sounds fine. People who own an R may ant a native mount or may not have an EF. The vast majority of people with a DSLR in the market for a 24-70 2.8IS have something in EF already. 

My big question is, how much?


----------



## dak723 (Oct 25, 2018)

DrToast said:


> Are they seriously not going to put IBIS in the R bodies? That’s ridiculous.



Since this rumored lens has IS, not sure why you are complaining here in this thread.


----------



## dak723 (Oct 25, 2018)

Talys said:


> That sounds fine. People who own an R may ant a native mount or may not have an EF. The vast majority of people with a DSLR in the market for a 24-70 2.8IS have something in EF already.
> 
> My big question is, how much?



Yes, exactly. The EF lineup is already essentially complete and up to date (with one exception, apparently..) So it is obvious Canon will try and build up the RF lineup as quickly as possible. Of course, forum dwellers will immediately take this as a signal that DSLRs are dead. Typical over-reaction.


----------



## dominic_siu (Oct 25, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> oh boy DSLR are dying faster than i thought...
> 
> not a SINGLE EF lens in 2019?!
> 
> not even a new 50mm ....  how much longer must people wait for a new L 50mm?


If someone wants 50 1.2 now, RF is the only choice. Switch to R


----------



## Isaacheus (Oct 25, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Yes, exactly. The EF lineup is already essentially complete and up to date (with one exception, apparently..) So it is obvious Canon will try and build up the RF lineup as quickly as possible. Of course, forum dwellers will immediately take this as a signal that DSLRs are dead. Typical over-reaction.



I don't think the dslr is already dead, but the comment at the end about the EF version might be dependent on how the R is received doesn't give a lot of confidence


----------



## eyeheartny (Oct 25, 2018)

As an R owner I like how things are shaping up lens-wise for the RF mount and I understand why Canon needs a cheaper standard zoom (compared to the f2 version), but I am also eager for some more exotic lenses to be released on the RF mount...an 85mm, a fast short-portrait zoom, some ultrafast wide angles, etc. So exciting to see what this new mount enables the engineers to do.


----------



## peterzuehlke (Oct 25, 2018)

ethanz said:


> ... you save money I guess .


I bought into the Canon system in the mid 1980s for the lenses, last 6 months I bought two Tamrons, 45mm and 85mm. Those were the first, maybe not the last.


----------



## Aaron D (Oct 25, 2018)

I've got an R (I love it btw, even without two cards) and I'm really anxious for exactly this lens, or there-abouts. I've got nothing to look through yet because I'm waiting for the polarizing adapter; and none of the first four RFs are a good fit for my needs. Besides this rumored standard zoom I've got a pretty small-niche wish-list, so I'm resigned to waiting awhile. But if Canon is reading this:

A 28mm IS f2.0 Plenty fast but compact, too. No macro required.
A 17mm TS-E that uses filters. Front, back—doesn't matter. 19 or 20mm would be close enough.
A 24mm TS-E compact and with excellent optics.

And yeah, expensive year ahead!


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 25, 2018)

What the source is suggesting sounds like a really bad idea from a business standpoint. The compelling cameras have to come first, before the fancy lenses will capture buyer interest and the current EOS R just isn't very compelling. And may I remind all you folks that EF lenses can be used on R bodies but R lenses can't be used on EF bodies?


----------



## DrToast (Oct 25, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Since this rumored lens has IS, not sure why you are complaining here in this thread.



Because it’s another indication that they’re not going to put IBIS in their R bodies? I don’t want IS on this lens; I want it to not need IS.


----------



## DaveGrice (Oct 25, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> oh boy DSLR are dying faster than i thought...
> 
> not a SINGLE EF lens in 2019?!
> 
> not even a new 50mm ....  how much longer must people wait for a new L 50mm?



My money says you can stop waiting, it's not happening. I'll be a little surprised if we see another EF Mount L, at all, not just in 2019. I think the Great Whites we just got were the last hurrah.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> I've got an R (I love it btw, even without two cards) and I'm really anxious for exactly this lens, or there-abouts. I've got nothing to look through yet because I'm waiting for the polarizing adapter; and none of the first four RFs are a good fit for my needs. Besides this rumored standard zoom I've got a pretty small-niche wish-list, so I'm resigned to waiting awhile. But if Canon is reading this:
> 
> A 28mm IS f2.0 Plenty fast but compact, too. No macro required.
> A 17mm TS-E that uses filters. Front, back—doesn't matter. 19 or 20mm would be close enough.
> ...


Not trying to be a smart Alec, but if you can't yet mount a lens on it how do you know you love it?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2018)

DrToast said:


> Because it’s another indication that they’re not going to put IBIS in their R bodies? I don’t want IS on this lens; I want it to not need IS.


No biggie. I want IS in the lens. It is far superior on long focal lengths. https://photographylife.com/lens-stabilization-vs-in-camera-stabilization


----------



## Talys (Oct 25, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Yes, exactly. The EF lineup is already essentially complete and up to date (with one exception, apparently..) So it is obvious Canon will try and build up the RF lineup as quickly as possible. Of course, forum dwellers will immediately take this as a signal that DSLRs are dead. Typical over-reaction.



Was the one exception 24-70/2.8 IS or 50/1.4 IS?


----------



## Talys (Oct 25, 2018)

CanonFanBoy said:


> DrToast said:
> 
> 
> > Because it’s another indication that they’re not going to put IBIS in their R bodies? I don’t want IS on this lens; I want it to not need IS.
> ...



Ultimately, I don't think it's an either/or thing. I used IBIS on a Sony A7R3, and lenses without in-lens stabilization were clearly far inferior in IS performance to lenses with. However, IBIS does add _something_, whether the lens has ILIS or not, and we take all we can get, right? I'm sure that one day Canon will put IBIS in the camera. Either way, think that in-lens IS is still important if you want to get the most you can out of stabilization performance, and it's not like post-IBIS (or with Sony) people will start clammoring for lighter lenses with no IS.

To be honest, though, what I really missed on the Sony was Canon's mode 3 IS -- where it kicks in just when you're going to take the shot, so that you don't have to fight it when you're composing.


----------



## Refurb7 (Oct 25, 2018)

There are plenty of EF lenses already. If I were the boss of Canon, I'd be making a lot of new RF lenses right now. Putting EF lenses on hold for a while makes perfect sense. See how the market develops and take it from there. If RF is very strong, then put more and more into RF. If EF stays in high demand, then go back to making new EF lenses


----------



## gzroxas (Oct 25, 2018)

I’m really happy they are apparently working on a lot of extremely high quality glass! Now I just need a spec/tech advanced body that could be sold around the R price and I’ll be happy!! 
I can’t afford a 3000usd body especially if competitors offer the same functions at much lower prices, but maybe that lower end Full frame R could be my savior


----------



## LDS (Oct 25, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> A 24mm TS-E compact and with excellent optics.



I'm afraid the need to deliver a larger image circle, and the mechanism to move optics precisely while keeping them aligned works against compactness. Shift only may lead to a less bulky lens, but when adding the tilt and rotating mechanisms, the lens becomes bulkier. I prefer a more versatile lens than a compact but less versatile one, especially since most of the time it will be used on a tripod.


----------



## rjbray01 (Oct 25, 2018)

DrToast said:


> Are they seriously not going to put IBIS in the R bodies? That’s ridiculous.



apparently never ! https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60911043


----------



## rjbray01 (Oct 25, 2018)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Some interesting observations from Optical Limits on 24-70 lenses in general ...

"Let's start this review with a little discussion - are 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses an attractive offering or just overhyped? Within our local team that's an open question"
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1052-sigma2470f28art

"lack the greatness that should come with these price tags"
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1052-sigma2470f28art?start=2

I had the EF 24-70 mark II and sold it as I found I rarely actually used it ... as I found my 16-35 f/4 was fantastic for landscapes (although I increasingly use panoramas these days a la Thomas Heaton) and I used primes and 70-200s for portraits ... displacing the 24-70 out of my bag almost always.

On a day trip when I want to travel light with a simple configuration (one camera, one lens, Lowepro Toploader case) I find my 24-105 f/4 mark II on either a 5Ds or 5Div competes admirably with the 24-70 Mark II off-tripod (in the f/4 - f/5.6 range) and gives me substantially better range. 

True, its not a perfect lens for portraits begging the creamiest blur, but a great all-rounder and, in my opinion, solidly deserving of its L status, and at 105mm can produce some surprisingly good portraits.

So, personally, I can't say I'm too fussed whatever they do !


----------



## rjbray01 (Oct 25, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> I don't think the dslr is already dead, but the comment at the end about the EF version might be dependent on how the R is received doesn't give a lot of confidence



ha ! doesn't sound like the leak came from the marketing department then


----------



## twoheadedboy (Oct 25, 2018)

rjbray01 said:


> Some interesting observations from Optical Limits on 24-70 lenses in general ...
> 
> "Let's start this review with a little discussion - are 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses an attractive offering or just overhyped? Within our local team that's an open question"
> http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1052-sigma2470f28art
> ...



Agreed. I have the 24-105 STM for a light do-everything-non-extreme lens and the 50mm f/1.8 for when I need blurred backgrounds in the midrange, a giant 24-70 f/2.8 does nothing for me. I'm considering the 24-105 f/4 and 50 f/1.2 R mount now but those are less necessary and more to get the most out of the system. The other lens I want is a 28mm f/1.4 IS, I'm probably going to get the Sigma but I'd rather have Canon glass, 24 is too wide and 35 not wide enough.


----------



## qudek77 (Oct 25, 2018)

The lenses are really good no doubt, but the bodies man, I mean they really need to put out a "PRO 5D MARK IV-ish" body 'cuse the R is just not cutting it for me, and they should put it out as fast as possible.


----------



## Rudeofus (Oct 25, 2018)

This must all sound terrible, if you are heavily invested in EF mount lenses. If you are not, and can wait for a year: enjoy the great prices for used equipment a year from now! I was about to get a new 24-70, now I'll just wait and see what happens.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 25, 2018)

https://lensvid.com/gear/canon-interview-eos-r-and-more-photokina-2018/

no EF lenses are released by Canon in 2019. 

On sensor image stabilization is something that Canon didn’t include because of cost and target market (again this camera was not really designed for pro video work)
Canon promised to release the “holy trinity” of lenses in 2019 (24-70mm, 70-200mm, 16-35mm).
Just like the Nikon Z6/Z7 – Canon targeted with the EOS-R photo enthusiasts and not pro shooters. This led to many decisions that people have later criticized (slow shooting speed, single memory card slot, no full sensor readout in 4K), however, for the most part, all of these are the result of the way Canon’s engineers designed this camera for the specific target audience they went for (just think about this camera as a slightly more advanced mirrorless 6D MKII).


----------



## Ladislav (Oct 25, 2018)

I don't want to go and buy a new camera to use the new lens when my current camera works perfectly fine and is better for what I often shoot. Moreover I can buy second new 5D4 cheaper than new R. R definitely has plenty of awesome features and it is a future but I want to choose when I make a switch. Canon's approach is just turning back to everyone who made investment to DSLRs by not delivering lenses which are long overdue - 24-70L 2.8 IS L and new 50. If they already did that, they could do whatever they wanted with RF because the most important lenses for EF mount would be updated and DSLR could be slowly phased out.

At this point it looks like Canon is really doing this move with 24-70 because they are late to the game and they believe that who needed those lenses already made investment to third party options or is happy with non-IS version and since there is no long term plan for DSLRs it may not be feasible to release EF version. Definitely middle finger from Canon for me since I have experience with third party option and I really want to replace it with Canon one.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2018)

CR Guy says, "The EF lens lineup is going to take a backseat to the RF line for the foreseeable future."

Man, I took so much flack on this forum for saying this here 90 days ago!


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2018)

Ladislav said:


> I don't want to go and buy a new camera to use the new lens when my current camera works perfectly fine and is better for what I often shoot. Moreover I can buy second new 5D4 cheaper than new R. R definitely has plenty of awesome features and it is a future but I want to choose when I make a switch. Canon's approach is just turning back to everyone who made investment to DSLRs by not delivering lenses which are long overdue - 24-70L 2.8 IS L and new 50. If they already did that, they could do whatever they wanted with RF because the most important lenses for EF mount would be updated and DSLR could be slowly phased out.
> 
> At this point it looks like Canon is really doing this move with 24-70 because they are late to the game and they believe that who needed those lenses already made investment to third party options or is happy with non-IS version and since there is no long term plan for DSLRs it may not be feasible to release EF version. Definitely middle finger from Canon for me since I have experience with third party option and I really want to replace it with Canon one.


Have you considered that 5DIV owners are not the primary target market? But when you feel it's time to get a new body, Canon will have a higher-end, perhaps truly pro variation of mirrorless. And your legacy EF glass will still work well on that new body.


----------



## Tom W (Oct 25, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> oh boy DSLR are dying faster than i thought...
> 
> not a SINGLE EF lens in 2019?!
> 
> not even a new 50mm ....  how much longer must people wait for a new L 50mm?



Aren't the Mk III versions of the 300 and 500 due out this year?


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2018)

Tom W said:


> Aren't the Mk III versions of the 300 and 500 due out this year?


You have a point here, but consider the market for these Big Whites. Many photographers investing in these lenses will be happier knowing that they will be 100% compatible with EOS R, and some of the updates will include allowing the Big Whites to use all the R features, including that great spread of AF points, even with an extender.

Canon may have determined that building a new Big White from scratch for the RF mount would take too long and cost too much, especially when the EOS R lineup doesn't YET have a body that appeals to somebody who demands 1DX II performance.

So, in short, a Big White update at this point will probably offer some weight reduction and new circuitry to take as much advantage as possible of the RF mount. The interesting question would be, are these the last EF Big White updates?

I don't believe that releasing a few lenses that have been in the pipeline tells us whether Canon has put further EF development on the shelf. The production, engineering, and marketing departments probably hash out this issue on a frequent basis.

For myself, any significant purchase at this point is going to be delayed until the R series has at least become a series. If I needed a legacy EF's focal length(s), I'd go with it only if absolutely necessary and RF didn't offer something comparable. Even if new EF lens prices don't drop, they will seem like a bargain compared to some of the RF offerings!

I have never scolded Canon for deciding to make the transition. I've simply asked questions about purchasing and selling strategies for current EF lens collections with RF being Canon's stated path.


----------



## mirage (Oct 25, 2018)

DrToast said:


> Are they seriously not going to put IBIS in the R bodies? That’s ridiculous.



Canon will put IBIS in. but not in the 3 first gen EOS R bodies (low end, R, higher-end), it'll likely come the next round ... "Mk. II". 

Future Canon IBIS will work in combination with IS in lenses, as with other brands. So RF lenses with IS do make sense.


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 25, 2018)

tron said:


> And you keep getting the same nice results from a top L lens. Now if they make an EF 24-70 2.8L IS that is at least equal to the II version I might reconsider



If anything it should be superior because of the RF mount.


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 25, 2018)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



If Canon is going to stick with lens IS then they need to make all their lenses with IS. Just that simple.


----------



## Aaron D (Oct 25, 2018)

LDS said:


> I'm afraid the need to deliver a larger image circle, and the mechanism to move optics precisely while keeping them aligned works against compactness. Shift only may lead to a less bulky lens, but when adding the tilt and rotating mechanisms, the lens becomes bulkier. I prefer a more versatile lens than a compact but less versatile one, especially since most of the time it will be used on a tripod.


I should say "compact-er". Looking at the back of the EF version, I'm not sure how they can take advantage of there being no mirror in the way—if you enlarge that inner-most piece of glass and bring it closer it runs out out of wiggle room pretty quickly. Maybe they should have made the mount 60 mm wide!


----------



## ethanz (Oct 25, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> CR Guy says, "The EF lens lineup is going to take a backseat to the RF line for the foreseeable future."
> 
> Man, I took so much flack on this forum for saying this here 90 days ago!



I was waiting for you to pop in with that. While I wasn't one giving you flack, I hope you aren't entirely correct.


----------



## Aaron D (Oct 25, 2018)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Not trying to be a smart Alec, but if you can't yet mount a lens on it how do you know you love it?


Yeah I know, a little excitable I admit. What I love about it is the lean compact size of the thing and the intuitive controls. It's those things that I live with day to day, so assuming the image quality is as good as the 5Div, I'm very happy. Yeah I wish it had two slots, and I wish they hadn't got rid of internal AND plug-in intervalometers with the R….


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2018)

Architect1776 said:


> If Canon is going to stick with lens IS then they need to make all their lenses with IS. Just that simple.


Not really.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> Yeah I know, a little excitable I admit. What I love about it is the lean compact size of the thing and the intuitive controls. It's those things that I live with day to day, so assuming the image quality is as good as the 5Div, I'm very happy. Yeah I wish it had two slots, and I wish they hadn't got rid of internal AND plug-in intervalometers with the R….


I think it will be a fine camera.


----------



## JonSnow (Oct 25, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> CR Guy says, "The EF lens lineup is going to take a backseat to the RF line for the foreseeable future."
> 
> Man, I took so much flack on this forum for saying this here 90 days ago!



the old folks here who shot with canon for 50+ years know best......

they also say canon will make flapping mirror DSLR cameras forever. just like kodak will produce film forever.
well at least the name lives on....


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> CR Guy says, "The EF lens lineup is going to take a backseat to the RF line for the foreseeable future."
> 
> Man, I took so much flack on this forum for saying this here 90 days ago!


Except that you weren't saying this. You were claiming that the _existing_ lens models would suddenly become obsolete if Canon were to introduce a new mount.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> the old folks here who shot with canon for 50+ years know best......
> 
> they also say canon will make flapping mirror DSLR cameras forever. just like kodak will produce film forever.
> well at least the name lives on....


There is no such thing as "forever".

Still... https://petapixel.com/2018/10/18/here-are-photos-shot-on-the-rebooted-ektachrome-film/


----------



## hmatthes (Oct 25, 2018)

My EF 24~70 2.8 II works beautifully on my R -- so I am happy where I am. 
I've not really compared it to my RF 24~105 4.0 which is now my go-to for most situations.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 25, 2018)

Canon is going to be churning out more RF lenses than EF, and releasing a pro level mirrorless before long. They obviously know what the capabilities of the higher level camera will be, or they would not be going all in on RF lenses.

I have both a 5D MK IV and a R now, but only EF lenses and they work fine but larger ones are unbalanced, and the grip of the R does not fit as well as the MK IV.

As far as shooting every day ordinary images that do not require some of the higher FPS of the MK IV, and that's nearly 100% for me, the R does a better job of more consistent AF, the images are otherwise virtually identical.

Because of the poorer balance, it is more difficult to avoid motion blurring with the R at the same shutter speed where I have no problem with the 5D MK IV.

I've settled on my old 50mm f/2.5 macro as a normal lens for my R right now, it balances well and is a surprisingly good lens for under $100. I'm waiting for some more RF lenses that interest me, they would have to be something special and reasonably priced for me to give up my EF L lenses that work on both cameras.

If I decide to sell my MK IV, then the EF lenses will go as soon as a comparable RF lens exists.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2018)

Kit. said:


> Except that you weren't saying this. You were claiming that the _existing_ lens models would suddenly become obsolete if Canon were to introduce a new mount.


Quote me on that. I used terms such a "glide path," etc. I spoke in terms of a couple of years EF models would start being discontinued. I had questions before the release about the performance and acceptance of an adapter. Many of you we're sure the new mirrorless body would just be another EF model.

"Legacy technology" and "obsolete" are not synonyms. If I ever did write something that suggested they were, I wrote poorly. More likely somebody misread, as we all tend to scan very quickly through the posts.


----------



## Isaacheus (Oct 25, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> Yeah I know, a little excitable I admit. What I love about it is the lean compact size of the thing and the intuitive controls. It's those things that I live with day to day, so assuming the image quality is as good as the 5Div, I'm very happy. Yeah I wish it had two slots, and I wish they hadn't got rid of internal AND plug-in intervalometers with the R….



Is there no option for intervalometer externally on the R either? External remote control?


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> Quote me on that.


How else would you explain the whole topic that you started?
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...ew-ff-mirrorless-uses-a-new-lens-mount.35380/



YuengLinger said:


> I used terms such a "glide path," etc. I spoke in terms of a couple of years EF models would start being discontinued.


In the current rumor: "We’ve also been told that an EF version of such a lens is also in the works. "

Do you really think that it is what you were predicting?


----------



## mirage (Oct 25, 2018)

Kit. said:


> In the current rumor: "We’ve also been told that an EF version of such a lens is also in the works. "



well I read in the rumor:


> We’re now told that the RF version of the 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will come ahead of an EF version. Though *the source did say that it’s possible the EF version never comes*,



it will never come. EF is done. As are slapping mirrors (although I do expect one last, final iteration of Canon DSLRs).


----------



## scyrene (Oct 25, 2018)

SecureGSM said:


> On sensor image stabilization is something that Canon didn’t include because of cost and target market (again this camera was not really designed for pro video work)



Doesn't *pro* video make use of tripods, steadicam harnesses and suchlike (forgive me if my terminology is inaccurate), so IS is much less important? I thought it was mainly the enthusiast/low budget indie film-makers/video students who cared about that?


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2018)

Kit. said:


> How else would you explain the whole topic that you started?
> https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...ew-ff-mirrorless-uses-a-new-lens-mount.35380/



Here's what I wrote to open the topic you just linked to:

_"If Canon's new FF mirrorless camera does not use the old EF mount, would you continue to buy EF lenses? 
Maybe wait a while to see how things play out?
Maybe wait for an adapter to be reviewed and have some time in the field?_

_Or do you believe a new FF mirrorless with a new mount would in no way affect the current dSLR lineup for many years to come?"_

Many posters thoughtfully replied to the questions actually asked and helped me adjust to the transition--and I thanked them.


----------



## Aaron D (Oct 25, 2018)

Isaacheus said:


> Is there no option for intervalometer externally on the R either? External remote control?


I don't think Canon makes one—I've got the one with three pins that fits 5D bodies, but this one looks like a 1/8" earphone socket. They make a simple shutter release that looks like it would fit. And I'm trying to get Canon Camera Connect to work with my phone—I'm stuck on the 5D with no success yet…..


----------



## tron (Oct 25, 2018)

Architect1776 said:


> If anything it should be superior because of the RF mount.


As if you can compare them...


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2018)

My sadness knows no bounds. I had the winning Mega Millions ticket and must have left it on the table at the Catfish Buffet restaurant I was eating at in South Carolina. When time for the draw came I couldn't find the ticket. The numbers matched perfectly. I hope the busboy is happy. I was gonna buy a full on R system and a small island full of amazonian women.  Oh! And 5,000 trolls for the Sony Rumors websites.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 26, 2018)

JonSnow said:


> oh boy DSLR are dying faster than i thought...
> 
> not a SINGLE EF lens in 2019?!
> 
> not even a new 50mm ....  how much longer must people wait for a new L 50mm?


Obviously a new EF 50mm isn't a big deal. It might be to you, but it must not be to the market as a whole.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 26, 2018)

scyrene said:


> Doesn't *pro* video make use of tripods, steadicam harnesses and suchlike (forgive me if my terminology is inaccurate), so IS is much less important? I thought it was mainly the enthusiast/low budget indie film-makers/video students who cared about that?



I have only provided a quote from the interview. this is the Canon's take on the subject. I read this as follows: IBIS is considered a PRO level feature in Canon Universe and is therefore reserved for a higher, PRO level body that event shooters and PJ's would use. 5 series camera body level comes to mind.
My takeaway from this interview: the lack of certain features in R was a business decision rather than an inability to deliver a viable technical solution.


----------



## Jethro (Oct 26, 2018)

SecureGSM said:


> I have only provided a quote from the interview. this is the Canon's take on the subject. I read this as follows: IBIS is considered a PRO level feature in Canon Universe and is therefore reserved for a higher, PRO level body that event shooters and PJ's would use. 5 series camera body level comes to mind.
> My takeaway from this interview: the lack of certain features in R was a business decision rather than an inability to deliver a viable technical solution.


Not sure that was my take - I got the impression that the engineers were given a surprising amount of leeway to experiment with new approaches, but not all of them either (i) worked at all, or (ii) were ready for practical application yet. I suspect IBIS was one of the ones that is still being developed. Canon seems to have an entrenched 'house view' on IBIS (versus in lens), and I suspect that it's going to take some convincing internally (even in an atmosphere of openness to innovation) for them to actually put IBIS into an ILC. 

I still think they'll do it, but it may be a while. If there is a lower level FFM coming, maybe they 'trial' it in that? Or even in a DSLR - there seem to be some scheduled for the next 12 months? Hard to believe that they would put a first generation IBIS into their first pro FFM.


----------



## RGF (Oct 26, 2018)

This could be Canon's way to signal that ML will be an area of ever increasing importance to them.

The new mount and opportunities that go with it will be very important in the future.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 26, 2018)

Jethro said:


> Not sure that was my take - I got the impression that the engineers were given a surprising amount of leeway to experiment with new approaches, but not all of them either (i) worked at all, or (ii) were ready for practical application yet. I suspect IBIS was one of the ones that is still being developed. Canon seems to have an entrenched 'house view' on IBIS (versus in lens), and I suspect that it's going to take some convincing internally (even in an atmosphere of openness to innovation) for them to actually put IBIS into an ILC.
> 
> I still think they'll do it, but it may be a while. If there is a lower level FFM coming, maybe they 'trial' it in that? Or even in a DSLR - there seem to be some scheduled for the next 12 months? Hard to believe that they would put a first generation IBIS into their first pro FFM.


Here is one recent interview direct quote from Canon. They did a lot of interviews about the R. They can, of course do it, but there are trade offs.


*Why is there no in-body image stabilization (IBIS) in the EOS R?*


*Shoji Kaihara: *We had to look at the balance of the entire camera, like the size and other aspects. Based on that, it’s not something we are able to include in the EOS R at this time. We are quite aware that there are pros and cons to that.


----------



## mirage (Oct 26, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Here is one recent interview direct quote from Canon. They did a lot of interviews about the R. They can, of course do it, but there are trade offs.
> 
> 
> *Why is there no in-body image stabilization (IBIS) in the EOS R?*
> ...



bullsh*t.
enough hollow, air-filled empty space in EOS R body which is bigger than both Sony A7 III and Nikon Z6/Z7 with lower functionality (eg no IBIS). see Roger Cicala's tear down and comments (although i think he is wrong in believing Canon would "never ever" add IBIS). 

Canon simply did not have IBIS tech ready in time for EOS R launch (see recent patent), that's all. plus internal resistance. octagenarian board and all ...

i dont expect Canon bringing IBIS in first round of 3 EOS R bodies (low end "R50", EOS R, High-rez "R5").

much more likely to appear in "pro" EOS "1R-X" in spring 2020 .. just in time for Tokyo Olympics.

Next in EOS R Mk. II, but not in lower end models ... for marketing differentiation.

fairly easy to predict future on that one.


----------



## Del Paso (Oct 26, 2018)

Please keep your negative opinion about octOgenerians to yourself...


----------



## mirage (Oct 26, 2018)

Kit. said:


> In the current rumor: "We’ve also been told that an EF version of such a lens is also in the works. "



you keep repeating this line. The rumor source also said "but the EF version may never materialize". 

I bet there won't be one. Canon wants to entice users customers into R system/RF lenses, not into mirrorslappers/EF any more.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Oct 26, 2018)

Aaron D said:


> A 17mm TS-E that uses filters. Front, back—doesn't matter. 19 or 20mm would be close enough.
> !


There is a Lee-Adapter ring for that use. It uses the hood mount and you can use normal 100x100 lee filter holder with a little bit than more than half shift. The full shift is only possible with another adapter (wonderpana) which uses 150er Lee filters then.

But yes, a rear filter thread would be much nicer.


----------



## Tom W (Oct 27, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> You have a point here, but consider the market for these Big Whites. Many photographers investing in these lenses will be happier knowing that they will be 100% compatible with EOS R, and some of the updates will include allowing the Big Whites to use all the R features, including that great spread of AF points, even with an extender.
> 
> Canon may have determined that building a new Big White from scratch for the RF mount would take too long and cost too much, especially when the EOS R lineup doesn't YET have a body that appeals to somebody who demands 1DX II performance.
> 
> ...



The longer the lens, the less advantage that the short backfocus length of the RF mount will offer. It's not going to bring any optical advantage to redesign any longer telephoto for the RF mount. The only advantage would be no need for the adapter really. 

I'm not too concerned about the possibility of making the switch at some point, since Canon has allowed for EF-RF compatibility. And I think that at the wide-normal-short tele range, the advantages of the RF mount will push sales towards the newer lenses that take advantage of it. Like the 50/1.2 and the 28-70 f/2. 

Long term, I can see me going the mirrorless route, with a couple of these fantastic lenses, but for now, I have no reason to switch from my 5D4 to the new mirrorless body. Yet...


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 28, 2018)

One last thought.
Why bother with EF development and new lenses anyway? 
The current line-up is incredible and quality second to none.
The RF mount is most likely the sole future with EF/EFs going away eventually so why not just focus on the RF system and make it the best there is in the world. As EF/EFs migrate to the RF there is no loss of use of the EF/EFs lenses they own so there is no worry of being stuck.
The R series will become professional as we see is getting there with the Sony a9 and Canon can do better.


----------



## Chris_BC (Oct 28, 2018)

Bob Howland said:


> What the source is suggesting sounds like a really bad idea from a business standpoint. The compelling cameras have to come first, before the fancy lenses will capture buyer interest and the current EOS R just isn't very compelling. And may I remind all you folks that EF lenses can be used on R bodies but R lenses can't be used on EF bodies?



I'm with you Bob, another horrible and idiotic idea if they are delaying or cancelling any EF lenses. Seems you are one of the few who sees this accurately. I don't know exactly what people in this forum are thinking cheering this on. Among one of the more ridiculous comments right here was "the EF lineup is essentially complete". Really??? 

What about more L lenses with the "blue goo"?? What about a new 50 mm L so many are looking for? What about a wide prime with much improved MTF such that it can fully resolve the coming 100 MP sensors? What about a real improvement to the walk around 24-105 mm L??

With so many DSLR customers with so many existing EF and EF-S lenses (and the EF-S lens updates have been far more pathetic than in the L realm), it would be quite the gamble to assume so many Canon owners are going to be thrilled with the trendy new mirrorless thing with its new mount. It seems to me it just perfectly cues up a decision point that will result in Canon customers migrating elsewhere. If you need to invest in a new type camera, and new lenses as well to utilize all of the touted benefits of the R system, why not consider all the other brands out there and thus you are more likely to switch?


----------



## Chris_BC (Oct 28, 2018)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Canon is going to be churning out more RF lenses than EF, and releasing a pro level mirrorless before long. They obviously know what the capabilities of the higher level camera will be, or they would not be going all in on RF lenses.
> 
> I have both a 5D MK IV and a R now, but only EF lenses and they work fine but larger ones are unbalanced, and the grip of the R does not fit as well as the MK IV.
> 
> ...



Thanks for pointing out your real world experience with what I saw as obvious. The smaller size body and grip do not work well with any large L lens. I had the 5D III and then upgraded to the 5DsR, and so far I can carry it around by the grip on hikes and shorter walks (I've never liked the feel of the strap tugging on my neck.) with any of the black Ls and even with the 100-400 mm IS zoom to some extent.

That smaller grip is never going to fit my hand well in any event, and I'm skeptical Canon is going to be able to downsize the big Ls such that they are fully balanced or even partially balanced on the R. It's interesting that you note the effect is such that it even compromises your ability to use the same shutter speeds. This had not occurred to me, but it makes sense.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 28, 2018)

There is a issue at play. The EOS R is new and has few lenses native to it. Canon certainly has big plans for it and we will see more mirrorless bodies for sure. That also means that there is a big effort to get a full lineup of lenses, and there are a limited number of lens design teams in Canon. I expect that 2/3 of them are working on RF designs while the rest are doing EF and M lenses. 

A RF lens and a EF lens are not just the same lens with a little modification, they have a totally different optical formula. That likely means that there will not be a RF and EF version using the same basic design.

Fortunately, there are plenty of superb EF lenses, so there is no pressing need for new ones, updates have generally been minor things like tweaking the IS. I certainly do not see a pressing need for a IS version of the 24-70L II, it takes a second or more to lock on, and I often fet a poor image when I close the shutter while the IS is moving. For my telephotos, I have to wait for that first shot because IS is useful at 400mm, but not much at focal lengths less than 100mm.

Even so, if Canon sees a demand, then they will come just as soon as they can find a way to make one that photographers can afford and is light enough to handle.


----------



## mirage (Oct 28, 2018)

really funny how some folks misread the current situation. 

Canon has moved to mirrorfree cameras. Transition will happen fast. There will be no more new EF-S lenses because they have already been fully supplanted by EF-M lineup. There will be no more new EF lenses, but at best a few minor iterations of existing ones to make them fit for use on mirrorfree EOS R line. Typically long teles that don't profit much from shorter FFD mount. 

All the attention has shifted to building a compelling RF lens lineup. Canon has no choice, they want to be #1 not only in mirrorfree APS-C, but also for FF. they need to keep ahead of Nikon and catch-up/pass Sony.

Also: long "L" tele lenses are an extreme minority program, despite all the birders in this forum. 99% of Canon customers do not own one and never will. there is no need to design an entire new camera/ lens ecosystem just to please 1% of potential customers. it would make very little sense business-wise. for every 1DX II + 600/4 customer there are literally thousabd others who would like ro get a supercompact, 999 USD "entry level" EOS R model along with some decent, compact and well affordable RF f/4.0 zooms in the most frequently used focal length range. RF 16-35/4, 24-85/4, 50-150/4 zooms would all be selling very well. 

For the "big lens, big hands,, big wallets" niche I expect Canon to bring a mirrorfree "1DX III equivalent" EOS R "pro" camera - at the latest in early 2020 ahead of Tokyo Olympics. It will be large-bodied, cost close to 10k (25% more than 1DX II, simply because it is new and hype) and be the perfect camera to attach massive white L 10k+ telelenses. Big chunky body and grip, big battery, maximum performance, EF glass usable via little adapter.

so, where's the problem?


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 28, 2018)

mirage said:


> really funny how some folks misread the current situation.
> 
> Canon has moved to mirrorfree cameras. Transition will happen fast. There will be no more new EF-S lenses because they have already been fully supplanted by EF-M lineup. There will be no more new EF lenses, but at best a few minor iterations of existing ones to make them fit for use on mirrorfree EOS R line. Typically long teles that don't profit much from shorter FFD mount.
> 
> ...


After handling an R body with the 24-105 lens, I find it very unimpressive. I think that the R-system 1DX3-equivalent has to make the 1DX2 look archaic. I'm hoping that, with the elimination of the flopping mirror, 24 FPS full frame will be possible. But that's a specialty camera. The high volume model will be the 5D4 replacement. I might even buy one to replace my 5D3 in a few years.

As for how long the transition will take, since the new lensmount can use old lenses, I think that it will never be complete. But 10 years seems like a good start.

Update: As for the EF-S to M relationship, if what you say is true, then Canon needs to drop the price of their adapter by about 60%. Right now, it's double the cost of the EF to R adapter. They might also introduce an M model that is the current R model with a smaller sensor, an M lens mount and different firmware. Not all of us like the tiny size of the current M models.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 28, 2018)

SecureGSM said:


> I have only provided a quote from the interview. this is the Canon's take on the subject. I read this as follows: IBIS is considered a PRO level feature in Canon Universe and is therefore reserved for a higher, PRO level body that event shooters and PJ's would use. 5 series camera body level comes to mind.
> My takeaway from this interview: the lack of certain features in R was a business decision rather than an inability to deliver a viable technical solution.



Oh, fair enough.


----------



## espressino (Oct 28, 2018)

Chris_BC said:


> I'm with you Bob, another horrible and idiotic idea if they are delaying or cancelling any EF lenses. Seems you are one of the few who sees this accurately. I don't know exactly what people in this forum are thinking cheering this on. Among one of the more ridiculous comments right here was "the EF lineup is essentially complete". Really???
> 
> What about more L lenses with the "blue goo"?? What about a new 50 mm L so many are looking for? What about a wide prime with much improved MTF such that it can fully resolve the coming 100 MP sensors? What about a real improvement to the walk around 24-105 mm L??
> 
> *With so many DSLR customers with so many existing EF and EF-S lenses (and the EF-S lens updates have been far more pathetic than in the L realm), it would be quite the gamble to assume so many Canon owners are going to be thrilled with the trendy new mirrorless thing with its new mount. It seems to me it just perfectly cues up a decision point that will result in Canon customers migrating elsewhere. If you need to invest in a new type camera, and new lenses as well to utilize all of the touted benefits of the R system, why not consider all the other brands out there and thus you are more likely to switch?*



Exactly. "No new EF lenses in 2019" probably means "no new EF-S lenses" either, and there hasn't been one in 2018. There's never been two consecutive years of no-EF-S release before -- and if -as an APS-C shooter with no intention to invest in full-frame- you have to wait until 2020 for a less-than-likely update or the confirmation that your system is dead then you might as well migrate to Fuji's dedicated APSC system if you need a new camera in the meantime. 
(And, unlike AvTvFullstopmirage's claim, while the EOS M system is nice its lens line-up is less complete than the EF-S one.)


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 28, 2018)

I don't see the problem with Canon moving on from further EF at this point. Initially, I was sad when the RF 50mm f/1.2L was released, as I'm one of the most eager for a new version of the EF 50mm 1.2L.

But now my thinking has changed. If the next mirrorless FF is better than the 5D IV in the way the 5D IV is better than the 5D III, and maybe more so with features not available to dSLR, what's the problem with simply upgrading to the better camera? If the adapter works as well as early hype suggests (which remains to be seen), then it's just another upgrade, and we bring our EF lenses with us. PLUS we get some of the dream lens-updates that haven't materialized for EF. And maybe never will.

Much depends on the truth of the adapter's performance, and maybe even more depends on the performance and experience of using an EVF, which I never have except playing with a friend's Fuji. And much depends on the attraction of the next EOS R body relative to the 5D IV.

The unhappy story would be if the adapter turns out to be flaky or the EVF is hard to live with after the initial "wow factor" wears off. Hopefully the current narrative of a great adapter and EVF is more than just early marketing success!

If Canon has created a new system with a new mount, that works virtually flawlessly with the EF lenses, and can (soon?!?) satisfy dSLR users with the EVF, well, this is rare, amazing story, almost worthy of being called a technological miracle.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 29, 2018)

dak723 said:


> Yes, exactly. The EF lineup is already essentially complete and up to date (with one exception, apparently..)



I'd say it's missing at least two - a 50mm f/1.4 IS USM, and 24-70mm f/2.8 IS USM.


----------



## mirage (Oct 29, 2018)

espressino said:


> "No new EF lenses in 2019" probably means "no new EF-S lenses" either,
> ..
> while the EOS M system is nice its lens line-up is less complete than the EF-S one.)



why should there be new EF/EF-S lenses all the time? What EF-S lenses are really missing - considering the target group? Most "Rebel" customers will not even buy a second lens beyond the kit zoom. And the limited number of xxD/7D customers who are into birding/wildlife and use APS-C "for reach" are typically using/buying EF tele lenses, which would not be smaller/ lighter/cheaper if they came in EF-S mount. 

so, really what is missing in EF-S and EF-M from Canon's business perspective and from majority of customers' view?

Fuji is forced to offer all sorts of fancy, expensive crop lenses because of their (dead wrong!) decision to skip FF entirely. Canon EF-S customers can also use any EF lens natively.

Fuji X users are a tiny minority of folks (5% market share or thereabouts?) willing to "pay FF prices for crop cameras and lenses". i bet there are only a couple hundred people worldwide paying 1300 € for a Fuji XF 56/1.2 CROP lens. folks able and willing to spend that kind of money on a lens are typically smart enough to spend it on FF gear. Or they buy Leica, if they are into maximum "hipster show-off factor". Fuji? no cigar. 

Fuji X system will suffer the next major blow when Canon launches an "entry level" FF EOS R model at a more affordable price similar to Fuji X-T3 abd when Sony finally brings their next gen A### bodies to market. 

A simple EF 85/1.8 or RF 35/1.8 lens gives Canon FF users more photographic potential than any fancy-expensive Fuji XF f/1.2 crop lens on any retro-styled Fuji X crop-sensor body.

Even as a rather Canon critical market observer I must say that Canon got their lens mounts and lens lineups and the transition to mirrorfree very well sorted ... just a few years late. 

for me not much is missing in EF-M lineup. a compact, moderately fast tele prime eg EF-M 85mm/2.0 IS STM along the lines of the 32/1.4 would be great. And maybe a 50-150 constant f/4.0 zoom ... but might be not feasible within EF-M size limits (max. 58mm filter thread and 61.6mm max. diameter).

So in summary:
* EF-S is done.
* EF is in "maintain during transition" mode.
* EF-M is in "maybe the one or other new lens if 32/1.4 sells reasonably well".
* RF is "full speed ahead".

Makes perfect sense. Canon has competition cornered. 

* Sony will be #2 if they soon beef up their APS-C lineup with some "killer" A### bodies - both on "hi end" at usd/€ 1500 (Fuji X-T3, Canon EOS M5 II) and at "low-end" around 500 usd/€ (Canon M50/Fuji X-T100). 

* Nikon suffers deservedly and will fall to #3 due to lack of mirrorless APS-C system. 

* Fuji locked in at 5% market share due to no affordable crop and no FF mirrorfree system. 

* Oly, mFT and Pentax/Ricoh are "walking dead" already. 

* Pana/Leica/Sigma L-mount initiative will not get beyond 5% market share at best, due to big size and high prices.

* Too bad, Samsung threw in the towel so quickly, would have liked to have them around offering impressive gear like the NX-1 which just had the bad luck to be ahead of its times by 3 years.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 29, 2018)

mirage said:


> So in summary:
> * EF-S is done.
> * EF is in "maintain during transition" mode.
> * EF-M is in "maybe the one or other new lens if 32/1.4 sells reasonably well".
> ...



Its too early to put EF in the freezer, and Canon will pay for it.

As example, take event photographers. They wouldn't buy EOS/EF, because its dead, but they wouldn't buy EOS-R either, because it isn't up to the task yet. Even if a pro EOS-R came out tomorrow morning, people would wait due to supply issues, get an opportunity to see other people's experience, etc. That double whammy isn't going to do any good for Canon.

I have an EOS 5DmkIII with four L zooms. I'm getting a nice sum of money in a month, and I planned to upgrade the 16-35mm f/2.8L mkII to mkIII. Ain't going to happen now, I'll save the money till EOS-R comes of age - a much better R equivalent is on the way. That sounds like fresh new L lenses losing value on shop's shelves.


----------



## mirage (Oct 29, 2018)

Why should one not be able to cover all sorts of events with an EOS R plus RF 24-105 and/or EF 70-200/2.8 and/or RF 50/1.2 and/or one or two fast EF primes of choice?

But I fully agree that Canon in its typical clandestine & arrogant manner is doing itself a disservice by not communicating at all. Why no clear statements, why no clear roadmap?


----------



## Chris_BC (Oct 30, 2018)

mirage said:


> why should there be new EF/EF-S lenses all the time? What EF-S lenses are really missing - considering the target group? Most "Rebel" customers will not even buy a second lens beyond the kit zoom. And the limited number of xxD/7D customers who are into birding/wildlife and use APS-C "for reach" are typically using/buying EF tele lenses, which would not be smaller/ lighter/cheaper if they came in EF-S mount.
> 
> so, really what is missing in EF-S and EF-M from Canon's business perspective and from majority of customers' view?
> 
> ...




Let's just take one lens to shred your position, the EF-S 15-85mm IS zoom. Super versatile walk around lens for APS-C. How old is that lens? You really think it's delivering adequate optical quality for even 24 MP?? What about the next step in APS-C, which is likely to be 28 to 32 MP?? Even if an APS-C shooter decided to shell out some big bucks to replicate it in an L lens, what do they buy???

We don't even need to get into the rest of your ramblings/musings to know the truth of the old adage of continuous improvement. Canon either continues to improve or they suffer, period. And if current Canon users are not enthralled by the gimmick/fad/trend of mirrorless, they're going to be doubly unhappy. And again, if they have to make a system level switch (or simply decide mirrorless is the way) to get the improvements they seek, Canon probably loses more customers than it gains.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 30, 2018)

Antono Refa said:


> Its too early to put EF in the freezer, and Canon will pay for it.
> 
> As example, take event photographers. They wouldn't buy EOS/EF, because its dead, but they wouldn't buy EOS-R either, because it isn't up to the task yet. Even if a pro EOS-R came out tomorrow morning, people would wait due to supply issues, get an opportunity to see other people's experience, etc. That double whammy isn't going to do any good for Canon.
> 
> I have an EOS 5DmkIII with four L zooms. I'm getting a nice sum of money in a month, and I planned to upgrade the 16-35mm f/2.8L mkII to mkIII. Ain't going to happen now, I'll save the money till EOS-R comes of age - a much better R equivalent is on the way. That sounds like fresh new L lenses losing value on shop's shelves.



And as if to support what I wrote, a new post by Canon rumors, quoting from Canon's 3rd quarter financials: "Additionally, the successive announcements made by manufacturers, including Canon, of entering the full-frame mirrorless camera market has led to temporary restrained buying of advanced-amateur models. Compared to the same period last year, during which we launched two new models, our sales declined by 22.4% in the third quarter. "

Canon's reasoning is, IMHO, insufficient to explain a 22.4% decline in sales.

Yes, new release help sales. Yes, there's a much discussed trend of sales decreasing. But, no - there aren't that many crop customers who delayed buying equipment just because a FF camera announcement was around the corner. I suspect such a big drop is partially due to FF camera owners being weary of their equipment becoming suddenly obsolete.


----------



## mirage (Oct 30, 2018)

Chris_BC said:


> Let's just take one lens to shred your position, the EF-S 15-85mm IS zoom. Super versatile walk around lens for APS-C. How old is that lens? You really think it's delivering adequate optical quality for even 24 MP?



yes. EF-M 18-55 is no Zeiss Otus, but it zooms, has AF, is lighter and more compact and noticeable less expensive. More importantly, it is more versatile, has better build quality and is optically better than the later introduced, "newer" EF-M 15-45. 

EF-M 18-55 is an absolutely amazing kit zoom and offers perfect bang for the buck. If you can still find one, highly recommended to any EOS M user. It is (was) the best IQ 18-55/3.5-5.6 crop kit zoom (APS-C) on the market - all brands, all makers. A nuance better than the current incarnation of the EF-S. It does serve a 24 MP sensor "more than adequately" and a 28 MP sensor likely too.

Canon was not willing to deliver "continuous improvement", when they replaced 18-55 with 15-45. yes, the latter is more compact, but main motivation seems to have been production costs a few cents lower per unit.

That's why i bought M50 "body only", without the sub-par 15-45 kit zoom.


----------



## BillB (Oct 30, 2018)

mirage said:


> yes. EF-M 18-55 is no Zeiss Otus, but it zooms, has AF, is lighter abd more compact and ... more versatile, better build quality and optically superior to the later i troduced, "newer" EF-M 15-45. The 18-55 is an absolutely amazing kit zoom and perfect bang for the buck. Highly recommended to any EOS M user, if you can still find one. It is (was) the optically best performing crop "kit zoom" (APS-C) on the market (for f/3.5-5.6 zooms). A nuance better than the current incarnation of the EF-S. It serves a 24MP sensor easily and 28 MP very likely too.
> 
> Canon was not willing to deliver "continuous improvement" here, when they replaced 18-55 with 15-45. yes, it is more compact. but main motivation obviously were production cost a few cent lower per unit.
> 
> That's why i bought M50 "body only", without the sub-par 15-45 kit zoom.


Your insight into the thinking behind Canon design decisions continues to astonish and amaze. What is guesswork and speculation to some of us is obvious to you.


----------



## SecureGSM (Oct 30, 2018)

Antono,

Canon won't put EF in a freezer just yet. that is not what they said. they said: We have to catch up and get ER lenses and R system up to speed in 2019. Massive project underway. We had to allocate all our resources and focus on R system in 2019 (A.M.: sounds like a push to be ready with pro lenses and system for 2020 Olympics to me.)
EF used in Canon pro video systems. They cannot pull the plug on entire line of business just like that.

on unrelated note: I sold my trusty 6D and purchased my second 5D IV body (Mint, slightly used with less than 2000 actuations on it) a week ago for AUD 2,350.00 as a replacement.
I am going to keep the following lenses in my kit until transitioning to Pro mirrorless bodies in late 2019:
1. Canon 24-70/2.8 II L
2. Canon 70-200/2.8 II L
3. Canon 16-35/2.8 III L
4. Canon 35/1.4 II L
5. Canon 100/2.8 L Macro
6. Canon 100-400 II IS L

Sold:
Canon 6D
Canon 85/1.4 IS L

For sale, taking offers: Canon 400/2.8 II IS L (Mint, as new, full kit)



I


Antono Refa said:


> And as if to support what I wrote, a new post by Canon rumors, quoting from Canon's 3rd quarter financials: "Additionally, the successive announcements made by manufacturers, including Canon, of entering the full-frame mirrorless camera market has led to temporary restrained buying of advanced-amateur models. Compared to the same period last year, during which we launched two new models, our sales declined by 22.4% in the third quarter. "
> 
> Canon's reasoning is, IMHO, insufficient to explain a 22.4% decline in sales.
> 
> Yes, new release help sales. Yes, there's a much discussed trend of sales decreasing. But, no - there aren't that many crop customers who delayed buying equipment just because a FF camera announcement was around the corner. I suspect such a big drop is partially due to FF camera owners being weary of their equipment becoming suddenly obsolete.





Antono Refa said:


> Its too early to put EF in the freezer, and Canon will pay for it.
> 
> As example, take event photographers. They wouldn't buy EOS/EF, because its dead, but they wouldn't buy EOS-R either, because it isn't up to the task yet. Even if a pro EOS-R came out tomorrow morning, people would wait due to supply issues, get an opportunity to see other people's experience, etc. That double whammy isn't going to do any good for Canon.
> 
> I have an EOS 5DmkIII with four L zooms. I'm getting a nice sum of money in a month, and I planned to upgrade the 16-35mm f/2.8L mkII to mkIII. Ain't going to happen now, I'll save the money till EOS-R comes of age - a much better R equivalent is on the way. That sounds like fresh new L lenses losing value on shop's shelves.


----------



## mirage (Oct 30, 2018)

BillB said:


> Your insight into the thinking behind Canon design decisions continues to astonish and amaze. What is guesswork and speculation to some of us is obvious to you.



following the industry and Canon's moves for a few years gives one a pretty good "feel" for what might be next and how they try to cut corners and squeeze out a little more oligopolist-level profit at every opportunity. Of course, they never say communicate about their plans for further development of their product portfolio and how it may affect/benefit their customers. they just want to take our money and be done with it. That type of corporate behaviour will become increasingly less sustainable. Imaging pro's and amateurs/enthusiasts are not your typical "black box consumer electronics" buyer. They are a bit more interested in what exactly they will get for their hard-earned money and whether its going to be technically obsolete in a few years' time or already tomorrow.

Canon definitely is not doing itself a favor by giving interviews bare of any meaningful content and not clearly communicating direction and next steps for their product lines, all the way to publishing a specific road map when launching an entirely new system.


----------



## Chris_BC (Oct 30, 2018)

mirage said:


> yes. EF-M 18-55 is no Zeiss Otus, but it zooms, has AF, is lighter and more compact and noticeable less expensive. More importantly, it is more versatile, has better build quality and is optically better than the later introduced, "newer" EF-M 15-45.
> 
> EF-M 18-55 is an absolutely amazing kit zoom and offers perfect bang for the buck. If you can still find one, highly recommended to any EOS M user. It is (was) the best IQ 18-55/3.5-5.6 crop kit zoom (APS-C) on the market - all brands, all makers. A nuance better than the current incarnation of the EF-S. It does serve a 24 MP sensor "more than adequately" and a 28 MP sensor likely too.
> 
> ...



Good grief. Read the range again on the lens I mentioned. That's 15, as in fifteen, to 85, as in eighty five. 18 on the wide end is no substitute for 15, and 55 on the long end is nowhere near 85.

And that's EF-S for APS-C DSLRs. I did not say anything about the M camera which is also mirrorless (and which I have zero interest in) and thus is not owned by the Canon user group that would be faced with a system shift. You need to grasp that we're talking about owners of Rebels, 40D, 50D, 60D, 70D, 80D, 7D I and II, etc.


----------



## mirage (Oct 30, 2018)

ah, yes, my bad then. But i think we may well have seen the last new EF-S lens already. And not many more new EF lenses either, if any. Don't think an EF 24-70/2.8 L IS will ever come. Only RF. 

Canon crop DSLR owners have a good number of options going forward. Either stay with DSLRs for one more cycle or go mirrorfree - either APS-C [EOS M / EF-M] or FF [EOS R / RF]. In all scenarios their existing EF and EF-S lenses will keep working. No really big issues.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Oct 30, 2018)

tron said:


> And me with my 24-70 2.8 II
> 
> P.S If something works...



And I'll stick for a while with my ... errh ... Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC, despite it is not the greatest AF performer on my old 5D3.


----------



## tpatana (Dec 4, 2018)

I'm really hoping EF is not dead yet. I have two needs:

Sports: Currently using 1DX, considering upgrade to 1DX2. If mirrorless wants to beat that, it needs to have same-ish AF tracking at minimum, same low-light performance and 10+fps. Hopefully 12-16fps. Dual cards too. I'd be ok with CF although I understand if it's CF+CFast, or further into future 2x Cfast. Neither of the current mirrorless bodies are not even remotely option for these. Also since I'm keying off on action, the EVF delay needs to be stupid low. I think 1DX shutter lag is 60ms? So if EVF has 30ms delay and the body has shutter lag of 30ms, then it'd be equal to 1DX. And typical day is 3k-5k clicks. 1DX can do it on one battery. If mirrorless takes 400-500 on one battery, that'd mean I need 10 batteries. No-go. (+need good ergonomics to hold with 70-200 for a full day)

Other stuff: Currently using 5D4. Mirrorless needs very good ISO100 performance (dynamic range, sharpness etc), enough pixels and probably no AA if possible. Other specs not as critical.

Yes, someday I'm sure mirrorless will be better than my current cameras. But the current mirrorless Canon offerings are pale comparison. So I don't like the plan to kill new EF lenses and concentrate on RF


----------



## BillB (Dec 4, 2018)

tpatana said:


> I'm really hoping EF is not dead yet. I have two needs:
> 
> Sports: Currently using 1DX, considering upgrade to 1DX2. If mirrorless wants to beat that, it needs to have same-ish AF tracking at minimum, same low-light performance and 10+fps. Hopefully 12-16fps. Dual cards too. I'd be ok with CF although I understand if it's CF+CFast, or further into future 2x Cfast. Neither of the current mirrorless bodies are not even remotely option for these. Also since I'm keying off on action, the EVF delay needs to be stupid low. I think 1DX shutter lag is 60ms? So if EVF has 30ms delay and the body has shutter lag of 30ms, then it'd be equal to 1DX. And typical day is 3k-5k clicks. 1DX can do it on one battery. If mirrorless takes 400-500 on one battery, that'd mean I need 10 batteries. No-go. (+need good ergonomics to hold with 70-200 for a full day)
> 
> ...


There is a lot of speculation about whether Canon will release any new EF lenses and Canon has a plan to release a lot of RF lenses. At worst, Canon DSLR users are going to have to make do with the EF lens designs that are out there now. Not all bad, IMHO.


----------

