# Patent: Canon RF 10-24mm f/4 and Canon RF 14-28 f/2.0



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 24, 2019)

> Canon News has uncovered patents for two ultra-wide-angle zoom lenses for Canon’s RF mount. We do believe we’ll see an ultra-wide-angle lens announced some time in early 2020.
> The first being a very wide RF 10-24mm f/4 which would be the RF version of the EF 11-24mm f/4L USM. Canon also has an optical formula for an RF 14-28mm f/2, which would pair nicely with the RF 28-70mm f/2L USM.
> *Canon RF 10-24mm f/4 specifications:*
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## vjlex (Oct 24, 2019)

Looks like an f/2.0 trinity is in the making!


----------



## criscokkat (Oct 24, 2019)

Wow, It's been a busy 24 hours in canon rumor land.

Wonder if the filter attachment will still be in the rear on the 10-24?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 24, 2019)

My big question would be: Will the RF 14-28mm f/2 be rectilinear like Canon's famed EF UWA zoom?


----------



## Kit. (Oct 24, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> My big question would be: Will the RF 14-28mm f/2 be rectilinear like Canon's famed EF UWA zoom?


I wonder if Canon introduces an EOS R firmware update with an option for rectilinear JPEG correction of fisheyes.


----------



## BeenThere (Oct 24, 2019)

Could be a dynamite starry night lens if coma and vignetting are reasonable. Price will, however, be astronomical (no pun intended) for f2.


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 24, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> My big question would be: Will the RF 14-28mm f/2 be rectilinear like Canon's famed EF UWA zoom?



I'd assume so, I can't see a fisheye would be a high-priority and the zoom range doesn't correspond to the EF 8-15mm fisheye. My question is whether or not the 14-28 can take a screw on front filter.


----------



## Viggo (Oct 24, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> Could be a dynamite starry night lens if coma and vignetting are reasonable. Price will, however, be astronomical (no pun intended) for f2.


Given the other RF zooms I think coma will be very well controlled, and way too much vignetting is a huge probability .


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 24, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> I'd assume so, I can't see a fisheye would be a high-priority and the zoom range doesn't correspond to the EF 8-15mm fisheye. My question is whether or not the 14-28 can take a screw on front filter.


That was my other concern. That end of the focal lengths is very low on my list though.


----------



## mccasi (Oct 24, 2019)

Taking the RF 28-70 F2.0 as the yard stick, another RF F2.0 would most likely aim at the same thing: 
1. absolute technical minimum of hard to remove aberations (esp. Coma here)
2. light touch on easy to remove aberations, i.e. distortion, CA
3. 95% sharp wide open at both extremes at F2.0
4. on par with the best primes when stopped down to 2.8
5. compromise on weight and size

I will not be able to resist if they make it happen


----------



## jonebize (Oct 24, 2019)

These guys are fucking legends. I might switch from Nikon. The focal length split at 28 is -so- sharp.


----------



## navastronia (Oct 24, 2019)

Anyone want to bet on the price? I’m gonna start the bidding on the 14-28 at $3,500


----------



## mclaren777 (Oct 24, 2019)

The 14-28mm f/2 will be mine!


----------



## Trey T (Oct 24, 2019)

Hopefully, the f/2 lenses will below $10K


----------



## amorse (Oct 24, 2019)

navastronia said:


> Anyone want to bet on the price? I’m gonna start the bidding on the 14-28 at $3,500


I'm going to bet $2999 to match the 28-70. This lens and the 15-35 f/2.8 would certainly force me to make some hard decisions!


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 24, 2019)

amorse said:


> I'm going to bet $2999 to match the 28-70. This lens and the 15-35 f/2.8 would certainly force me to make some hard decisions!



I guessing weight, price and IS will be the primary differentiators. I'm not sure if the 14-28 will be able to accept front filters. I'm leaning toward "no", but Nikon's 14-30 does accept front filters but is f/4. The 15-35 is for general use, so I see the 14-28 as a more specialized lens for events like the 28-70. This is even more true if the 10-24 comes out and is the RF equivalent of the EF 11-24. So one for general use, one for events and one for ultrawide landscape/architecture.

What the 14-28 may do is to kill off the 14mm prime. With the 15-35 at f/2.8, the 14-28 at f/2, what aperture should the 14mm prime have? Possibly at least f/1.4. Sigma designed one at f/1.8, which is too close to f/2 to justify 1600 for a prime for most potential users even if the zoom is at 3000. Before the advent of the 11-24, the 14mm prime anchored the ultrawide focal length range (rectilinear), but I'm wondering if the market will even support a prime 10mm or wider.


----------



## 6degrees (Oct 24, 2019)

I am interested in Canon RF 14-28 F2.

If manual will reduce the size and price, no need to have auto focus for Canon RF 14-28 F2.


----------



## amorse (Oct 24, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> I guessing weight, price and IS will be the primary differentiators. I'm not sure if the 14-28 will be able to accept front filters. I'm leaning toward "no", but Nikon's 14-30 does accept front filters but is f/4. The 15-35 is for general use, so I see the 14-28 as a more specialized lens for events like the 28-70. This is even more true if the 10-24 comes out and is the RF equivalent of the EF 11-24. So one for general use, one for events and one for ultrawide landscape/architecture.
> 
> What the 14-28 may do is to kill off the 14mm prime. With the 15-35 at f/2.8, the 14-28 at f/2, what aperture should the 14mm prime have? Possibly at least f/1.4. Sigma designed one at f/1.8, which is too close to f/2 to justify 1600 for a prime for most potential users even if the zoom is at 3000. Before the advent of the 11-24, the 14mm prime anchored the ultrawide focal length range (rectilinear), but I'm wondering if the market will even support a prime 10mm or wider.


I'd be after the 14-28 f/2 for landscapes and astrophotography, but it's the front filter that gives me pause and consider the 15-35 instead. I really like having access to normal sized filters and removing the thread would result in considerable change for me. What I don't want to do is keep carrying both a 16-35 f/4 and a 14 f/2.8 at the same time when I can get one lens thats better for both astrophotography and landscapes. 

The 15-35 on its own is almost enough to get me into the R system - I'm waiting on the high resolution R as it isn't a change I need to make right away. Either way, odds are good I'd buy one of those two lenses in the next couple years!


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 24, 2019)

The Canon lens devision seems to be firing on all cylinders and producing some truly drool worthy lenses. 

The frustration for me is I’m ready to jump full speed into the R system and buy a swath of new lenses however, there is just not a camera I’m remotely interested in buying.

The 1DXIII proves Canon has still got the magic touch (amazing camera if you need it) but wish they weren't so tragically slow with the Pro R camera.


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 24, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> The Canon lens devision seems to be firing on all cylinders and producing some truly drool worthy lenses.
> 
> The frustration for me is I’m ready to jump full speed into the R system and buy a swath of new lenses however, there is just not a camera I’m remotely interested in buying.
> 
> The 1DXIII proves Canon has still got the magic touch (amazing camera if you need it) but wish they weren't so tragically slow with the Pro R camera.



It's been a year since the system launched... if the Pro R cameras (assuming one for speed and one for resolution) are out by the end of next year then you're talking about launching and fleshing out a new ecosystem in 2 years, which is pretty good.

That said, Canon RF lenses are great. I'm also waiting for the next R that will obsolete my 5D4, but in the mean time, I get to play with RF lenses. The R effectively replaced my 5D3 (backup camera) but I now use it more with the 5D4 than I did with the 5D3 as a backup. If the prices on the R/RP are discounted this holiday season, it might be worth straddling the two systems before the pro R is released.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 24, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> The Canon lens devision seems to be firing on all cylinders and producing some truly drool worthy lenses.
> 
> The frustration for me is I’m ready to jump full speed into the R system and buy a swath of new lenses however, there is just not a camera I’m remotely interested in buying.
> 
> The 1DXIII proves Canon has still got the magic touch (amazing camera if you need it) but wish they weren't so tragically slow with the Pro R camera.


Tragically slow? It's only been a year. Why release a body if a lens lineup isn't ready? Now that the lens catalog is filling out, there will be higher level bodies coming pretty quick. Had a high end body already been released the argument would be in the other direction..."Where are the lenses?" The portrait folks are pretty happy right now. That's where the most money is anyway, so it makes sense.


----------



## tron (Oct 24, 2019)

Well the Sigma 14mm 1.8 is just fine for astrophotography and does not cost a huge fortune!


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Tragically slow? It's only been a year


Have we not forgotten when the Sony A7 cameras were launched - I’ll jog your memory 2013 so I don’t consider Canon has only had a year to give us a Pro camera.

OK, Canon may have taken the original A7 as a flash in the pan but by the time 2015 came and we got the A7rII it was obvious the way the camera market wanted to go - Mirrorless.

Canon has had plenty of time to release cameras along side professional grade lenses so yes, after 4 years (minimum) they are being tragically slow.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Have we not forgotten when the Sony A7 cameras were launched - I’ll jog your memory 2013 so I don’t consider Canon has only had a year to give us a Pro camera.
> 
> OK, Canon may have taken the original A7 as a flash in the pan but by the time 2015 came and we got the A7rII it was obvious the way the camera market wanted to go - Mirrorless.
> 
> Canon has had plenty of time to release cameras along side professional grade lenses so yes, after 4 years (minimum) they are being tragically slow.


UM... Sony doesn't set the agenda for Canon. Neither does Sony set the pace of the industry with it's paltry market share.

Here's the problem for Sony: Sony operated in a vacuum for a very long time. Now Sony has Canon and Nikon in the mirrorless market to compete with. This may be the beginning of Sony's death spiral. Are you forgetting how Sony was forced into mirrorless because Sony could not compete in the DSLR world? And the ASPc world?

Canon doesn't have a pro body? Let me help you out: Pro body doesn't mean mirrorless only.

Might I also remind you that Sony couldn't make any lens longer than 300mm until last year and that Sony photogs were forced to adapt 3rd party glass (mostly Canon) to fill their needs? Where are Sony's Tilt Shift lenses?

I get it. You signed up on a Canon forum just so you could tell us all how wonderful Sony is (The one you say you own in a previous post). Guess what? Sony is *******.

BTW: For my work, I'll put my R up against any Sony... so define "Pro" body. To some short thinkers it simply means high frame rates.

Sony weather sealing example below: (Keeps the water in, not out.)


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Have we not forgotten when the Sony A7 cameras were launched - I’ll jog your memory 2013 so I don’t consider Canon has only had a year to give us a Pro camera.


Are you saying that Sony A7 was a pro camera that Canon needed to emulate?



Gazwas said:


> OK, Canon may have taken the original A7 as a flash in the pan but by the time 2015 came and we got the A7rII it was obvious the way the camera market wanted to go - Mirrorless.


What do you exactly mean by "the camera market wanted to go"?



Gazwas said:


> Canon has had plenty of time to release cameras along side professional grade lenses so yes, after 4 years (minimum) they are being tragically slow.


I've seen lots of companies entering an emerging market too early. Not many of them did well. Especially not Minolta (which is Sony by now).


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 25, 2019)

shunsai said:


> Looks like an f/2.0 trinity is in the making!



Very Exciting.


----------



## Architect1776 (Oct 25, 2019)

Trey T said:


> Hopefully, the f/2 lenses will below $10K



It will.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> My big question would be: Will the RF 14-28mm f/2 be rectilinear like Canon's famed EF UWA zoom?


Of course it is a rectilinear lens, do you know of a lens over 16mm that isn’t?


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> UM... Sony doesn't set the agenda for Canon. Neither does Sony set the pace of the industry with it's paltry market share.
> 
> Here's the problem for Sony: Sony operated in a vacuum for a very long time. Now Sony has Canon and Nikon in the mirrorless market to compete with. This may be the beginning of Sony's death spiral. Are you forgetting how Sony was forced into mirrorless because Sony could not compete in the DSLR world? And the ASPc world?
> 
> ...


I have over £30K worth of Canon equipment so feel I’m well within my right to join a Canon forum to vent my frustrations at their slow rate of pace bringing me the tools I need to market. 


Why you assume a Sony fanboy would like to buy a swath of Canon RF lenses (as said in an earlier post) is you reading something I’ve not written.

The market wants mirrorless as is reflected in Canons aggressive RF lens road map and anyone who thinks differently is looking at this from a personal preference only.

I don’t really care what camera anyone uses and a don’t feel the need to judge them on their choice of manufaturer - they are all just tools capable of great things in the right hands. I’ll leave the chest beating comparisons to someone who cares which performs better. 

However, is doesn’t stop me feeling frustrated by Canons slow progress bringing their pro grade cameras to market after all they led the way with their 1Ds line up until 2007 when the 1DsIII was launched. I just think they lost interest.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> I have over £30K worth of Canon equipment so feel I’m well within my right to join a Canon forum to vent my frustrations at their slow rate of pace bringing me the tools I need to market.
> 
> 
> Why you assume a Sony fanboy would like to buy a swath of Canon RF lenses (as said in an earlier post) is you reading something I’ve not written.
> ...


Please explain how the currently available tools prevent you from doing great work.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Of course it is a rectilinear lens, do you know of a lens over 16mm that isn’t?


Canon EF 50/1.4


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Of course it is a rectilinear lens, do you know of a lens over 16mm that isn’t?


I wouldn't know one from the other. I am ignorant on that count. I just know that it is one thing that makes the 11-24 so good.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 25, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Please explain how the currently available tools prevent you from doing great work.


You're a defensive bunch.... Is it normal forum etiquette to pick holes in every comment?


I renew my cameras every 2-3 years
I want to buy into the RF system (Lenses)
Canon don't make an R camera (yet) that is up to the job (for me)


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> You're a defensive bunch.... Is it normal forum etiquette to pick holes in every comment?
> 
> 
> I renew my cameras every 2-3 years
> ...


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> You're a defensive bunch.... Is it normal forum etiquette to pick holes in every comment?
> 
> 
> I renew my cameras every 2-3 years
> ...



Since when is a straightforward question "defensive" or an attempt to "pick holes" in any comment? I haven't followed "every comment" of yours! In fact, I was sincerely trying to understand your frustration and anxiety. I've felt it, but then thought things through and calmed down.

I was hoping you'd be more specific, perhaps stating a feature that you feel keeps you behind your own competition. For me, IBIS comes to mind, as my hands aren't getting steadier, and I do love the Rf primes. And I've mentioned, even complained several times the past few weeks, that the R is a great niche camera, if your niche is portraits or still-lifes or landscapes in decent weather; otherwise, I believe its EVF is still too laggy in AI Servo during burst mode. (I find that subjects moving even a little quickly get too far ahead of what is being jerkily displayed.)

But the R does work spectacularly with the primes for portraiture and detail shots. Its AF is the most precise I've ever used. It does what it does, and for all else, I have the 5DIV with a couple of IS lenses, plus the also spectacular ef 35mm f/1.4L II.

That said, a fast ultra-wide with very low distortion is something I've never owned. I'm interested! (But not in a rush.)

Buying new models of bodies every 2-3 years would be excessive for me, but I'm sure any camera company would love such customers! I bought the R specifically for the 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.2, but I could certainly produce great work with "just" a 5DIV and a few ef lenses. 

Gear has never held me back, though of course I enjoy discussing and occasionally getting my hands on the best available. In my opinion, people skills, enthusiasm, organization, and persistence are much more important in this business than having bleeding edge tech for photography. So is humility. For all our knowledge, artistry, and efforts, most of us are considered to be "hired help," even if we are paid well. Furthermore, photography techniques can be learned and improved much more easily (for people such as myself) than can people skills!


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2019)

I


Kit. said:


> Canon EF 50/1.4


I don’t understand that comment. I have had and happily use the 50 f1.4 for the last 20 years. It’s center sharpness at 1.4 is perfectly fine and at f5.6 it is sharper than the 100L macro. Barrel distortion is easily corrected in post.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 25, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Since when is a straightforward question "defensive" or an attempt to "pick holes" in any comment? I haven't followed "every comment" of yours! In fact, I was sincerely trying to understand your frustration and anxiety. I've felt it, but then thought things through and calmed down.



I’m sorry if your question was genuine, I read it as patronising - in that suggesting without a Pro R camera my work was ******* which is ridiculous. I suppose the Sony fanboy causing trouble in a Conon forum comment got me on the defensive.

I hope you accept my apology.

The frustration simply boils down to me wanting to invest a sizable amount in more gear and not having the means to allow me to do this with the R system.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> I have over £30K worth of Canon equipment so feel I’m well within my right to join a Canon forum to vent my frustrations at their slow rate of pace bringing me the tools I need to market.
> 
> 
> Why you assume a Sony fanboy would like to buy a swath of Canon RF lenses (as said in an earlier post) is you reading something I’ve not written.
> ...


Nobody said you had no right.

The point is that carping Canon not having the body you wish Canon would make yet is rather silly. Canon, with a firm grasp on market share, knows much better than you or I what is needed and when. The professional market is very small compared to the rest of the market. Releasing a body you want when the lens line is not yet available for it would make far less sense.

Honestly, your claimed 30,000 pounds worth of Canon gear gives your opinion no more right or weight than somebody who owns an Elf point and shoot. You come across as an elitist, as though you are personally owed something because you've spent some money. To that I say, "Whoop de doo!" A pro camera is coming. Acting as though Sony, with it's terrible record, is somehow ahead of the game when Sony has been the only player in that game for a while is kinda, well... I won't say it.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Oct 25, 2019)

...I have yet to pull the trigger on the UWA such as the EF 11-24. I don't really *need *such a lens...but I want one. I was able to hold off, in part, because of the possibility of a UWA in the RF format...but also because of IS (lack of).

In part, that time has come (apparently).

There are several posts in this thread now...and not one mentions image stabilization. Am I the only one that likes acquiring museum/theme park/at home images of really really dark (static) scenes, at places were tripods etc just aren't practical? Image stabilization in these use cases is critical.

IBIS for the next R?

Or will the 10-24 itself have IS?

Finally, will the EF 11-24 now see downward pressure as far as price is concerned?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2019)

josephandrews222 said:


> ...I have yet to pull the trigger on the UWA such as the EF 11-24. I don't really *need *such a lens...but I want one. I was able to hold off, in part, because of the possibility of a UWA in the RF format...but also because of IS (lack of).
> 
> In part, that time has come (apparently).
> 
> ...


I think IBIS is coming. IBIS will be especially good on UWA lenses, in my opinion... which isn't worth much.  IBIS works very well on my Olympus. Canon's will probably work well also.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 25, 2019)

josephandrews222 said:


> ...I have yet to pull the trigger on the UWA such as the EF 11-24. I don't really *need *such a lens...but I want one. I was able to hold off, in part, because of the possibility of a UWA in the RF format...but also because of IS (lack of).
> 
> In part, that time has come (apparently).
> 
> ...


Even if I had an R, and I will get the high resolution model, I wouldn’t get the RF 10-24 I’d get the EF 11-24 and use it with adapters so I could filter it. Further, I see IBIS coming to the R so no need for IS. Not that I have ever hankered for IS in the 11-24 anyway. Bearing all this in mind I doubt if you will see any downward pressure on the EF 11-24, for sure I am keeping mine going forwards.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Nobody said you had no right.
> 
> The point is that carping Canon not having the body you wish Canon would make yet is rather silly. Canon, with a firm grasp on market share, knows much better than you or I what is needed and when. The professional market is very small compared to the rest of the market. Releasing a body you want when the lens line is not yet available for it would make far less sense.
> 
> Honestly, your claimed 30,000 pounds worth of Canon gear gives your opinion no more right or weight than somebody who owns an Elf point and shoot. You come across as an elitist, as though you are personally owed something because you've spent some money. To that I say, "Whoop de doo!" A pro camera is coming. Acting as though Sony, with it's terrible record, is somehow ahead of the game when Sony has been the only player in that game for a while is kinda, well... I won't say it.


Again, you seem to be reading between the lines here and coming up with your own conclusions about me. From Sony fanboy to an elitest in just a couple of posts is most welcoming.......

I’ve never disclosed being a pro or amateur photographer as I feel has no relavence on the matter.

Owning £30k of Canon gear was in response to you questioning my motives for posting here as a Sony fanboy and was never mentioned in my original post.

I just can’t believe anyone else doesn’t feel my frustration to all these amazing lenses we keep hearing about while norhing on the camera front.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Again, you seem to be reading between the lines here and coming up with your own conclusions about me. From Sony fanboy to an elitest in just a couple of posts is most welcoming.......
> 
> I’ve never disclosed being a pro or amateur photographer as I feel has no relavence on the matter.
> 
> ...


Reading between the lines? I never once called you a Sony fanboy. Not once. However, you have mentioned, in previous posts, to owning a Sony... which doesn't matter and isn't the point.

The point, again, is that you seem to be ticked that the camera you want is not yet available from Canon... yet it is from Sony. You seem to think the body should have been here years ago. Again, the point is that what YOU personally want is not what drives Canon to do what Canon does no matter how much Canon gear you claim to own, or how much you might spend in the future.

The only person who has mentioned the term Sony Fanboy in relation to yourself is YOU. Freudian slip, maybe?


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 25, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Reading between the lines? I never once called you a Sony fanboy. Not once.





CanonFanBoy said:


> I get it. You signed up on a Canon forum just so you could tell us all how wonderful Sony is (The one you say you own in a previous post). Guess what? Sony is *******.


Mmmmm



CanonFanBoy said:


> The point, again, is that you seem to be ticked that the camera you want is not yet available from Canon... yet it is from Sony. You seem to think the body should have been here years ago. Again, the point is that what YOU personally want is not what drives Canon to do what Canon does no matter how much Canon gear you claim to own, or how much you might spend in the future.



You live a very sheltered life if you think its only myself that wants a mirrorless high resolution profession spec camera.(?)

Have I entered a parallel universe in this discussion with you and have confused this forum in being an open place to discuss Canon gear with like minded people?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> You live a very sheltered life if you think its only myself that wants a mirrorless high resolution profession spec camera.(?)


Hmmmm.... nobody ever said that either. If you have read the forum at all, then you'd know a high mp model is on the way. Crying it isn't here precisely when you want it is childish. I'd like one also, but complaining while extolling the virtues of company X is just plain silly. Go buy what the other company makes. Oh yeah, forgot. You already own what company X has issued.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Barrel distortion is easily corrected in post.


That kinda dilutes the value of the term "rectilinear". One can correct barrel distortion of a fisheye in post, too.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> You're a defensive bunch.... Is it normal forum etiquette to pick holes in every comment?


Obviously, that depends on the comments.



Gazwas said:


> I renew my cameras every 2-3 years
> I want to buy into the RF system (Lenses)
> Canon don't make an R camera (yet) that is up to the job (for me)


So, basically, you are complaining that Canon is a for-profit corporation and not your personal genie?


----------



## drob (Oct 25, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> The Canon lens devision seems to be firing on all cylinders and producing some truly drool worthy lenses.
> 
> The frustration for me is I’m ready to jump full speed into the R system and buy a swath of new lenses however, there is just not a camera I’m remotely interested in buying.
> 
> The 1DXIII proves Canon has still got the magic touch (amazing camera if you need it) but wish they weren't so tragically slow with the Pro R camera.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 26, 2019)

Kit. said:


> That kinda dilutes the value of the term "rectilinear". One can correct barrel distortion of a fisheye in post, too.


Seriously? You are comparing the distortion in a fisheye to the 50 f1.4... This place is getting beyond pathetic.

Here it is compared to the very highly rated EF 35 f1.4L









Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens Distortion


Review distortion test results for the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Lens and compare the performance of this lens with other lenses.




www.the-digital-picture.com


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Hmmmm.... nobody ever said that either. If you have read the forum at all, then you'd know a high mp model is on the way. Crying it isn't here precisely when you want it is childish. I'd like one also, but complaining while extolling the virtues of company X is just plain silly. Go buy what the other company makes. Oh yeah, forgot. You already own what company X has issued.



Extolling the virtues of company X??????

Look, I get it that YOU are happy with the EOS R and don't understand why anyone could want more but how is that any less selfish to me wanting something different for my needs?

Its a forum, crying and being childish doesn't come into it - they are reactionary words that I'd prefer not to rise to.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 26, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Obviously, that depends on the comments.
> 
> 
> So, basically, you are complaining that Canon is a for-profit corporation and not your personal genie?


Sorry, I don't follow. Where did I say that?


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 26, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Look, I get it that YOU are happy with the EOS R and don't understand why anyone could want more but how is that any less selfish to me wanting something different for my needs?


See what you did there? It isn't that you are selfish. You just can't understand why there isn't an outpouring of grief by people who already know that what they want is coming down the pike. It's your carping that somehow Canon should have had a pro mirrorless body years ago because Sony somehow set the direction for the future.

Then there is your refusing to define what a "Pro" body is. For many, the R is. For many, it is not. But guess what? You don't get to decide for everyone else.

So why don't you tell us all: What exactly do you want Canon to make for you that would make you happy? What, to you, would be the "Pro" body? Answer that and you might not come across as a vague twit.

A "pro" body for one person's needs is entirely different from what a pro body is for another person's needs. Are you a wildlife or sports photographer? Then you need something fast. Are you a portrait photographer? Then you don't. So what exactly is it that you need?


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> See what you did there? It isn't that you are selfish. You just can't understand why there isn't an outpouring of grief by people who already know that what they want is coming down the pike. It's your carping that somehow Canon should have had a pro mirrorless body years ago because Sony somehow set the direction for the future.


I didn’t DO anything other that state the obvious. And judging by the personal jibes you keep flinging my way its obviously hit a nerve that someone can’t possibly want a camera different to that you consider fine for your use.

Nobody does know what is coming down the pike so how do we know by buying into the R system Canon will deliver a camera of the calibre of the old 1Ds series (resolution, build quality etc) for example? However, if you do know some inside information please share it with us all.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 26, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Seriously? You are comparing the distortion in a fisheye to the 50 f1.4... This place is getting beyond pathetic.
> 
> Here it is compared to the very highly rated EF 35 f1.4L


The comparison seems to show that 35/1.4, even being wider, does not need distortion correction in post, while 50/1.4 does.

Still, 50/1.4 was a joke (and marked as such). The main culprit is RF 24-240.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 26, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Sorry, I don't follow. Where did I say that?


In the quote I provided.

Or is it my fault that you don't understand what you are saying?



Gazwas said:


> Nobody does know what is coming down the pike so how do we know by buying into the R system Canon will deliver a camera of the calibre of the old 1Ds series (resolution,


I think it's highly unlikely. If you expect an R camera with sub-20Mp resolution, you will be disappointed.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 26, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> I didn’t DO anything other that state the obvious. And judging by the personal jibes you keep flinging my way its obviously hit a nerve that someone can’t possibly want a camera different to that you consider fine for your use.
> 
> Nobody does know what is coming down the pike so how do we know by buying into the R system Canon will deliver a camera of the calibre of the old 1Ds series (resolution, build quality etc) for example? However, if you do know some inside information please share it with us all.



1. You are wrong. I hope everyone gets what they think they need. However, you are unable to describe what you think you need.
2. Of course there will be something akin to or better than the 1D series. Resolution of the 1D Series has been surpassed years ago. The 5D series and R series already beat it there.
3. You still cannot describe the camera you want to see made except to say Sony already makes whatever that is.
4. Go have a pint.


----------



## BillB (Oct 26, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Again, you seem to be reading between the lines here and coming up with your own conclusions about me. From Sony fanboy to an elitest in just a couple of posts is most welcoming.......
> 
> I’ve never disclosed being a pro or amateur photographer as I feel has no relavence on the matter.
> 
> ...


Some people make do with an R camera and are happy about it. You do not want to do this for reasons that are not clear to me. What is it that you want in a Canon mirrorless that the R can't provide in order to make use of all that wonderful RF glass? The main weaknesses of the R seem to have to do with action photography, but action photography is not the main strength of the new RF glass, except maybe the upcoming 70-200.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 26, 2019)

BillB said:


> Some people make do with an R camera and are happy about it. You do not want to do this for reasons that are not clear to me. What is it that you want in a Canon mirrorless that the R can't provide in order to make use of all that wonderful RF glass? The main weaknesses of the R seem to have to do with action photography, but action photography is not the main strength of the new RF glass, except maybe the upcoming 70-200.


Thanks for the reply. 

Resolution is my main objective in a camera and why I keep mentioning 1Ds cameras who's main objective in their day was speed, resolution and build quality. I’ve shot with EOS 1 film cameras during the 1990’s up until the 1DsIII when Canon abandoned the high resolution series leaving all us long time users without a replacement.11 years is a long time.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 26, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> Resolution is my main objective in a camera and why I keep mentioning 1Ds cameras who's main objective in their day was speed, resolution and build quality. I’ve shot with EOS 1 film cameras during the 1990’s up until the 1DsIII when Canon abandoned the high resolution series leaving all us long time users without a replacement.11 years is a long time.


I would really like to know what you mean by resolution and also how that has been abandoned, because I do not get it. Surely the current 1DX Mark II is better resolution than the 1DS Mark III. Surely dynamic range is better today than it was way back then.

There is a high resolution R series coming. Some say as many as 80+ megapixels. But then you also mention speed, and an 80+ megapixel camera will probably not be a speed demon... which is why the constant asking of you to explain exactly what it is you are looking for and that you refuse to articulate.






Comparison of Canon EOS digital cameras - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I would really like to know what you mean by resolution and also how that has been abandoned, because I do not get it. Surely the current 1DX Mark II is better resolution than the 1DS Mark III.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No the 1DX MkII has less MP (fractionally) than the 1Ds MkIII. Indeed my main reason for not going to the 'replacement' for the 1Ds MkIII, the 1DX, was the drop in resolution from 21mp to 18mp.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 26, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> No the 1DX MkII has less MP (fractionally) than the 1Ds MkIII. Indeed my main reason for not going to the 'replacement' for the 1Ds MkIII, the 1DX, was the drop in resolution from 21mp to 18mp.


*sigh* Thank you.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> *sigh* Thank you.


All is good, we all have a ton to learn, myself included. 

As a side note, Canon obviously felt justified in amalgamating the 1 series as they never went back, and they never abandoned the pro high resolution market either, that is a ridiculous thing for others to say, Canon made the highest resolution 135 format sensored camera available for years, they just did it in the 5 series, and I'd wager a lot more professional photographers use 5 series cameras than 1 series cameras.

I am very interested to see where they go with the resolution in the 1DX MkIII, I suspect it will be around the 24mp range which puts me in a quandary, not really enough of a bump to justify the upgrade but with the other bells and whistles an appealing prospect. However if it has 28mp I'm all in and would trade up as soon as the initial early adopter premium levels off.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I would really like to know what you mean by resolution and also how that has been abandoned, because I do not get it. Surely the current 1DX Mark II is better resolution than the 1DS Mark III. Surely dynamic range is better today than it was way back then.
> .


You seem like a pretty aggressive person and not sure what your agenda is here other than to drive people from this forum. But we all get our kicks from different things.

1DXII was a18MP so no idea what you mean by that comment and DR is just fine on all modern Canin Cameras for my needs.

]


CanonFanBoy said:


> There is a high resolution R series coming. Some say as many as 80+ megapixels. But then you also mention speed, and an 80+ megapixel camera will probably not be a speed demon... which is why the constant asking of you to explain exactly what it is you are looking for and that you refuse to articulate.



I hear the rumours (why I’m on this website) and the “we know its coming” talk from people like you telling us all without question that said camera is around the corner. I see all the nice new lenses I want to buy. What I don’t see is any suggestion that this camera exists in testing, planning, development or the imagination of Canon engineers. 

I know what happened to the 1Ds line so no matter how you sugar coat it or demean my comments, nothing is just around the corner and hence my rather innocent comment about canon being so slow.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 26, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I wonder if Canon introduces an EOS R firmware update with an option for rectilinear JPEG correction of fisheyes.


Fisheye Hemi is a very powerful fisheye correction program that is way more flexible than a simple rectilinear correction. V2.0 has given it even more usefulness. 

I have used it for years and found the results from a corrected EF 15mm fisheye to be much higher quality than from either of the two EF 14mm L's I tested.

Kieth over at Northlight Images has a couple of great writeups on its use.

V1: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/fisheye-hemi-plugin-review/
V2: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/imadio-fisheye-hemi-v2-review/


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 26, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> You seem like a pretty aggressive person and not sure what your agenda is here other than to drive people from this forum. But we all get our kicks from different things.
> 
> 1DXII was a18MP so no idea what you mean by that comment and DR is just fine on all modern Canin Cameras for my needs.
> 
> ...


If you feel demeaned by simple questions, that's your problem. Like I said before, I don't think you are going to get both high resolution and speed at the same time. The EOS-1Ds Mark III shot at 3 and 5 fps. So there was no "speed" in that camera. The Canon 5DSr is 50mp and shoots at 5fps in FF.

You can discount the rumors you are seeing on a rumor site all you like (from normally reliable sources). But if you are going to do that, then what is the point of being here anyway? Just to complain and then claim to be attacked when more information is asked for? Good luck.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 26, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> If you feel demeaned by simple questions, that's your problem.



Polite rosponces would have been perfect but mocking others with terms like “crying” and “childish” are very demeaning. Do you not read what you write before you post?




CanonFanBoy said:


> Like I said before, I don't think you are going to get both high resolution and speed at the same time. The EOS-1Ds Mark III shot at 3 and 5 fps. So there was no "speed" in that camera. The Canon 5DSr is 50mp and shoots at 5fps in FF.


The 1DsIII was both high resolution and fast in 2007???? Are you seriously comparing a camera from 2007 to make your point?????

Its ok if you don’t get it but anyone who used a 1Ds camera and was forced into a 5D series will get where I’m coming from. The EOS 1 is a beacon in Canon’s range and a truly remarcable camera that, over each generation I’ve owned was utterly amazing. I’d like that back again.........

What I don’t want is to have to re-purchase all my lenses again just to end up with another version of the 5D in mirrorless form.



CanonFanBoy said:


> You can discount the rumors you are seeing on a rumor site all you like (from normally reliable sources). But if you are going to do that, then what is the point of being here anyway? Just to complain and then claim to be attacked when more information is asked for? Good luck.



I’ve not read one rumour that claims to know anything concrete about said camera.- Patents and Chinese whisper a plenty is hardly basis for fact.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 26, 2019)

Kit. said:


> In the quote I provided.
> 
> Or is it my fault that you don't understand what you are saying?
> 
> ...


I wrote it so i think I understand what I said.
Construct what you wish from my response but It doesn’t make you right.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 27, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Resolution is my main objective in a camera and why I keep mentioning 1Ds cameras who's main objective in their day was speed, resolution and build quality.





Gazwas said:


> The 1DsIII was both high resolution and fast in 2007???? Are you seriously comparing a camera from 2007 to make your point?????


EOS 5 was shooting 5 fps back in 1992. EOS 3 was shooting 7 fps (with PB-E2 booster) back in 1998. 1Ds III was a _slow_ camera for its time. If you wanted a fast camera, you would have bought 1D III with its 10 fps.

1Ds III and 5D II had the same sensor resolution, so it was not leading in resolution either. 5D III had both better burst speed and a higher resolution sensor than 1Ds III. "Build quality"... do you really think that there were so many people for whom the build quality of 5D III was not enough for a _studio_ camera that the development of 1Ds IV would _pay off_ for Canon?

Besides, you don't need to repurchase all your lenses. Who gave you an idea that you do?



Gazwas said:


> I wrote it so i think I understand what I said.


No, that doesn't follow.

"I wrote it so I though I understood what I said" would be correct.

Unless you are not able to critically evaluate your past actions, that is.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

Kit. said:


> EOS 5 was shooting 5 fps back in 1992. EOS 3 was shooting 7 fps (with PB-E2 booster) back in 1998. 1Ds III was a _slow_ camera for its time. If you wanted a fast camera, you would have bought 1D III with its 10 fps.


That is cherry picking the numbers, the 1Ds MkIII was very fast for throughput at the time considering the resolution.

The contemporary 5D was 12.8mp, the 1Ds MkIII was a breakout for the time at 21mp. The 5D MkII with the same sensor but little else of value didn't arrive until over a year later. The 5D MkIII came close but the 1DX - 1D MkIV/1Ds MkIII replacement was with us by then. 

Personally I would have bought a 1 series with a 5DSr sensor and slower fps and I don't think the development costs would have been very high to do that.


----------



## Kit. (Oct 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> That is cherry picking the numbers, the 1Ds MkIII was very fast for throughput at the time considering the resolution.
> 
> The contemporary 5D was 12.8mp, the 1Ds MkIII was a breakout for the time at 21mp. The 5D MkII with the same sensor but little else of value didn't arrive until over a year later.


5D MkII had only ~20% slower throughput (besides, it could record video)



privatebydesign said:


> The 5D MkIII came close but the 1DX - 1D MkIV/1Ds MkIII replacement was with us by then.


Market-wise, 5D MkIII was a 1Ds MkIII replacement. It did not just "come close", it had a higher resolution sensor with a higher frame rate, which of course meant higher throughput.



privatebydesign said:


> Personally I would have bought a 1 series with a 5DSr sensor and slower fps and I don't think the development costs would have been very high to do that.


Development, production, marketing, logistics, support etc. I don't think Canon makes big money on 1D series. I suspect that 5D series starting from MkII did "cannibalize" 1Ds series, making it unprofitable, and that's why Canon cancelled it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 27, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> 1DXII was a18MP so no idea what you mean by that comment and DR is just fine on all modern Canin Cameras for my needs.



No, the 1DX was 18mp, the 1DX MkII is 20mp.


----------



## marioslrzn (Oct 27, 2019)

mccasi said:


> Taking the RF 28-70 F2.0 as the yard stick, another RF F2.0 would most likely aim at the same thing:
> 1. absolute technical minimum of hard to remove aberations (esp. Coma here)
> 2. light touch on easy to remove aberations, i.e. distortion, CA
> 3. 95% sharp wide open at both extremes at F2.0
> ...


I would be all over this lens, I got the 15-35 but it’s more of a video. This lens would be better for those lovely night sky, I bet it’ll be super sharp


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 27, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> No, the 1DX was 18mp, the 1DX MkII is 20mp.


Thanks for the clarification. 
All I remember was that the 1DX was never a direct replacement for the 1DS. The ‘studio’ line or whatever it stood for was never continued after the 1DSIII.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 27, 2019)

Kit. said:


> EOS 5 was shooting 5 fps back in 1992. EOS 3 was shooting 7 fps (with PB-E2 booster) back in 1998. 1Ds III was a _slow_ camera for its time. If you wanted a fast camera, you would have bought 1D III with its 10 fps.
> 
> 1Ds III and 5D II had the same sensor resolution, so it was not leading in resolution either. 5D III had both better burst speed and a higher resolution sensor than 1Ds III. "Build quality"... do you really think that there were so many people for whom the build quality of 5D III was not enough for a _studio_ camera that the development of 1Ds IV would _pay off_ for Canon?
> 
> ...


This is just incorrect and like said above, cherry picking the specs to win your own private argument. You can think what you like but the fact is the EOS 1 studio series stopped at the 1DSIII. A 5D, no matter the resolution is not a direct replacement for a 1DS.

Finally, not sure how I can make this any clearer to you other than quoting my original post.

“The Canon lens devision seems to be firing on all cylinders and producing some truly drool worthy lenses.

The frustration for me is I’m ready to jump full speed into the R system and buy a swath of new lenses however, there is just not a camera I’m remotely interested in buying.”

Please can you explain how I can own any of the RF lenses as I alluded to in my very first message without buying a an EOS R(whatever) and starting again?


----------



## Kit. (Oct 27, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> This is just incorrect and like said above, cherry picking the specs to win your own private argument. You can think what you like but the fact is the EOS 1 studio series stopped at the 1DSIII. A 5D, no matter the resolution is not a direct replacement for a 1DS.


That's only one fact. Another fact is that Canon is not bounded by your wishes. If Canon doesn't see a good market opportunity, they won't produce a camera (or rush it to the market) just before you wish for it. If Canon doesn't see a market for a studio camera built like a war zone camera, given the alternative Canon offerings, they won't produce one.



Gazwas said:


> Finally, not sure how I can make this any clearer to you other than quoting my original post.
> 
> “The Canon lens devision seems to be firing on all cylinders and producing some truly drool worthy lenses.
> 
> ...


You are not fully quoting your original post. You forgot the following line:

"The 1DXIII proves Canon has still got the magic touch (amazing camera if you need it) but wish they weren't so tragically slow with the Pro R camera."

The fact is that so far Canon is no more "tragically slow" with a Pro R camera than they were in 1980s with a Pro EOS camera. It took Canon two and a half years to release EOS 1 after shipping the first EF lenses.

And you don't need to "start again" with buying an EOS R(whatever). All your EF lenses will work no worse on RF bodies than they did before (some will work even better, because of no need in AFMA). All your Speedlites will work too.


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 27, 2019)

marioslrzn said:


> I would be all over this lens, I got the 15-35 but it’s more of a video. This lens would be better for those lovely night sky, I bet it’ll be super sharp



First, let me say THANK YOU! for posting something on topic. 

Now, please share more about why you think the 15-35 is "more of a video" lens. 

And does this mean you think the 14-28 f/2 would be better for stills? Should we expect any less vignetting, and even less distortion?


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 27, 2019)

Kit. said:


> That's only one fact. Another fact is that Canon is not bounded by your wishes. If Canon doesn't see a good market opportunity, they won't produce a camera (or rush it to the market) just before you wish for it. If Canon doesn't see a market for a studio camera built like a war zone camera, given the alternative Canon offerings, they won't produce one.
> 
> 
> You are not fully quoting your original post. You forgot the following line:
> ...


Skew what I said all you like it still doesn’t detract from my original rather innocent comment that I had to remind you of above.

Adapting my existing lenses was never part of the equation however, buying the new RF glass is. Re-read it a couple of times just so it sinks in.

The fact it took two years to release a pro EF lens mount camera in 1989 when AF was in its infancy and was extremely untrusted at the time has no baring and me expressing my frustrations.

I just don’t understand why you have such a problem with my comment and why some here are expelling so much time and effort in poopooing everything I say?

I’m a happy Canon user, love their cameras and especially love their lenses. Can I not also feel frustrated that I’m not able to buy any RF glass even though happy R users and especially because youtube say its the real deal.


----------



## Aaron D (Oct 27, 2019)

f/2 for a 14 mm is really unnecessary for my purposes, I'd use it stopped down anyway. And 10 mm at whatever f/ is unessesary. I personally would be really happy with a 14--24 f/4. But if I have to live with more kick-ass-ness than required, I'll take a 10 mm f/4. No need to wrap it up--I'll eat it here.


----------



## analoggrotto (Oct 28, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> The 1DXIII proves Canon has still got the magic touch (amazing camera if you need it) but wish they weren't so tragically slow with the Pro R camera.



As the camera market contracts, and profits disappear; will we ever have it this good again? We may, but it will be expensive as L.


----------



## Gazwas (Oct 28, 2019)

Its a bit of a contradiction though that patents surface for these big, fast zoom lenses that could only ever really be bulky and heavy. Then in the following days patents surface showing Canon want to shrink FF mirrorless cameras.
Interesting times......


----------



## tron (Oct 31, 2019)

I wonder about size, weight and price. Ok price will skyrocket but size and weight too. And it will probably NOT have iS. Not having anything R but were I to use it I would get the 15-35 2.8L IS. It would be very versatile for the interior shots I sometimes take inside museums and churches (the same for RF 24-70 2.8L IS). And of course it is a very nice landscape lens.

I understand that 14-28 f/2 would make it a terrific astro lens but there is the much cheaper SIgma 14 1.8 Art for that. Now if Canon could concentrate on making a similar lens it could be interesting. That way they could improve on vignetting (and coma). And if Sigma is so big how big would be the UWA f/2 zoom ? (Just wondering).


----------



## scyrene (Nov 10, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> Nobody does know what is coming down the pike so how do we know by buying into the R system Canon will deliver a camera of the calibre of the old 1Ds series (resolution, build quality etc) for example? However, if you do know some inside information please share it with us all.



Is it your contention that they have released these 'pro level' RF lenses and they *won't* then produce high end bodies to go with them? We don't have a roadmap but we can make some pretty robust inferences, even without the rumours, some of which are fairly credible.


----------



## Gazwas (Nov 11, 2019)

scyrene said:


> Is it your contention that they have released these 'pro level' RF lenses and they *won't* then produce high end bodies to go with them? We don't have a roadmap but we can make some pretty robust inferences, even without the rumours, some of which are fairly credible.


The ‘if’ was never in contention and I hope I didn’t ever intentionally suggest that however, the ‘when’.........


----------



## Optics Patent (Dec 18, 2019)

Gazwas said:


> The frustration for me is I’m ready to jump full speed into the R system and buy a swath of new lenses however, there is just not a camera I’m remotely interested in buying.



I switched from Nikon to get the Canon RF lenses, and am getting accustomed to Canon with an inexpensive RP, knowing that bodies will keep improving.


----------



## chong67 (Mar 9, 2020)

1, How much longer before the 14-28 comes out? It says early 2020.  2. Will it cost $3K only?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 9, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> My big question would be: Will the RF 14-28mm f/2 be rectilinear like Canon's famed EF UWA zoom?


Of course it will be rectilinear, fisheye focal lengths for full frame sensors range from 8-15 mm.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 9, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Of course it will be rectilinear, fisheye focal lengths for full frame sensors range from 8-15 mm.


Rectilinear, double Gauss,


privatebydesign said:


> Of course it will be rectilinear, fisheye focal lengths for full frame sensors range from 8-15 mm.


     I heard you the first time.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jun 9, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Rectilinear, double Gauss,
> 
> I heard you the first time.
> View attachment 190729


Sorry, it showed up in the new posts in my feed, which is weird but this site does very weird stuff, my post count has gone down several thousand over the last 4 years!


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 9, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Sorry, it showed up in the new posts in my feed, which is weird but this site does very weird stuff, my post count has gone down several thousand over the last 4 years!


 No apologies needed. I knew something weird happened and thought it very funny.


----------



## chong67 (Jun 26, 2020)

Where is this lens? I been waiting forever and ever. Not 2020?


----------

