# Canon officially announces the development of 6 new RF mount lenses



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 14, 2019)

> Press Release:
> New Lenses Under Development Cover a Range of Core Focal Lengths
> *MELVILLE, N.Y., February 13, 2019 – *Continuing with the message of “optics at its core,” Canon U.S.A. Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced that its parent company, Canon Inc, is developing six new RF-series lenses, further displaying the company’s commitment to the EOS R full-frame mirrorless camera system. Canon’s new RF mount allows for fast, light, and high-performing optics with a large opening diameter and short back focus distance. Each new lens in development will help fulfill the needs of amateur and advanced amateurs to professional photographers and videographers, covering critical focal lengths. In 2019, Canon’s already well-established optical lens heritage will celebrate a production milestone of 140 million EF and RF lenses and the celebration starts with the development announcement of these six lenses...



Continue reading...


----------



## dlmartin81 (Feb 14, 2019)

Man, that 70-200 looks amazing! It's so compact. I'm also real curious about the 85 DS - how much of a difference it is compared to the normal version. They're all great; who am I kidding!!


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 14, 2019)

I was hoping it was release not a product announcement


----------



## 1Zach1 (Feb 14, 2019)

Yup, want that 15-35 something bad. Wish I could order it now.


----------



## PGSanta (Feb 14, 2019)

Don't tell me Canon just pulled a Nikon, and gave us an announcement about an announcement....


----------



## MrFotoFool (Feb 14, 2019)

As noted elsewhere, the 70-200 looks stubby (which is good of course). Do we know if it will extend when zoomed out to 200?


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 14, 2019)

MrFotoFool said:


> As noted elsewhere, the 70-200 looks stubby (which is good of course). Do we know if it will extend when zoomed out to 200?


The patent says so.
Length of the zoom lens : 172.73 227.50 242.86


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 14, 2019)

The "announcement about an announcement" is a bit disappointing esp. when Canon stays so nebulous with "available later in 2019".
But the ammount of lenses show how much Canon is pushing into this new market.
I yould have expected at least one or two together with the EOS RP.
So we'll have to wait some time longer to see what they can deliver.


----------



## proutprout (Feb 14, 2019)

It makes sense to release these lenses with one or 2 pro bodies at the end of the year. Maybe they dont want to be ridiculed with a pro lense line and no pro body.


----------



## Proscribo (Feb 14, 2019)

neilfisher said:


> Haven't seen anything official regarding the release of the RF 35mm f/2.0 IS... but it's clearly shown in the B&H EOS RP hands on video.
> View attachment 183123


You mean the already released RF 35mm f/1.8 IS.


----------



## djack41 (Feb 14, 2019)

Lenses like the RF 85mm F1.2 (non-IS) begs for IBIS and truly functional Eye-AF. Come on Canon!


----------



## neilfisher (Feb 14, 2019)

Proscribo said:


> You mean the already released RF 35mm f/1.8 IS.


well damn - i totally missed that one 

... just gonna delete ye ol' post.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 14, 2019)

Not gonna lie, I’m so seriously disappointed they’re not available. And it means I’ll have to wait a great deal longer for a 100 f1.4 if it comes... they still look spectacular, but man....


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Feb 14, 2019)

Expecting to see a real review that evaluate the AF and Eye-AF


----------



## JoTomOz (Feb 14, 2019)

proutprout said:


> It makes sense to release these lenses with one or 2 pro bodies at the end of the year. Maybe they dont want to be ridiculed with a pro lense line and no pro body.


Maybe I’m a minority, but I am all about the pro lenses on the non-pro Eos-R body. I’m probably more into lenses than I am actual cameras...


----------



## sanj (Feb 14, 2019)

Am proud to be a Canon user.


----------



## sanj (Feb 14, 2019)

bokehmon22 said:


> I was hoping it was release not a product announcement


Yeahhhhh


----------



## dominic_siu (Feb 14, 2019)

I’m waiting for RF15-35, hope not till late (end of) 2019


----------



## bokehmon22 (Feb 14, 2019)

Dual IS is coming! Lens IS + IBIS camera


----------



## dirtyvu (Feb 14, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Lenses like the RF 85mm F1.2 (non-IS) begs for IBIS and truly functional Eye-AF. Come on Canon!


I'm going to keep using my EF 85 1.4 with IS. It's such an amazing lens.


----------



## rjbray01 (Feb 14, 2019)

that 70-200 looks pretty compact ... quite surprising having read countless comments on this site informing us all that lenses can't be made any smaller due to "physics"


----------



## edoorn (Feb 14, 2019)

if the patent is right it's extending and when used at the longest end 240mm (at least that's what I read and understood; correct me if I'm wrong).. that's a tad longer than the 70-200 2.8 II, but when not extended its more compact; my bag would like that. Also, less lens elements so maybe lighter?


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 14, 2019)

edoorn said:


> if the patent is right it's extending and when used at the longest end 240mm... that's longer than the 70-200 2.8 II


True, but that the 70mm end...it's very short and looks like it takes up a lot less bag space. ef 70-200 lenses are constant length only because of an fd mount tradition.


----------



## edoorn (Feb 14, 2019)

yes I thought of that too (added that to my post). That is actually nice since in my shoulder bag there's one lens that stands out in the most literal meaning, and it's the big white one 

hopefully the 24-70 is a bit smaller and lighter too; Nikon just announced their 24-70 for the Z and it's very compact!


----------



## padam (Feb 14, 2019)

edoorn said:


> yes I thought of that too (added that to my post). That is actually nice since in my shoulder bag there's one lens that stands out in the most literal meaning, and it's the big white one
> 
> hopefully the 24-70 is a bit smaller and lighter too; Nikon just announced their 24-70 for the Z and it's very compact!


It will be more compact but doesn't have stabilization in the lens, if Canon comes out with sensor based stabilization, the two together will work better.

I also don't like the folding design on some of their lenses.


----------



## dolina (Feb 14, 2019)

With more lenses like these signals Canon’s intent to devote all R&D money solely for RF mount Camera bodies, camera lenses and camera accessories.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 14, 2019)

edoorn said:


> yes I thought of that too (added that to my post). That is actually nice since in my shoulder bag there's one lens that stands out in the most literal meaning, and it's the big white one
> 
> hopefully the 24-70 is a bit smaller and lighter too; Nikon just announced their 24-70 for the Z and it's very compact!



It's a brave design move for the 70-200 f2.8 LIS genre. 

The saddest thing here is that Canon has obviously withheld this lens concept / formula back from the ef mount (ie the unspectacular warm over that became the mkIII) and flipped it over to the Rf mount. There's little optical benefits on a mirror less mount over a 35mm mirror box design over 50mm. So this lens could easily have been designed as an EF lens....held back and then modified and ported over to the Rf mount. Same with the 24-70 f2.8 L IS....that could easily have been an Ef mount too. I suspect that Canon have been engineering the marketing of the Rf mount for some time. 

I wonder what other treasures Canon have been holding on to.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Feb 14, 2019)

Well the new 70-200 RF still has a major flaw inherent in the EF versions: it's white!


----------



## padam (Feb 14, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> It's a brave design move for the 70-200 f2.8 LIS genre.
> 
> The saddest thing here is that Canon has obviously withheld this lens concept / formula back from the ef mount (ie the unspectacular warm over that became the mkIII) and flipped it over to the Rf mount. There's little optical benefits on a mirror less mount over a 35mm mirror box design over 50mm. So this lens could easily have been designed as an EF lens....held back and then modified and ported over to the Rf mount. Same with the 24-70 f2.8 L IS....that could easily have been an Ef mount too. I suspect that Canon have been engineering the marketing of the Rf mount for some time.
> 
> I wonder what other treasures Canon have been holding on to.


The 24-70/2.8 IS does definitely go under 50mm so I highly doubt it could be made in EF mount exactly like that, where the size of the rear lens element is more restricted by the flange distance.


----------



## degos (Feb 14, 2019)

Well that was underwhelming. Where are the non-L IS primes to complement the 35mm? Or at least a 35-105 f4 IS and then they can go back to their usual tactic of ignoring anyone who can't afford L lenses.

I only hope that Sigma and Tamron show some interest in the RF mount for the amateurs, just like they did for EF.


----------



## edoorn (Feb 14, 2019)

padam said:


> It will be more compact but doesn't have stabilization in the lens, if Canon comes out with sensor based stabilization, the two together will work better.
> 
> I also don't like the folding design on some of their lenses.



what do you mean with not having stabilisation in the lens; it's an IS lens isn't it?


----------



## padam (Feb 14, 2019)

edoorn said:


> what do you mean with not having stabilisation in the lens; it's an IS lens isn't it?


The Canon RF 24-70/2.8 has lens-based IS, the Nikon Z 24-70/2.8 is probably lighter and smaller but it uses the sensor stabilization only.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 14, 2019)

I bought my EOS R as a second body, mostly for macro with vintage Leica lenses.
Alas, the introduction of such interesting new lenses made this strategy obsolete...especially the 1,2/85 and the compact 70/200.
Thus, I'll sell the EOS R, will keep waiting for a high MP. EOS R, and my 5 D III will become the second (wildlife!!!!) body. Nothing beats a DSLR for wildlife (my opinion).


----------



## Ladislav (Feb 14, 2019)

I certainly expected more from announcement than just images (mockups?) of future lenses.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 14, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> I bought my EOS R as a second body, mostly for macro with vintage Leica lenses.
> Alas, the introduction of such interesting new lenses made this strategy obsolete...especially the 1,2/85 and the compact 70/200.
> Thus, I'll sell the EOS R, will keep waiting for a high MP. EOS R, and my 5 D III will become the second (wildlife!!!!) body. Nothing beats a DSLR for wildlife (my opinion).


I think that until a Rf 400/2.8 and a 600/f4 is released... and a Eos Rf mount pro camera to match the frame rate of the 1DxII then EF mounts are here for a very long time. 
I also find it bewildering that Canon are releasing small and miniature mirror-less camera bodies....but mating them to massive and heavy L Rf lenses. Sure the concept of Mirror-less is to be able to go smaller ala range finder? So where are the small and light pancake prime lenses? 21mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm?


----------



## Viggo (Feb 14, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think that until a Rf 400/2.8 and a 600/f4 is released... and a Eos Rf mount pro camera to match the frame rate of the 1DxII then EF mounts are here for a very long time.
> I also find it bewildering that Canon are releasing small and miniature mirror-less camera bodies....but mating them to massive and heavy L Rf lenses. Sure the concept of Mirror-less is to be able to go smaller ala range finder? So where are the small and light pancake prime lenses? 21mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm?


I think it’s a great strategy to show people that they are indeed catering to both those crowds.

And a million times out of million times I would choose better glass rather than better body. Nikon screwed up by having, what looks like, nice camera bodies and have seriously underwhelming lenses at launch.


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 14, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I think that until a Rf 400/2.8 and a 600/f4 is released... and a Eos Rf mount pro camera to match the frame rate of the 1DxII then EF mounts are here for a very long time.
> I also find it bewildering that Canon are releasing small and miniature mirror-less camera bodies....but mating them to massive and heavy L Rf lenses. Sure the concept of Mirror-less is to be able to go smaller ala range finder? So where are the small and light pancake prime lenses? 21mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm?



Totally agree on the subject of EF lenses and DSLRs.
As to miniature RF lenses, they certainly are coming, but it was important for Canon to demonstrate their optical superiority. As we all know that a more professional EOS R is coming, why would somebody consider buying a Nikon Z, if they aren't in the F system? The new lenses are killers.
And bank-account killers as well...


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 14, 2019)

rjbray01 said:


> that 70-200 looks pretty compact ... quite surprising having read countless comments on this site informing us all that lenses can't be made any smaller due to "physics"



Nobody has said that a 70–200 couldn't be made smaller _if you make it extend when zooming._ Which is what this one does.


----------



## padam (Feb 14, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Totally agree on the subject of EF lenses and DSLRs.
> As to miniature RF lenses, they certainly are coming, but it was important for Canon to demonstrate their optical superiority. As we all know that a more professional EOS R is coming, why would somebody consider buying a Nikon Z, if they aren't in the F system? The new lenses are killers.


If some people really don't want a Sony, but they do want a similar approach to photo and video together, which is very different to Canon (even offering Prores Raw video output soon, even in some of their existing DSLRs), they can be quite happy with the Nikon Z system. Same for the L-mount alliance.

But yes, overally speaking, probably none of these will have the same impact as Canon.


----------



## Meatcurry (Feb 14, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Lenses like the RF 85mm F1.2 (non-IS) begs for IBIS and truly functional Eye-AF. Come on Canon!


Canon confirmed future IBIS at the lunch event


----------



## yeahright (Feb 14, 2019)

looks like on the RF 24-240 there are only two rings, so the control ring doubles as the focus ring and the type of operation is selected by the switch...


----------



## Random Orbits (Feb 14, 2019)

degos said:


> Well that was underwhelming. Where are the non-L IS primes to complement the 35mm? Or at least a 35-105 f4 IS and then they can go back to their usual tactic of ignoring anyone who can't afford L lenses.
> 
> I only hope that Sigma and Tamron show some interest in the RF mount for the amateurs, just like they did for EF.



Why would there be a 35-105 f/4 IS lens? There are already many 24-105s around including the EF non L version. Canon is bringing the lenses that maximize their return on investment. 24-70s, 70-200s, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm primes. 24, 28mm f/2.8 non-L IS; not so popular, so they're not as high a priority. Plus, you can still use the EF adapter.


----------



## degos (Feb 14, 2019)

Random Orbits said:


> Why would there be a 35-105 f/4 IS lens? There are already many 24-105s around including the EF non L version.



Because it would be (1) useful (2) easier to optimise than the 24-105s with their crappy wide ends and (3) hopefully affordable

There are lots of EF 24-70s and 70-200s and 85s, so why bother with RF versions?

There are no constant-aperture non-L lenses in the Canon catalogue. With its alleged weight and size benefits RF would seem to provide an opportunity to address that with a useful focal range that permits maximisation of IQ within a budget. But instead we get one 35mm prime and a dark superzoom. Cheers, Canon.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 14, 2019)

degos said:


> Because it would be (1) useful (2) easier to optimise than the 24-105s with their crappy wide ends and (3) hopefully affordable
> 
> There are lots of EF 24-70s and 70-200s and 85s, so why bother with RF versions?
> 
> There are no constant-aperture non-L lenses in the Canon catalogue. With its alleged weight and size benefits RF would seem to provide an opportunity to address that with a useful focal range that permits maximisation of IQ within a budget. But instead we get one 35mm prime and a dark superzoom. Cheers, Canon.


Patience. Your desires may not be at the top of Canon’s priority list, but they can release only so many new lenses each year. Your time will probably come if you can wait.


----------



## Random Orbits (Feb 14, 2019)

degos said:


> And there are lots of EF 24-70s and 70-200s and 85s, so why bother with RF versions?
> 
> There are no constant-aperture non-L lenses in the Canon catalogue. With its alleged weight and size benefits RF would seem to provide an opportunity to address that with a useful focal range that permits maximisation of IQ within a budget. But instead we get one 35mm prime and a dark superzoom. Cheers, Canon.
> 
> Maybe they should just drop anything non-L and stop pretending.



Because they sell; why wouldn't they introduce the lenses that people use the most first? They did introduce the RF 35 f/1.8 IS at a lower price than the existing EF 35 f/2 IS, and now that the RP is out, I'm guessing they'll bring out other non-L lenses later. However, from a price perspective, it's hard to beat adapting existing non-L EF glass.

Or perhaps your expectation were too high for what Canon releases within a year of launching the EOS R system. 10 native lenses within 1.5 years of launch. Sony couldn't do that and Nikon isn't doing that. The bigger joke is that Nikon is charging $1000 for its 24-70 f/4 for its Z system, and it doesn't even have IS. Why don't you wait a few years and before judging?


----------



## PGSanta (Feb 14, 2019)

There’s still nothing on pricing? So all of this amounts to a lens release map with pictures? Sometime in 2019 is all we get? Seriously? Maybe I should grab a 28-70 afterall.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 14, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> There’s still nothing on pricing? So all of this amounts to a lens release map with pictures? Sometime in 2019 is all we get? Seriously? Maybe I should grab a 28-70 afterall.


I appreciate getting a road map from Canon. Helps plan when determining lens purchases from what is available now, or by the end of the year.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Feb 14, 2019)

I have a few issues with the 70-200 extending when zooming:

1: Doesn't it suck air (with potential dust) into the lens when extending? The extended lens will have a larger volume than the short lens. So there must be some kind of gaps, which can let in all that air within a fraction of a second. Dust has always been my single worst problem with interchangeable lenses. 

2: Extending a lens while zooming normally means that you have a smaller maximum aperture at the long end. I can't think of any exception. So if the 70-200 has f/2.8 at the long end, something like f/2 or even bigger should be possible at the wide end. So the restriction to f/2.8 even at the wide end is artificial. f/2 or even f/1.8 at 70mm would be amazing. 

3. An extending lens let's other people see that you zoom closer to your subject. That can have some disadvantages. 

If I had the choice I would prefer a lens that does not extend while zooming.


----------



## Random Orbits (Feb 14, 2019)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I have a few issues with the 70-200 extending when zooming:
> 
> 1: Doesn't it suck air (with potential dust) into the lens when extending? The extended lens will have a larger volume than the short lens. So there must be some kind of gaps, which can let in all that air within a fraction of a second. Dust has always been my single worst problem with interchangeable lenses.
> 
> ...



1. Even the non-extending 70-200s move air as the lens focuses. Lenses aren't air tight; air will move as it must. In reality, this brings the 70-200 to a similar design as the 100-400s and 70-300s. Do the 100-400s and 70-300s have dust problems that are significantly much worse than the 70-200s? Bryan at TDP indicated that the lens is shorter than his iPhone 8 at 5.5 in. Think of the amount of space that can be saved in a camera bag if it can be stored vertically instead of horizontally. The size is why I loved having the 70-300L while I had it. Now the question is how heavy will the RF 70-200 be? Will it be significantly lighter than its EF counterpart?

2. This is true of any constant aperture zoom lens. 24-105 f/4, 24-70 f/2.8, 24-70 f/4, etc.


----------



## Pape (Feb 14, 2019)

R serie cameras can focus more darker than cameras earlier.
Now we need 600mm f8 as replacer for 400mm f5,6  or what :?
would make low megapixel cameras like RP and D1 more equivalent with high density sensor cameras ,when diffraction cuts bit off with 5ds


----------



## Joatamos (Feb 14, 2019)

yeahright said:


> looks like on the RF 24-240 there are only two rings, so the control ring doubles as the focus ring and the type of operation is selected by the switch...


Was just thinking the same!


----------



## davidcl0nel (Feb 14, 2019)

I like the speed of the announcements, but they should deliver them soon and not at the end of the year.

The weight and the prices are missing, so I am not soo excited, because I think there might be a bigger problem. 

I also dislike the fact of an outer focus, as the RF 35mm 1.8 IS shows (older announcement). I like the EF 35 2 IS very very much, and also because of the internal focus/durability (no moving parts to the outside. There are plenty of broken 50 1.4 USM, because the tube is broken a little bit...
And because of the already existing RF 35mm 1.8 IS, there might be a RF 35mm 1.4L or lower in the future, but I think there will be no internal focus 35mm f/2 USM equivalent.... 
The extension on a zoom lens is ok, but please not with focus...
This is a big problem for me, but I also will wait for a EOS RS announcement, which will come in the future I hope...

I also had the old EF 24-105L, and dislike the higher weight of the 24-105L II or also the RF equivalent. Yes yes, if they are sharper thats ok... But if you want to push a smaller and lighter mirrorless system you shouldnt waste the adventage by having too heavy lenses. The announced 70-200 here looks very tiny, maybe its much less then the EF counterpart, which would be amazing. I like the EF 70-200 IS II very much, although the 1700gramm is very heavy in my backpack... (no please no correction in the theoretical weight, nobody transport it without any caps)...


----------



## Etienne (Feb 14, 2019)

Check out that small 70-200 f/2.8 IS. And now where are all the "geniuses" on this forum who fancy themselves lens engineers... all of whom insisted that there was no way to make telephotos smaller on the mirrorless systems. ... crickets


----------



## Joules (Feb 14, 2019)

Etienne said:


> Check out that small 70-200 f/2.8 IS. And now where are all the "geniuses" on this forum who fancy themselves lens engineers... all of whom insisted that there was no way to make telephotos smaller on the mirrorless systems. ... crickets


Well, the current 70-200mm lenses are an exception to that because those don't extend when zooming. That makes them longer than they have to be. Unlike this RF version which will very likely vary in length while zooming. So, that doesn't count as mirrorless making lenses shorter... 

Birds.


----------



## deleteme (Feb 14, 2019)

degos said:


> Because it would be (1) useful (2) easier to optimise than the 24-105s with their crappy wide ends and (3) hopefully affordable
> 
> There are lots of EF 24-70s and 70-200s and 85s, so why bother with RF versions?
> 
> There are no constant-aperture non-L lenses in the Canon catalogue. With its alleged weight and size benefits RF would seem to provide an opportunity to address that with a useful focal range that permits maximisation of IQ within a budget. But instead we get one 35mm prime and a dark superzoom. Cheers, Canon.



1. A constant aperture zoom is more difficult to optimize even when you make it less useful by leaving off the wide end.
2. The weight and size benefits (plus cost benefits) of variable aperture zooms are real and can be optimized for mirrorless.
3. Canon WILL bother with RF versions for precisely the same reasons it bothered with EF versions of FD lenses. Because it will be phasing out the EF platform.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 15, 2019)

Is anyone else worried that each of these lenses are $1000 more than their EF brothers?


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 15, 2019)

davidcl0nel said:


> I like the speed of the announcements, but they should deliver them soon and not at the end of the year.
> 
> The weight and the prices are missing, so I am not soo excited, because I think there might be a bigger problem.
> 
> ...



I don’t like extending lenses while focusing either, but the RF 35 f1.8 automatically retract when the camera is turned off, which is very nice. Ultimately, I usually want the smaller lens over an internally focusing one, and especially with a small lens like the RF 35.


----------



## Pape (Feb 15, 2019)

Viggo said:


> Is anyone else worried that each of these lenses are $1000 more than their EF brothers?


Lenses are expensive because there is so many thick wallet sony user without canon lenses atm .
They run back like sheep pack,when hearing first soundless eos ReX 50 fps roar 
theyll be cheaper later i bet,when first buying mania is over 
or hrmm burst speed must be lot more higher if its able do constant 30fps 8K. if thinking 8k uses whole sensor.


----------



## PGSanta (Feb 15, 2019)

Viggo said:


> Is anyone else worried that each of these lenses are $1000 more than their EF brothers?


Where did you see pricing?


----------



## Viggo (Feb 15, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> Where did you see pricing?


I didn’t , I just went by the pricing of the RF50


----------



## vjlex (Feb 15, 2019)

No one else wishes they offered the 70-200 2.8L in black? I've never been a fan of the white paint. I would much prefer a matching set.


----------



## delta0 (Feb 15, 2019)

What is the release date for the 24-70?


----------



## padam (Feb 15, 2019)

"This year"
Maybe it is a bit higher priority than the rest, as the EF version has no IS, so this definitely has an appealing feature, but only they know the order.


----------



## PGSanta (Feb 15, 2019)

Viggo said:


> I didn’t , I just went by the pricing of the RF50


Ahhh well, the RF50 is actually worth the premium over an EF model. 

I actually think the new RF lenses will come in at the same MSRP as their EF counterparts.


----------



## Viggo (Feb 15, 2019)

PGSanta said:


> Ahhh well, the RF50 is actually worth the premium over an EF model.
> 
> I actually think the new RF lenses will come in at the same MSRP as their EF counterparts.


It is indeed, it’s absolutley bonkers good.

Fingers crossed for same pricing as the EF versions. Hopefully they price lenses also aggressively ..


----------



## bf (Feb 16, 2019)

The rf 700-200f2.8 is a star and a checkmark for the mount selection. I'm now more positive about Canon's mirrorless system. Hopefully the pricing of these lenses would not blow it away.


----------



## bf (Feb 16, 2019)

shunsai said:


> No one else wishes they offered the 70-200 2.8L in black? I've never been a fan of the white paint. I would much prefer a matching set.


I agree with you! I think for this release they needed white to bring attention but I like to have a black option.


----------



## gmon750 (Feb 16, 2019)

Canon has to start somewhere and I think they're doing a fantastic job with how they're handling the introduction of their mirrorless productions. If Canon introduced a pro-body first, I know with absolutely certainty that everyone would be whining about not having decent RF lenses. With this route, Canon will have the lenses ready, and immediately put out a pro body. Makes sense. These lenses take a huge amount of R&D and its obvious they were busy the past few years - all while people were accusing Canon of sleeping at the wheel. 

I think we'll see a pro-body announcement at the end of 2019 when these lenses are on the market. Until then, no need to put something out before it's time. It will also give Canon time to make adjustments to the pro body as the year progresses and advances. 

Christmas 2019 might be a fun year for many (like me) that have been patiently waiting.


----------



## Bangrossi (Feb 16, 2019)

Well, with this big announcement, It’s confirmed that RF lenses will not have focus distance windows like EF lenses


----------



## Viggo (Feb 16, 2019)

Bangrossi said:


> Well, with this big announcement, It’s confirmed that RF lenses will not have focus distance windows like EF lenses


You have it in the EVF


----------



## jd7 (Feb 17, 2019)

padam said:


> The Canon RF 24-70/2.8 has lens-based IS, the Nikon Z 24-70/2.8 is probably lighter and smaller but it uses the sensor stabilization only.


Interesting that the Nikon Z 24-70/2.8 is about the same weight as Canon's EF 24-70/2.8L II. And I am certainly going to be interested to see what weight the RF 24-70/2.8L IS comes in at.


----------



## funkboy (Feb 17, 2019)

The "tiny" 70-200 is yet another compelling argument for this platform.

I'd love to see a "reverse teleconverted" (or redesigned  50-150 f/2 IS in similar form factor.

Oh, I'd expect to see Tokina release their full-frame mirrorless "Firin" 20mm f/2 for EOS R as well:
https://tokinalens.com/product/firin_20mm_f2_fe_af/


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 18, 2019)

The strange omission is a more budget standard zoom to go with the EOS RP. US camera dealers & UK show the option of purchasing with the EF24-70mm f4L IS USM or the EF24-105mm budget zoom. Having two zooms with similar focal lengths in the RF24-70mm f2.8L IS USM & the RF28-70mm f2L USM at the higher end is a strange strategy. 

That said the holy trinity of the RF15-35mm f2.8L IS USM, RF24-70mm f2.8L IS USM & the RF70-200mm f2.8L IS USM hits back at Sony who are the wannabe Canon.


----------



## digito23 (Jun 7, 2019)

I'm looking forward to the RF 70-200mm - f/2.8


----------

