# Canon officially announces the RF 16mm f/2.8 STM and RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 14, 2021)

> *MELVILLE, N.Y., September 14, 2021 – *Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the RF16mm F2.8 STM and RF100–400mm F5.6–8 IS USM lenses. Both lenses invite current EOS R series users and those who are considering a move to Canon’s prominent mirrorless system, such as the EOS R or EOS RP, to expand their content creation abilities with the visual drama of an ultra-wide-angle lens and true telephoto-only zoom lens. As the “lens first” EOS R series continues to expand, these latest lenses open the door to a wide-range of imaging creators, encouraging them to test the powers and possibilities of their art.
> *Preorder:* Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM $299 | Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM $649
> 
> *Ultra-Wide Perspectives*
> Whether you are excited...



Continue reading...


----------



## Chaitanya (Sep 14, 2021)

Will be waiting for reviews of both these lenses as they look quite interesting for closeup work. Though that f8 still feels odd.


----------



## danfaz (Sep 14, 2021)

Pre-ordered both immediately


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 14, 2021)

Canon really added the lens hoods + soft case with both lenses? At least that's what it says at Wex UK. Might be a mistake.


----------



## FrenchFry (Sep 14, 2021)

Is it odd that none of the reps that tested the R3 had anything to say about the new lenses?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 14, 2021)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Canon really added the lens hoods + soft case with both lenses? At least that's what it says at Wex UK. Might be a mistake.


May be market-dependent. I recall that in Malaysia, Canon included the hood with the EF 50/1.8 II (and other non-L lenses, but the nifty fifty stuck out as it was the cheapest lens). B&H list only the front and rear caps as included with the RF 100-400 and 16/2.8.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Sep 14, 2021)

Preordered the RF 16mm F2.8.
excited to test it as a UWA option for nightsky, cityscapes and large group photos.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Sep 14, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> May be market-dependent. I recall that in Malaysia, Canon included the hood with the EF 50/1.8 II (and other non-L lenses, but the nifty fifty stuck out as it was the cheapest lens). B&H list only the front and rear caps as included with the RF 100-400 and 16/2.8.



Makes sense. At least UK customers get something extra for the much higher GBP price.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 14, 2021)

RF 16mm f/2.8 STM:
339,- € in Germany
RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM:
729,- € in Germany


----------



## scyrene (Sep 14, 2021)

No mention anywhere of the degree of IBIS possible with the 16mm?


----------



## CaMeRa QuEsT (Sep 14, 2021)

Here's the 16mm's MTF. Pretty convenient for Canon to not show [email protected]/8 anymore, isn't it? Of course, what else would you expect from a $300 UWA lens?






キヤノン：RF16mm F2.8 STM｜仕様


交換レンズ RF16mm F2.8 STM の仕様をご紹介しているページです。




cweb.canon.jp





Following are full size [email protected]/8, f/9, and f/2.8 (too large to attach here):






キヤノン：RF16mm F2.8 STM｜撮影サンプル


交換レンズ RF16mm F2.8 STM の撮影サンプルをご紹介しているページです。




cweb.canon.jp


----------



## xwxw (Sep 14, 2021)

scyrene said:


> No mention anywhere of the degree of IBIS possible with the 16mm?


You could get a sense of it from its performances during video taking.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 14, 2021)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> Here's the 16mm's MTF.


*dry heave*
*reminds self it’s a $300 lens*


----------



## AHollowedHunter (Sep 14, 2021)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Canon really added the lens hoods + soft case with both lenses? At least that's what it says at Wex UK. Might be a mistake.


The parkcameras linked here also offer hood and soft case, for the same price as just the lens on Canon store. The hood is over £70 alone???

I'm deciding on whether I want this nice, compact zoom, or if I should get a cheap second hand 400 5.6. I'll probably be at the 400 range more often than not anyway, but I already have the rf800 to fit in my bag and another large >1kg lens won't fit! 

Ofc, my thin wallet has made the decision a lot easier...


----------



## SteveC (Sep 14, 2021)

Unless that 100-400's weight is comparable to my tamron 18-400 (APS-C)...I'll likely pass. I do have that range covered with my EF 100-400 L mk II (with dedicated adapter).


----------



## frjmacias (Sep 14, 2021)

I got my preorder in for the 16mm! I was eyeing that lens since I saw it announced here. Hoping to do an extensive review if I get it in early enough. Who knows with all the shortages. That is why I did not want to wait for the reviews. It's cheap enough that I can test it out and decide if it will stay in my bag.


----------



## xwxw (Sep 14, 2021)

SteveC said:


> Unless that 100-400's weight is comparable to my tamron 18-400 (APS-C)...I'll likely pass. I do have that range covered with my EF 100-400 L mk II (with dedicated adapter).


They are identical in price: $649.

The weight shows the canon is 10% lighter: 100-400 at 635 grams and 18-400 at 710 grams.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 14, 2021)

xwxw said:


> They are identical in price: $649.
> 
> The weight shows the canon is 10% lighter: 100-400 at 635 grams and 18-400 at 710 grams.


 Thanks!

Still, it might be a while!


----------



## SereneSpeed (Sep 14, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> *dry heave*
> *reminds self it’s a $300 lens*


The lines are supposed to remain relatively flat from left to right, aren't they? I don't think I've ever looked twice at an MTF chart, but I seem to remember all the ones I've seen having far less slope...

Was hoping for a lighter (hiking) alternative to my EF 16-35. Maybe not? I'm a bit finicky with lens quality, perhaps I need to cancel my pre-order.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 14, 2021)

SereneSpeed said:


> The lines are supposed to remain relatively flat from left to right, aren't they? I don't think I've ever looked twice at an MTF chart, but I seem to remember all the ones I've seen having far less slope...
> 
> Was hoping for a lighter (hiking) alternative to my EF 16-35. Maybe not? I'm a bit finicky with lens quality, perhaps I need to cancel my pre-order.


Here are the MTFs of the EF 16-35/4L IS (this is the older format, the new one above for the 16/2.8 does not have the curves shown as thin lines below, so only compare the 4 thick lines here to the MTF above. Short version of interpretation is that the center of the frame is on the left and the edges are on the right, and higher lines are better.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 15, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> *dry heave*
> *reminds self it’s a $300 lens*


And its MTF at f/2.8 seems to beat my 17-40L at f/4, so I'm looking forward to try it out.


----------



## Marcus550 (Sep 15, 2021)

I preordered the canon RF85mm f2 from park cameras, stated that it came with a pouch & lens hood, after the preorder phase they removed the fact it came with a lens hood/pouch and mine eventually turned up with no pouch or case so not sure if its just a con to get people to preorder, had loads of broken promises with them, things may have changed now but I wouldn't go on the fact it comes with a pouch/lens hood


----------



## AHollowedHunter (Sep 15, 2021)

Marcus550 said:


> I preordered the canon RF85mm f2 from park cameras, stated that it came with a pouch & lens hood, after the preorder phase they removed the fact it came with a lens hood/pouch and mine eventually turned up with no pouch or case so not sure if its just a con to get people to preorder, had loads of broken promises with them, things may have changed now but I wouldn't go on the fact it comes with a pouch/lens hood


Thanks for the heads up, if I decide to order I will double check, or go with someone else. If any company pulled that though, I'd fight them on it, otherwise they'll get 0 from me and waste money on returns.


----------



## AlP (Sep 15, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> Here are the MTFs of the EF 16-35/4L IS (this is the older format, the new one above for the 16/2.8 does not have the curves shown as thin lines below, so only compare the 4 thick lines here to the MTF above. Short version of interpretation is that the center of the frame is on the left and the edges are on the right, and higher lines are better.


Just for fun, here's a comparison with some RF and EF zooms and EF primes.



Not bad for the price and size, I would say not too bad even without considering the price


----------



## Marcus550 (Sep 15, 2021)

AHollowedHunter said:


> Thanks for the heads up, if I decide to order I will double check, or go with someone else. If any company pulled that though, I'd fight them on it, otherwise they'll get 0 from me and waste money on returns.


yeh, probably should of as I even screen grabbed it before they removed it but I had 4 different delivery dates, other companies were getting them in stock and shipped out, I only got my earlier than I should of because it took a bad review on trustpilot for them to sort it out so unfortunately I wouldn't use park cameras again, wasn't even fussed about the dates changing just be nice for an email explaining why rather than broken promises.


----------



## Tangent (Sep 15, 2021)

CaMeRa QuEsT said:


> Here's the 16mm's MTF. Pretty convenient for Canon to not show [email protected]/8 anymore, isn't it? Of course, what else would you expect from a $300 UWA lens?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ouch -- there is no sharp sand near either frame edge in this 2.8 shot. Oh well, at least it's a beach with nice soft sand to walk on.


----------



## AdmiralFwiffo (Sep 15, 2021)

The full-frame setup for a vlogger is coming together. 16mm is wide enough for vlogging even with a bit of a crop (i.e. using digital stabilization). Combined with an RP-tier camera (which might even get cheaper), and a 50 1.8 for the studio, and you're ready to go.


----------



## AJ (Sep 15, 2021)

The MTF curve looks consistent with what you'd expect from a de-fished fisheye.
I bet that this is quite a sharp lens without the distortion correction.


----------



## SereneSpeed (Sep 16, 2021)

Do hands-on reviews tend to come out before the first batch of lenses ship? Or after?


----------



## Absolutic (Sep 16, 2021)

has anyone who already has 100-500 considering also ordering 100-400 for a lesser weight perhaps vacation use or some other reason?


----------

