Rumored RF lens roadmap update

[frankchn]

The 200-500 f/4L also sounds interesting, depending on its price. probably won’t be $3K because that’s where the current 100-500 is, but $10K is a nonstarter for me.

I expect it to be around the price of the RF 400 f/2.8 at $12k. You gain the versatility and lose a stop of light -- a fair trade in my mind.

 

[EricN]

Sure there certainly are some physical limitations, e.g. Fuji 200mm is 10 years younger, but managed to be only 255g lighter than Canon' 200mm.

It's about 10% lighter, but it does have the 1.4 Tele-converter which the canon didn't.

 

[EricN]

I love my RF 100-400! I only wish the positions of the zoom and focus rings were swapped, which would make it easier to hand-hold steady while following a moving subject.

Canon has the reasonably priced 600 and 800 f/11 STMs, so I also don’t see what an RF-S super tele would be. Unless they do like a crop 600 f/4 for less $$ than the full frame version. Or maybe a 1200mm f/11 STM (!)

It'll be interesting to find out! It could help the R7 sales, don't you think?

 

[Del Paso]

With teleconverter compatibility might be asking too much?

This would just be perfect, your word in Goddess Kwanon's ear!

 

[LeBlobe]

180ish macro L lens and what about something for astro? 20mm L 1.4?

 

[Bahrd]

This means no second f2 lens which was rumored a while ago.

Do you mean RF-S 22/2? I would cordially welcome one (a lens, not a rumor)!

 

[David - Sydney]

Please, don't wake up a sleeping dog!

28 pages so maybe dozing but definitely not sleeping

 

[divinshire]

Where is the 200-800 that everyone said was coming this year!!!!? That is the one us wildlife photographers want!
Come on Canon, you have a chance to not only catch up, but potentially overtake the competition again!

 

[john1970]

Not exactly the most informative update. I see that mirrorlessrumors.com predicted a Canon lens announcement on Nov. 2, 2023. I suspect that this could be the 200-500 mm f4. Will know in a few weeks if the rumor is true and what is being announced.

 

[AlanF]

Not exactly the most informative update. I see that mirrorlessrumors.com predicted a Canon lens announcement on Nov. 2, 2024. I suspect that this could be the 200-500 mm f4. Will know in a few weeks if the rumor is true and what is being announced.

Nov 2024 is a long time to wait.

 

[john1970]

Nov 2024 is a long time to wait.

Nov 2023 not Nov 2024. Corrected original post. Thank you for catching my error.

 

[TonyG]

I would love a Mark II improved sharpness version of the RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM which although not a bad lens is a bit soft for a L series lens especially compared to some other native RF lenses.

Soft? I find it about equal to the RF 24-70 2.8 in real life.
If you pixel peep at the-digital-picture, it shows as sharper then the RF 24-70 2.8.
There are other imperfections with chromatic aberrations etc, but I think it is plenty sharp and a gem of a walk around lens with its size.
If anything the RF 24-70 2.8 needs some help if you compare it to Sony's GMII.
I have the GMII and find it to be pretty much as sharp as primes.

Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8 L IS USM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8 L IS USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

 

[mdcmdcmdc]

Not exactly the most informative update.

it’s been a slow couple of weeks for rumors. You can tell when CR features firmware updates, patent disclosures, and an “opinion” piece complaining about the lack of third party RF lenses.

 

[Tom W]

I think the wide end for RF-S is the most needed lens - a 10-22 or even something like a 9-20, similar to the M lens would be welcome.
Also, as mentioned, a 15-xx, maybe even a constant f/4 lens, would be welcome as a higher-end "normal" zoom. And, of course, a couple of lightweight, fast primes like that 32 f/1.4 and the 22 f/2 in the M format.

Of course, there are some needs on the full frame side as well. The proverbial 24/1.4 and 35/1.2 are needed and have been rumored forever. A longer macro lens, and the aforementioned super tele zoom (200-500 f/4), but there ought to be something that competes head-on with Nikon and the Sigma/Tamron telephoto zooms. Although the EF version of the Sigma 150-600 doesn't play well with eye autofocus on the RF mount, I think that the situation will change at some point, and Canon ought to be ahead of that game.


I'm not sure of the need for an RF-s superzoom. I mean, slap that 100-400 f/8 on there. There wouldn't be a lot of weight savings on longer lenses by going to the crop format. Most of that size improvement comes at the wide to midrange end of the focal length.

 

[Czardoom]

Where is the 200-800 that everyone said was coming this year!!!!? That is the one us wildlife photographers want!
Come on Canon, you have a chance to not only catch up, but potentially overtake the competition again!

Huh? Rumor and patent were just posted a week or so ago. And patent listed numerous lenses, not just 200-800. And most patents don't become products. So, basically, doubt anyone said it was coming this year, and maybe never. And those who actually take photos know that Canon's 100-500 is probably the equal to any competitors 200-600mm (or 180-600, or whatever to 600) lens.

 

[EricN]

I think the wide end for RF-S is the most needed lens - a 10-22 or even something like a 9-20, similar to the M lens would be welcome.
Also, as mentioned, a 15-xx, maybe even a constant f/4 lens, would be welcome as a higher-end "normal" zoom. And, of course, a couple of lightweight, fast primes like that 32 f/1.4 and the 22 f/2 in the M format.

Of course, there are some needs on the full frame side as well. The proverbial 24/1.4 and 35/1.2 are needed and have been rumored forever. A longer macro lens, and the aforementioned super tele zoom (200-500 f/4), but there ought to be something that competes head-on with Nikon and the Sigma/Tamron telephoto zooms. Although the EF version of the Sigma 150-600 doesn't play well with eye autofocus on the RF mount, I think that the situation will change at some point, and Canon ought to be ahead of that game.


I'm not sure of the need for an RF-s superzoom. I mean, slap that 100-400 f/8 on there. There wouldn't be a lot of weight savings on longer lenses by going to the crop format. Most of that size improvement comes at the wide to midrange end of the focal length.

I'm not sure if super zoom doesn't mean for example 18-350mm

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'm not sure if super zoom doesn't mean for example 18-350mm

I would think so, for RF-S. Supertelephoto ≠ superzoom.

 

[DhlcadR6]

When the success Canon got with RF 28mm f2.8 STM. Can Canon please use PMO for all their non-L zoom lens, make it bright(f2.8~4) with linear STM(NO SCREW-type STM PLS) and not necessarily stabilized, outsource to CN/TW/TH/SEA for production. If 3rd party isn't coming in soon. Why not making it in-house.
Wishful Wishlist:
1. RF-S 10-20 f4 IS STM, ultra small UWA, make it smaller than Sigma's new 10-18/2.8. So it can be justified when 3rd party RF is allowed.
2. RF16-45 f3.5 STM, in-between RF 14-35L and 15-30 IS STM. Doesn't render the 14-35L useless but more attractive than the 15-30. Also substitutes as an APS-C standard zoom.
3. RF 20-50 f2.8 STM, Panasonic 20-60 and Sony 20-70 proved to be a feasible product. Having it as alternative to 24-70L f4/24-105L f4 and 3rd party 28-75 f2.8.


As for the RF 14mm 24mm 35mm L lens....Seriously why Canon is taking so long. It's needed. Or replace all screw-type STM RF lens with linear STM.

 

[Richard CR]

The next announcements from Canon will be a slew of lenses. We had reports of an announcement coming in late September, and that has obviously passed without anything being announced. We are very confident that a lot of new lenses will be announced between now and March 2024, but we’re still waiting for any solid

See full article...

I would argue the 32mm 1.4 was one of the best standard prime lenses canon made. optically sharp on a 32.5mp APS-C sensor wide open, and very well controlled even for infrared. That and the RF-S 11-22 would have me moving to RF-S.

Now if only they would make the equivalent of the M200 (and no, the R100 isn't it).

I'm not sure an RF-S telezoom would make sense. it would save a bit of weight but be around the same size. people would be better off getting the tamron Canon full frame lens

 

[Richard CR]

Is there a reliable source for this? I had the impression it was mostly guessing that a wideangle zoom would be "a conversion" of the EF-M lens?
Personally I'm waiting for a wideangle zoom to replace EF-S 10-18mm or 10-22mm. In other words, something that goes down to at least 10mm (75% of the photos I shoot with my wideangle zoom are shot at 10mm). Preferable wider (it should be "easy" to make with the shorter flangedistance of R-mount).
Also hoping for some R mount replacement for the EF-S 15-85mm. Again at least 15mm wide in the short end.

Sigh, doesn't sound like I should expect anything like those any time soon :-/

An "RF-S super-telezoom" sounds interesting though. Do they really mean super-telezoom?

Economically it makes alot of sense for Canon simply to port the EF-M lenses. the focal plane distance is close enough that Canon could move the optics with no redesign. Simply change the housing, update the electronics and it's done. the ones that Canon did already for the RF-S were either poor / had problematic QA, or required heavy DLO to be "okay" so changing them up probably was a good idea .. but the EF-M 11-22 and potentially the EF-M 32mm were pretty top notch.