It would be a Z lens. Clearly that concern didn’t bother Canon in terms of the RF 70-200/2.8 lenses.
Upvote
0
Canon RF 14-28mm f/2.8L IS USM Z Up Next?
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I'm still interested in new F2 zooms! I would likely purchase a 24-70 F2 if it's not much heavier than 1.0 kg.
Re: UWA, while I'm dreaming, here are some other F2 designs I would be interested in . . .
14-24 F2
16-28 F2
24-50 F2
Upvote
0
I currently own the RF 15-35 mm f2.8 L lens and much prefer the extra reach out to 35 mm than the 15 vs 14 mm. My personal preference. This very well might be a year when I do not buy any lenses. We shall see.
Upvote
0
Sounds like a great trip! Have fun and enjoy it!
Mine is the RF14-35/4, RF24-105/4 and the RF100-500 under 3kg
Worst case, I would drop the RF24-105/4 for my 2 lens kit under 2kg. Covers landscape and telephoto with cropping on the R5 if needed. Not good for portraits though
Just the lenses is under 3kg.
14-35 F4 + padded case 649g
24-105 F4 + padded case 810g
70-200 F4 + padded case 872g
35mm F1.4 + padded case 666g
Sub total 2997g
But I have a carry on limit of 7kg to meet with 2 camera bodies, MacBook Air, cards, card readers, external SSD drives etc etc + the weight of the bag itself. The best I've found is the F-Stop Dalston 21L bag which weighs only 820g
Dalston 21L
The Dalston 21L Urban Series Camera Backpack by f-stop was inspired by the busy streets of London's Dalston district. 21 liter capacity for great adventures
fstopgear.com
Upvote
0
Instead of a 14-28mm f/2.8, which seems like a little too sacrificial over the practicality of a 15-35's range, I would prefer Canon to see what lens they could come up with if they created a large ultra-wide lens body like the existing 24-105/70-200. They could create a totally new and unique zoom range that many shooters could find useful..say a 14-55mm f/2.8...this would also play well with any upcoming EF-S cameras and the R50V for more serious productions. Perhaps that would be too large of a lens as I speak out of my butt about lens design fantasies. haha
Upvote
0
If canon decides to keep all the Z lenses the same size it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect a bigger zoom range than the existing 15-35 f2.8. It's probably more realistic than my fantasy of a 20-200 f4 Z
Upvote
0
For city travels, I often go with a two lens set-up:Just the lenses is under 3kg.
14-35 F4 + padded case 649g
24-105 F4 + padded case 810g
70-200 F4 + padded case 872g
35mm F1.4 + padded case 666g
Sub total 2997g
But I have a carry on limit of 7kg to meet with 2 camera bodies, MacBook Air, cards, card readers, external SSD drives etc etc + the weight of the bag itself. The best I've found is the F-Stop Dalston 21L bag which weighs only 820g
Dalston 21L
The Dalston 21L Urban Series Camera Backpack by f-stop was inspired by the busy streets of London's Dalston district. 21 liter capacity for great adventures
RF 14-35mm F4 L
RF 70-200mm F4 L
When I take a third lens, I have to choose between the RF 35mm F1.8 (more for cityscapes at night) or RF 85mm F2 (more portrait-like pice). I usually to have at least one lens that has a brighter aperture than F4.
For hiking,
I stick to the 35mm F1.8 and a telezoom. I usually don't carry the 100-500mm on hikes longer than 10 km. I opt for the 70-200mm F4 or the 100-400mm which I sold to my father-in-law, but fortunately I can burrow it at any time.
Btw: the Dalston backpack looks quite nice and interesting, but since I already own a great backpack, it won't be a purchase for me.
Upvote
0
I´d preorder in a heartbeat! Actually two, my heart will definitely skip a beat once it gets announced
Currently, I can´t imagine buying a UWA f2 zoom because the RF 14-35mm does a real great job and f4-f8 works perfectly for landscapes. I´d be more interested in a 70-135mm (or longer) F2 zoom, if it is max. 1kg
Upvote
0
It will certainly cost more money, be internal zooming, be less compact, and support the power zoom attachment.
If anything canabalizes the RF 15-35 f/2.8, it is the RF 16-28 f/2.8.
I say the more choices the better.
Upvote
0
Gosh, yeah, I would walk around all day with a 24-50/2 --- I shoot weddings with 2 bodies, so that on one of them and an 85 or 70-200 on the other, and I'd be goldenI share all of your dreams, particularly the one about an RF 24-70 f/2 and the 24-50!
Upvote
0
Yep, I get that it would be a Z lens but what would be substantially different from the RF15-35/2.8? VCM motor = tick but otherwise?
The RF70-200/2.8 Z vs non-Z has the collapsible feature so smaller and lighter. For the 14-28/2.8 the difference would be ?
Upvote
0
I have the same 7kg carry on limit but get around it by using a eScott Vest to actually carry the stuff and a Lowepro 450AW which can carry all the gear once past checkin. I regularly carry >12kgs in carry on this way.
16" MBpro and RF00-500 goes in the backpack adding up to roughly 7kgs.
2 bodies, wide angles lenses, big powerback/batteries, protein bars etc for the flight goes in the vest.
Not that this is not my hiking setup or even a walkaround setup but getting to a destination safely with gear. If diving then strobes, housing, fins etc goes in the checked in bag. 30kg bag is preferable in this case.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I'm not getting your point here. Are you suggesting that the potential RF12-28/2.8Z will be the same form factor as the 2 zoom Z lenses that you showed? Does the patent give this lens length for instance?
Upvote
0
Fair point, and my assumption of it being the same size could be wrong. The patents for internally zooming 14-24/2.8 and 15-35/2.8 lenses are shorter than the current Z lenses, but those patents may not become the actual lens.
Presumably they’d want the PZ-E2 to sit in the same place relative to the camera body as on the other Z lenses (having it be closer to the body would necessitate adjusting a rig to switch between Z lenses). If they want the attachment in the same relative position, the patent for the 14-24/2.8 won’t be made because it’s shorter than the position of the outer screw hole.
Upvote
0
I will definitely be buying the wide angle Z lens, but I'm really surprised it is going to be a 14-28mm. It really needs to be approximately the same size as the other Z lenses for it to make sense and a 14-28mm seems like an odd range for that size of lens. Odd. And for video, it is more useful if the lens 40mm rather than 14mm.
Upvote
0
FWIW, the most recent patent has a 14-24/2.8 that's significantly shorter than the current Z lens length (too short, as I mentioned), but the 15-35/2.8 in that patent is only a little bit shorter could be made at the same length with that basic optical formula.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
