Canon plans to develop more lenses that no one has done before
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Well, for decent lenses you first need decent bodies. An R7 doesn't cut it anymore and looks dated by comparison to the other manufacturers. (I own an R7 too)
Upvote
0
No one has ever done a 180 or 200mm f2.8 macrolens, my wishlist for:
.
- Same (or better) optical quality as the EF 180 mm
- 1:1 magnification
- Fast AF
- Compatible with RF extenders (for increased working distance with dragonflies, butterflies and other insects)
- Sufficient number of aperture blades for a round opening with good bokeh
- Image stabilization
- Internal focusing (like the EF 180mm)
- Focus limiter (from closest focus to +/- 1 meter)
- Removable tripod collar
- Weight: equivalent to, or lighter than, the EF 180mm
- Spherical Aberration Control
- Focus shift
.
Upvote
0
"lenses with specifications that have never been seen before and that no one can imagine yet"!
10-20/4, 100-300/2.8, 28-70/2, 200-800, 600&800 f11 fit that description. already
200-500/4+1.4 would be unique but Nikon's 200-500/5.6 is close.
Auto focus TS lenses would be pretty impressive and pretty expensive!
If the 1.4-2x TC would be another crazy optic though especially if it corrected for 1x/1.4x/2x options in one.
People's imagination can be pretty impressive but there are still EF lenses that aren't replaced yet eg 8-15/4,180/3.5 macro and MP-E 65/2.8 1-5x
Crazy halo lenses like the 50/1 Noct are unlikely to move any needle or improve Canon's reputation for great optics.
Most of the requests from the punters are to keep up with competitor offering eg 14/1.4, 150-600mm, 500/5.6 etc
Unfortunately, the mid range is an area that could be improved with the 50/1.4 being most obvious but Iezuka-san doesn't mention that area.
10-20/4, 100-300/2.8, 28-70/2, 200-800, 600&800 f11 fit that description. already
200-500/4+1.4 would be unique but Nikon's 200-500/5.6 is close.
Auto focus TS lenses would be pretty impressive and pretty expensive!
If the 1.4-2x TC would be another crazy optic though especially if it corrected for 1x/1.4x/2x options in one.
People's imagination can be pretty impressive but there are still EF lenses that aren't replaced yet eg 8-15/4,180/3.5 macro and MP-E 65/2.8 1-5x
Crazy halo lenses like the 50/1 Noct are unlikely to move any needle or improve Canon's reputation for great optics.
Most of the requests from the punters are to keep up with competitor offering eg 14/1.4, 150-600mm, 500/5.6 etc
Unfortunately, the mid range is an area that could be improved with the 50/1.4 being most obvious but Iezuka-san doesn't mention that area.
Upvote
0
The only one lens I'm waiting for, expands the regular 2,8/24-105 to a really good 2,8/24-200 ... with extenders!
Upvote
0
Hi there !
!s the "L" label not compatible with RF-S ?
I am happy with my R5 and a bunch of good lenses, but I would also appreciate a good R7 Mk II with a BSI sensor and some excellent Zooms like was the famous EF 17-55 f2,8 IS, but that time with the "L" label. If they don't plan to do that, at least, they have to open their RF-S mount to third-party manufacturers like Sigma and Tamron for instance. This would help them selling APS-C gears and get some more market-shares. The 100-500 zoom is pretty good and underlines the interest of an R7 MkII. Wild-life photographers would appreciate that combo.
About lenses, I think the new-born RF 35mm f1,4 is really an excellent idea and they have to do the same with an RF 24mm f1,4. No doubt those two would be top-sellers...
In addition, the macro-segment is still unsatisfactory and I am not that much enthusiast with their 24, 35 and 85 mm products. I have owned all three and finally replaced them by the RF 100mm f2,8 IS. From the design point of view, that one did not need "gadgets" like the SA control and, to be honest, the Nikon equivalent is still a bit better as I could see and test with a good friend... And what are they doing with macro-extension rings?
Of course, "the trinity" f2,8 zooms is in my kit: I stay traditional... The 85 mm f1.2 is fantastic: a reference for life-time !
Cheers !
Michel
!s the "L" label not compatible with RF-S ?
I am happy with my R5 and a bunch of good lenses, but I would also appreciate a good R7 Mk II with a BSI sensor and some excellent Zooms like was the famous EF 17-55 f2,8 IS, but that time with the "L" label. If they don't plan to do that, at least, they have to open their RF-S mount to third-party manufacturers like Sigma and Tamron for instance. This would help them selling APS-C gears and get some more market-shares. The 100-500 zoom is pretty good and underlines the interest of an R7 MkII. Wild-life photographers would appreciate that combo.
About lenses, I think the new-born RF 35mm f1,4 is really an excellent idea and they have to do the same with an RF 24mm f1,4. No doubt those two would be top-sellers...
In addition, the macro-segment is still unsatisfactory and I am not that much enthusiast with their 24, 35 and 85 mm products. I have owned all three and finally replaced them by the RF 100mm f2,8 IS. From the design point of view, that one did not need "gadgets" like the SA control and, to be honest, the Nikon equivalent is still a bit better as I could see and test with a good friend... And what are they doing with macro-extension rings?
Of course, "the trinity" f2,8 zooms is in my kit: I stay traditional... The 85 mm f1.2 is fantastic: a reference for life-time !
Cheers !
Michel
Upvote
0
I’d love to see a second attempt at a standard f2 zoom - but starting at 24mm. I find the 24mm end more important than the 70 end when I’m shooting an event and inevitably have a second body with something longer anyway. Heck, try 20-50mm f2 or something!
I’d also love to see next gen of big whites (400 2.8, 600 f4) incorporate 1.4x teleconverters, but that’s not exactly new, just playing catch-up with Nikon!
I’d also love to see next gen of big whites (400 2.8, 600 f4) incorporate 1.4x teleconverters, but that’s not exactly new, just playing catch-up with Nikon!
Upvote
0
Halo lenses like a 1-100mm f0.1L are now possible now that Canon has mastered the art of digital yoga, stretching an image from apsc coverage+black corners into full frame.
It's cool to do stuff that no one has done before but please stop that bs please? Digital corrections are fine, until you go overboard in *cutting corners* with the optical design.
It's cool to do stuff that no one has done before but please stop that bs please? Digital corrections are fine, until you go overboard in *cutting corners* with the optical design.
Upvote
0
My copy is sharper than my copies of the EF100 non-L en EF100L. My RF100L seems better, but it’s hard to say if that’s sharpness or contrast.
It also balances surprisingly well on the M6II.
Upvote
0
Sigma had a 180mm f/2.8 macro and launched a version with OS just before they announced the global vision line.
They are hard to find on the second hand market in .nl, so I assume people are happy with them
Upvote
0
Wondering if they'll announce it with the R5II.
With the new 35mm VCM we learnt that "cutting corners" takes all it sense.
Upvote
0
Why wouldn't it? An RF 70-200mm f/2 would be almost identical in dimensions to the RF 100-300mm f/2.8 and could share many parts. The RF 100-300mm f/2.8 has an entrance pupil of 106mm (what I calculated) and a filter size of 112mm
Also it would complete the Trinity: RF 200-500mm f/4 (rumoured), RF 100-300mm f/2.8 & RF 70-200 f/2
Last edited:
Upvote
0
As an intensive user of the MPE-65, I am impatient to see what Canon can develop to replace it in the RF series. And as a current user of the RF 100 macro, I would adore to have a RF 200 macro.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
