Canon RF 85mm f/2 IS STM in the pipeline [CR1]

[bbasiaga]

How big and heavy are the associated R camera as going to be? The RP and SL1/2/3 are only slightly larger than the M5 and almost exactly the same weight. My M5 with the Sigma 16 f/1.4 C lens is an absolute joy to carry compared with the 5D3 and Canon 24 f/1.4 L lens and most of the weight difference is in the body itself.

I think you'll see a range. I saw an RP in the store and it was small which I could see some value in for a travel body. I wonder if that will be the progenitor of the 'rebel' line replacements? Hopefully they keep something in that form factor. I think the R5 will be big like the 5D series. And a 1 series R will likely be larger still. Once a full line is released, I think they'll have it all covered.

-Brian

 

[Andy Westwood]

It is nice to have something to chat about in these dull lookdown days but thinking about it I don't think an RF 85 F2 will be made. Canon have had an EF 85mm 1.8 for years now going to F2 would be a step backwards, surely an RF 85mm 1.8 IS would be more likely and feel like an upgrade given it had IS

 

[deleteme]

100 f2 1:2 macro pleeeaaase

I love my EF 100 macro but I lament the unloved EF100 f2. It is the unsung sweet spot of portrait lenses.
I had the EF 85 f1.8 and while it did heroic work, it was too short for my comfort for portrait work. The 135 f2 is no doubt superb but too long for my studio.

 

[LensFungus]

I don't expect the lens to fight CAs as good as the RF 85mm 1.2L but if shooting open wide is better than shooting open wide with popular lenses like the Sony 85mm 1.8 or the Fujifilm 56mm 1.2, I would love to own it.

 

[VICYASA]

RF 16mm RF f/2 IS STM

Thank you!

 

[Ozarker]

Any news here is good news! Nice to see y'all posting! I hope you are all doing well and hope those of you who are still able to work still can.

 

[SteveC]

The EF 85 mm f/1.8 isn't at all bulky, so perhaps they could give it that slight bump in aperture?

 

[slclick]

So we got stiffed as EF users, for the most important 85 and 50 IS.....thank fully my 50 has held up fantastically well.

No one would want a 50 F2 anyways.

I'd love a set of f/2 pancakes. 24/28/35/40/50 and something like a short stack of an 85. Not all of us have hard ons for super wide apertures.

 

[Architect1776]

Continue reading...

Why not non-L lenses up to 200mm f2.8? Canon used to do this and the 200mm f2.8 for amateur sports people with kids might be nice. Who knows though with high ISO's available now?

 

[IcyBergs]

I'd love a set of f/2 pancakes. 24/28/35/40/50 and something like a short stack of an 85. Not all of us have hard ons for super wide apertures.

I second you on the set of f/2 pancakes.

But if history is any indication there is a decent chance that if Canon were to release a non-pancake non-L 50 it would be faster than f/2.

 

[slclick]

I second you on the set of f/2 pancakes.

But if history is any indication there is a decent chance that if Canon were to release a non-pancake non-L 50 it would be faster than f/2.

Oh I agree, also I shouldn't have included the 50 in there, just lumped it with the 85 as as small DG design. No pickle jar. This is a CR1 though so it's all up in the air

 

[IcyBergs]

So we got stiffed as EF users, for the most important 85 and 50 IS.....thank fully my 50 has held up fantastically well.

No one would want a 50 F2 anyways.

If it's small enough, has a short MFD, cheap, and tack sharp I'd take one.

 

[NowHearThis]

I like the idea of F2 primes for RF mount. For me the 2 lenses I would want RF18/2 & RF85/2. Now I just hope they are reasonably small, light, and most importantly... affordable.

 

[SteveC]

I'd love a set of f/2 pancakes. 24/28/35/40/50 and something like a short stack of an 85. Not all of us have hard ons for super wide apertures.

Oh, now if we're talking pancakes, that's a different story altogother. I was wondering why an f/2 versus an f1/8 (which in the EF world isn't super bulky at all--but it's certainly no pancake), in another comment.

In an ideal world there'd be a series of pancakes (at whatever aperture they can manage) and a series of nice, normal sized lenses with about a 58mm filter thread on them, in whatever aperture can be managed there. Then the super-duper lenses with no size constraint on them and the letter L to boot.

 

[mb66energy]

100 f2 1:2 macro pleeeaaase

Would maybe make an L lens, but I would pay around 1000 bucks for it in an instant ...

 

[dancan]

Good idea. I still use EF system and would only change if more options are on the table. Would like many RF lenses instead of using the adaptor.
So a RF 4,0/ 70-200 is also welcome. And furthermore everything with TS.

 

[mb66energy]

The EF 85 mm f/1.8 isn't at all bulky, so perhaps they could give it that slight bump in aperture?

What about a bump in IS + at least 1:3 closeup capability?

 

[slclick]

Is the ask for IS as strong as it used to be for future IBIS bodies? Let's think in terms of keeping size and weight to a minimum. Fuji is a good model for this line of thought.

 

[picperfect]

Wow that would be awesome, small, stabilized and cheap native glass. I'm in

"cheap". oh well. I would not hold my breath. I expect € 699 MSRP for a Canon RF 85/2.0 IS.

Canon EF 85/1.8 is reasonably priced at € 375, a bit faster, but no IS.
RF 35/1.8 IS = € 549.
Tamron 85/1.8 VC = € 699.
Sony FE 85/1.8 = € 499 - but no IS.

 

[art sanchez]

Great point

"cheap". oh well. I would not hold my breath. I expect € 699 MSRP for a Canon RF 85/2.0 IS.

Canon EF 85/1.8 is reasonably priced at € 375, a bit faster, but no IS.
RF 35/1.8 IS = € 549.
Tamron 85/1.8 VC = € 699.
Sony FE 85/1.8 = € 499 - but no IS.