Canon will release a trio of RF mount wide angle L prime lenses in the first half of 2023

[jdavidse]

I am a newly converted 28mm fan. I used to swear by the 35 as my go-to general purpose prime, but I am loving 28 much more. I am very excited about the rumor of a 28 1.4L.

 

[LSXPhotog]

A 28mm f/1.4-1.8 with a close focusing distance would be rather awesome. I am very find of 28mm on my film cameras, as well as my 18mm on Fuji. It would be pretty excellent to see what it can do.

 

[David - Sydney]

Since astro doesn't need autofocus, I wonder if a RF TS-E 14mm would be a fun option if it has low coma. Can't imagine the price tag though and autofocus was rumoured.

 

[Blue Zurich]

I'm probably gonna put my ignorance of (and non-use of) WA lenses out there, but wouldn't three lenses of 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm seem too closely spaced together?

One of the finest wide lenses I had was the Sigma 24-35 f/2. 3 primes in one.

 

[Chaitanya]

Or lack of demand.

That's more likely, given how well 1.8 sold(is heavily recommended as 2nd lens after kit lens for starters) and 1.2 being bought by Pros have rarely seen 1.4 in recent years(I do own a Pentax SMC-M 50mm 1.4 though along with couple of vinatage K mount lenses)

 

[Snapster]

I'm definitely not onboard with Canon's strategy of offering only entry level lenses and uber expensive and bulky L lenses.

I need my lenses weather sealed so that pretty much rules out the cheaper lenses. The prices rule out most L lenses. There's a massive gap between a $200 and $2500 50mm lens. I'm not going to get either and don't really understand why they won't let third party manufacturers fill that gap.

Also, lenses that weigh 500-600 grams feel perfectly balanced with R5/R6. We badly need 1.4 primes in that weight class with weather sealing.

 

[Joel C]

24, 28 and 35mm? I would really be surprised to see them all so close together like that. I would much rather see one of these in the 8-12mm range. Seeing as the only real wide angle lens in the RF line up is that strange fish eye at 5.2mm (We all know what that lens is really for...)

 

[photographer]

That’s a good point. When I was a lot younger, the 50 came in every body. That’s was it, either buy a body, kr buy one with a 50. Everything we learned said that 50 was the natural perspective (not really true). These days people either but bodies, or buy them with some zoom. I see fewer 50mm lenses over time. A few years ago, making very expensive 50s was a thing. I’m not so sure most people cared. Look at smartphones. What’s the normal? 24 to 26mm equivalent. I think that regular camera users gave come to see that as more important than 50.

It depends on what you are shooting. I shoot mainly portraits and nudes and I have a Canon RF 50 1.2 (+ other EF lenses from Canon and Sigma) and I'm looking forward to the RF 35 1.2. With mobile phones, people use wide lenses also because most mobile phones do not offer other and also because they want to capture where they are in their selfies. The main goal is not to make a good portrait, but to show that I am in Hawaii.

 

[photographer]

I wonder what the price of an RF 35 mm will be?

You are not alone. Canon RF 35 1.2 L - I would guess at a similar price to RF 50 1.2 L. And for Canon RF 35 1.4 L - let´s say price of Sigma Art 35 + 500 USD.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

I'm still hoping for a 14-28/2 to sit alongside the 28-70/2.

And a 70-135mm F2 (or 70-140mm) to complete the trinity

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Im waiting for the RF 85mm f1.4L IS USM but would definitely be interested in a 28mm f1.4L lens.

Unless you plan on getting a camera without IBIS like the R5 C there is no benefit to having IS on an 84 mm lens.

Camera + lens stabilisation | which Canon lenses work best?

With the EOS R5 and R6 cameras the first to offer in-body image stabilisation (IBIS), this can work in conjunction with Canon’s optical IS systems to offer up to 8 stops. But it’s not additive.

www.eos-magazine.com

All 85 mm lenses get the same 8 stops.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

And a 70-135mm F2 (or 70-140mm) to complete the trinity

I am all for that, but what would be the third one?
I hope you are not including the Sigma 24-35mm f/2.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I need my lenses weather sealed so that pretty much rules out the cheaper lenses.

If you need weather sealed lenses, that rules out all non-L lenses. Sorry, but L lenses are typically expensive. There have been only a few under $1K and only one of those sealed (17-40/4L, which I think barely qualifies as L from an IQ standpoint).

If you’re talking primes, to get the L moniker and the weather sealing that comes with it, they’re going to be the fastest in-class with great IQ, and that means expensive.

There's a massive gap between a $200 and $2500 50mm lens. I'm not going to get either and don't really understand why they won't let third party manufacturers fill that gap.

Canon’s goal isn’t to give you what you want. Their goal is profit, and if they can make more of that by pushing some people to buy expensive lenses and blocking 3rd parties from making AF lenses for the RF mount, then they will.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

I am all for that, but what would be the third one?
I hope you are not including the Sigma 24-35mm f/2.

Third lense is already out: the RF 28-70mm F2
Add a UWA 14-28mm F2 and a 70-135mm (or 140mm) and voila: there's your F2 trinity

 

[koenkooi]

If you need weather sealed lenses, that rules out all non-L lenses. Sorry, but L lenses are typically expensive. There have been only a few under $1K and only one of those sealed (17-40/4L, which I think barely qualifies as L from an IQ standpoint). [...]

And even that one needs a front filter added to complete the seal. The IQ is decent, if you stay at APS-H or smaller For full frame, the non-L RF16mm beats it in every metric, after optical corrections.

 

[Snapster]

Canon’s goal isn’t to give you what you want. Their goal is profit, and if they can make more of that by pushing some people to buy expensive lenses and blocking 3rd parties from making AF lenses for the RF mount, then they will.

They wont profit at all when people like me eventually switch to Sony.

I've always been a Canon shooter and decided to give the R5 a go after the R. But my next camera won't be a Canon unless we start seeing mid-tier lenses from Tamron/ Sigma/Rokinon.

It's not just about price, either. All the fast L lenses are massive. For travel photography, that's a no.

 

[scyrene]

I'm definitely not onboard with Canon's strategy of offering only entry level lenses and uber expensive and bulky L lenses.

I need my lenses weather sealed so that pretty much rules out the cheaper lenses. The prices rule out most L lenses. There's a massive gap between a $200 and $2500 50mm lens. I'm not going to get either and don't really understand why they won't let third party manufacturers fill that gap.

Also, lenses that weigh 500-600 grams feel perfectly balanced with R5/R6. We badly need 1.4 primes in that weight class with weather sealing.

Genuine question, because I can't remember - was the EF 50mm f/1.4 weather sealed? Are midrange third party primes, typically?

 

[koenkooi]

Genuine question, because I can't remember - was the EF 50mm f/1.4 weather sealed? Are midrange third party primes, typically?

It wasn't weather sealed and its AF motor exploded if you looked at a Nikon camera too long. Only 3rd parties have released "weather sealed" midrange lenses.

 

[privatebydesign]

Genuine question, because I can't remember - was the EF 50mm f/1.4 weather sealed? Are midrange third party primes, typically?

No, and no. Having said that I have has an EF 50 f1.4 rolling around in my bags for over 20 years and it has outlasted half a dozen L series lenses.

 

[neuroanatomist]

They wont profit at all when people like me eventually switch to Sony.

If you’re ‘not on board’ with Canon’s lens options then switch to another brand that offers what you want.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking that you represent the majority of buyers, none of us does. Canon doesn’t care about you individually.

Canon has a long history of making choices that satisfy a majority of buyers, which is why they’ve sold more ILCs than any other manufacturer every year for the past 20, and why they continue to sell more than twice as many cameras as their nearest competitor.

I’ve been on these forums a long time, and seen many people predict dire consequences for Canon if they did not add Feature X or make Product Y (not surprisingly, those are things the people making such predictions personally desire). Yet Canon continues to dominate the market. But maybe this time you’ll be the one who is correct, and buyers will suddenly leave Canon in droves over the lack of mid-range non-L lenses that have weather sealing.



…or not.

I've always been a Canon shooter and decided to give the R5 a go after the R. But my next camera won't be a Canon unless we start seeing mid-tier lenses from Tamron/ Sigma/Rokinon.

Given that Canon has seemingly blocked 3rd party manufacturers from selling AF lenses for the RF mount, I suppose your next camera will not be a Canon. As I said, Canon doesn't care. Apparently they've already gotten a fair bit of your money anyway.

It's not just about price, either. All the fast L lenses are massive. For travel photography, that's a no.

What are your use cases for fast lenses when traveling? Personally, slow lenses are fine for me while traveling, I have lenses like the 28-70/2L and EF 85/1.4L but those stay home, not because of weight/bulk but because slower zooms and TS-E lenses meed my travel needs. I do often take the EF 11-24/4L on trips, which is not fast but is definitely massive.