An f/1.8 Macro? Almost all 1:1 macros stop cold at f/2.8 I thought.
If it's a macro, I wonder if it's potentially only 1:2. Or has that crop feature of the inset illumination around the front element.
- A
Upvote
0
Here’s the full list of gear Canon will announce on September 5
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
An f/1.8 Macro? Almost all 1:1 macros stop cold at f/2.8 I thought.
If it's a macro, I wonder if it's potentially only 1:2. Or has that crop feature of the inset illumination around the front element.
- A
This is all quite likely, but where are the ND and CPL internal adaptors for the EOS R then? If there is enough room on the back of the RF lens to have an ND filter between it and the sensor when adapted to the EOS M series, then there has to be exactly the same room available within the EOS R. I doubt this would be wasted as it would seem somewhat odd that the EOS M APS-C cameras get to use this feature and their new mirrorless FF camera doesn't.
Upvote
0
I don't know anything further than what has been reported on CR. I speculated that EF-R might able to accommodate a bigger sensor than EF. There have been speculations that EF-R mount through a proper design could result in smaller/lighter lenses. There is also the faster comms protocol patent. I presume that if Canon has a patent for that, they do see the need for it. ... likely it's for a faster comms. protocol although I cannot fathom why there is a need for faster communications between lens and body.
Assuming that the flange distances for EF-R is also shorter; similar to EF-M, then there shouldn't be any protrusion. assuming that the adapters are for EF-R on M bodies, then the EF-R flange distance must be longer than EF-M flange distance, so definitely no protrusion into M body.
Upvote
0
We're off-topic, but all interested in this should head to LR and read Uncle Rog's take of it. It's the same damn lens.
- A
Upvote
0
Doubtful, because the M.ADAP R is almost certainly an adapter to use RF lenses on the EOS M bodies, and that would not be possible in your scenario where the lenses require sensor curvature.
Upvote
0
It's worth noting that you do NOT need a new physical mount to take advantage of the faster comms protocol patent as defined. It describes a series of electronic messages sent between the body and the lens to determine if it's capable of faster communication or not. If both the body and lens can talk faster, they talk faster. Otherwise it defaults to the slower speed. EF lenses right now (the new 70-200) could be using this.
This is exactly the same as the way USB -> USB 2 evolved using exactly the same connector but a faster protocol.
Upvote
0
Not at all. That's not how Canon's naming works.
This one is neither EF, 'II', or IS = it's a new lens. Might be [ducking from rocks being thrown] the same optical formula as the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM II but I doubt it -- that would require a lens tube spacer to get back to EF, so it would not be small. My guess is that it's an altogether new design.
And no IS on that one -- a stone cold stabilized EF lens -- is probably the biggest tell that we're getting IBIS.
- A
Upvote
0
Has Canon ever used 'M' as a shorthand for Macro in their naming? I always thought that they wrote out the full word 'Macro' (which is not technically a standalone word other than for software I believe).
Agree on IBIS. No IS on the 24-105 seems like a clear tell there -- unless they really want to keep the kit zoom small.
- A
Upvote
0
...or Canon is winding us up and will go thin + EF adaptor and they just haven't leaked the EF adaptor yet.
I think you're probably right -- which means this will not be a thin mount body. Wow.
Sorry, just processing this now. If true, wow.
- A
Upvote
0
Not suggesting Canon is using M as an abbreviation for Macro, I’m suggesting Nokish. or whoever posted the translation is doing that. Just like they listed the kit as “Canon EOS R w/24-105mm f/4L” where clearly Canon would list it as “Canon EOS R | RF 24-105mm f/4L USM Kit”.
Upvote
0
?Roger states that even Canon said the two lenses are the same. But are we 100% certain? Roger said of the IS unit: "These are self-contained units that we generally don’t disassemble." I know this is wishful thinking (about IBIS), but what if Canon updated this lens with dual IS capability?
Upvote
0
You're right, the Zeiss 100mm f/2 Macro Planar stops already at 1:2 closest distance. Canon's EF 35mm macro IS STM does allow for 1:1, but that's an f/2.8 lens again (and no FF design). Maybe the possibility of moving the rear lens element closer to the sensor without the mirror box allows for a bigger image ratio with a faster than f/2.8 lens.
Upvote
0
Because Canon said it was the same, I believe. It's the same lens with a paint job and a coating.
Uncle Rog: "If you think there’s an optical or performance difference, please contact me about some Tennessee Beach-front property I have for sale."
I think you'll get a lovely bump in flare control with that new coating and that's about it.
- A
Upvote
0
So are all the lenses a "roadmap" or a day one thing? If they are out of the gate, that is pretty good of a lineup. I assume they are a going to be out day one or closely following. As others have said, I'm also interested in what makes an R lens different and what advantages it brings on an R body that cannot be attained otherwise, assuming it shares the same EF mount.
Upvote
0
Its likely translated to Japanese from Chinese and then to English, so the terms are going to end up misleading people. It always happens that way.
When the first words are "I have taught from overseas sources what Canon confirmed with a new product announced in September. " that likely means its first translated from another language to Japanese.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
