Well, I won't threaten to leave Canon if they do not release a 35 1.2L this year... because I won't in any case.
Nice. I had decided not to preorder it because the ship date listed at the announcement was after our planned departure for Italy. However, when CR posted an in-stock notice for Adorama on June 23, I ordered immediately. UPS delivered it a couple of days later than Adorama indicated when I placed the order, but the lens arrived literally one hour before we left for the airport. I took a test shot, then stuck it in the bag for the trip. It's a great little lens especially on the R8 (and makes a nice body cap for the R3, as the EF 40/2.8 did for the 1D X).
I suspect that's true. The EF 50/1.2L and EF 85/1.2L II had an old optical design (some say 'dreamy look' wide open, others just say 'soft'...personally, I'm in the latter group and usually shot the 85/1.2L II at around f/2). The RF lenses are bigger and heavier but optically excellent wide open. The EF 35/1.4L II is optically excellent, much improved over the MkI especially with the BR element (blue goo) to reduce the CA. It's also relatively recent. Canon will likely do something to justify upgrading and the increased cost for the 35/1.4L, and an f/1.2 aperture meets the need for an otherwise excellent lens.
Is the 70-135mm zoom lens still talked about? Or has Canon scraped their plans about this lens?
This is assuming that price depreciation is linear and directly dependant on age and a newer version being available. The current price of some of the top their EF glass isn't going to be this low going forwards. Once EF lenses are no longer going to be available, then the quality stuff's prices will rise. The RF lenses are ridiculously over priced. Sure, there are great, but we are paying a premium for the exclusivity of the RF mount. Canon are selling less gear than before, but making a far higher profit with their lenses than previously. Canon will have to re-evaluate their pricing model once the likes of Tamron and Sigma enter the RF lens market. Tamron is making some really interesting lenses for other Mirrorless mounts. The new 70-180mm f2.8 is tiny, light and quite spectacularly sharp. It's less than half the price of the RF version.Let me just say that, with all the EF lens being around for so many years, buying now a brand new EF lens wouldn't be a great purchase from a cost/benefits point of view...on the used market you find them for 50% to 80% less, and there would be even more sold by people when RF gaps will be closed.
Example (it's not a RF gap, but I can compare as I acquired it exactly 12 months ago), buying an EF 24-70 f2.8 II today is 2.140€ price list on canon website, and between 1.500€ and 1800€ buying from any reputable retail shop.
I paid for it 610€ shipped (in summer you make super good deals on open auctions on eBay!)...so I would not fear reduction of catalogues, out of stock etc, EF lenses will be available for years, or decades, pretty everywhere on used market. Of course they would not get serviced after a certain period (in Europe, if I recall correctly, spare parts must be available at least up to 10 years after discontinuing a product), but if they discontinue the 24-70 today, the service will stop at the same time, regardless if it was bought used or new.
So I wouldn't personally worry about EF discontinuation, I would just consider all EF's as entirely discontinued starting from the day of the last lens was presented, which is 2018 according to Camera Museum.
...new lenses?! C'mon, let's get me my RF 50 f1.4 and finally make me happy ahah!(...sadly, having just sold the 50 Art for the 40 Art, if they really present it, which I'm sure will NOT happen, I'm not going to buy it...and so they probably will really present it, just to slap me in the face!)
EF 24/1.4 mk2 had brutal coma/astigmatism abberations. See for example https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3391473
It depends on what I'm shooting. If it's fungi, then it's usually around 1:1. Other stuff, a lot further back.
I definitely think such a lens needs to exist for RF-S shooters.
... if we're lucky. But, Canon may tell APSC users to just mount a full-frame 11-24 and shoot to their heart's content.
What about reliability, as you say you was in a rental? I had a copy (in 2013) that had IS failure; looking online at the time I saw many complaints about the IS failure, and I asked Canon to repair it for free (bringing proofs of all the online complaints), but in the end I had to pay for the entire work. I then sold it.
As explained in a parallel thread, the RF 24-105/4 on an R8 will deliver better overall performance in a lighter package than your 7DII + EF-S 17-55/2.8, and for not much more money.
