Two new RF L mount lenses rumored for 2021 [CR1]

[docsmith]

ha ha that's an 8inch big telescope! (although this has 200mm real glass diameter and its materials increase this) but still 20cm (OK 22cm) is almost the length of the 400mm DO II lens!!!!!

Ha....ok, that got me wondering, which lens length would be closest to 201 mm.....I did not have to look far, the 70-200 f/2.8 III is 199 mm.

But, that seemed off to me as I own the 500 f/4 II, so I just started playing with it and the dimensions I am quoting from TDP seem to correspond more to the lens hood than the actual front element. I measured my front element to be ~5.8" or 148 mm. TDP lists it at 170 mm or 6.7". That is about what I get for the lens hood to the actual knob on the hood or from the barrel to the bottom of the foot.

But, yeah, this is a big lens. But, honestly, what will keep me from buying one will be the price point.

 

[tron]

I do have that lens but I am using it from the inside of my car or on a tripod most of the time. I rarely handheld it when I had to and got some nice pictures but it's heavy. When handholding I prefer to use my 400DO II or lately Nikon's 500mmPF 5.6

 

[MDM@ canon rumors]

Try the handy RF 70-200 2.8. Take a step back for groups of people.

Not in my dream

 

[SecureGSM]

I really hope the lens is a 500 mm f4. I would buy it on the release date. A 500 mm f2.8 would be huge and too big.

I really hope this lens is 400mm F2.2 instead. Would have a similarly sized front element at around 178mm. But... that’s 2/3 of a stop faster than F2.8. Probably would be weighting similar to the 400/2.8 IS II L. I would be seriously tempted...

 

[Lance vdv]

Swap that 2.8 for a 5.6 and ill order it NOW!

Had so many issues travelling for work this year weight wise. My two dream lenses for RF this year would be 500mm f/5.6 and 300mm f/4. Both TINY and light......GO CANON GO

 

[tron]

They can make a 500mm 2.8 and be the best or they can make a 500 5.6 DO and be richer! My humble opinion. Of course they know better.

 

[usern4cr]

They can make a 500mm 2.8 and be the best or they can make a 500 5.6 DO and be richer! My humble opinion. Of course they know better.

Maybe they'll make both

 

[Michael Clark]

There is no reason Canon can’t make both a 500 f2.8 and a 250 f2, they are similar statement lenses to the early EF lenses like the 200 f1.8 and the 50 f1.0 and the 1,200mm f5.6 and would make a lot of sense if launched with a 1 series R body.

But the prices are going to be eye watering and they are going to have to use DO elements to keep the size and weight down to manageable levels. I used to shoot tennis and it wasn’t unusual to see ten Canon 200f1.8 and f2’s in the photo pit, but I’d think 250mm might be a bit too long for them. Wide field Astro was another big market for the various super fast 200’s, indeed the very rare reverse engineered FDn 200 f1.8 version collect huge money because they don’t need power for the focus by wire af motor, though many of them have issues with cloudy elements due to age nowadays.

Of course this brings us neatly to the legendary and very rarely seen Canon 300mm f1.8. https://petapixel.com/2017/04/27/canon-300mm-f1-8-yes-monster-lens-exists/
Scale that lens up 10-15% and you’d have your 500mm f2.8 DO.

View attachment 192861

PE 300mm f1.8. EF mount and AF.

View attachment 192860

Possibilities for what, exactly, "PE" stands for:

PE = Physically Enormous
PE = Prohibitively Expensive
PE = The class required as a prerequisite to be able to handle this one
PE = Prototype EOS

 

[Michael Clark]

Where are the 1x Macros at around 100mm and 180/200mm focal lengths?

In the EF mount.

 

[Michael Clark]

I wonder if the two lens would be a 250 mm f2 and and 500 f4? The front element would be essentially the same size in both and that would save on manufacturing cost.

The diameter might be the same, but the shapes would need to be entirely different if the material used for both had the same index of refraction.

 

[Michael Clark]

I still wish Canon would come out with a 120-300 f/2.8, or something like that. Hard to swallow that Nikon has such a useful lens and Canon doesn't.

Sigma makes a pretty good 120-300/2.8 Sports in EF mount.

 

[Michael Clark]

View attachment 192887

Where does one place the line between f/4.5 and f/5 on such graphs? At the point where the ratio is first measurably narrower than f/4.5 (f/4.5001)? At the aperture halfway between f/4.5 and f/5 (f/4.7568)? Or just past the last aperture measurably wider than f/5 (f/4.9999)?

Where would the lines be on a graph that shows it in half stops?

 

[Chaitanya]

In the EF mount.

EF 180 is just too slow for AF compared to Sigma 180mm OS(now discontinued) also lacks weather sealing, stabilisation and build is quite mediocre at best. As for 100mm L it sure can do with an RF update with new added features- higher max mag ratio.

 

[Bdbtoys]

Possibilities for what, exactly, "PE" stands for:

PE = Physically Enormous
PE = Prohibitively Expensive
PE = The class required as a prerequisite to be able to handle this one
PE = Prototype EOS

I had a video card that used a PE suffix for 'Platinum Edition'. It was a limited run, short supply, high demand item that most couldn't find it anywhere... it ended up being widely dubbed as the "Phantom Edition".

 

[richperson]

Sigma makes a pretty good 120-300/2.8 Sports in EF mount.

Many seem to complain about the AF speed (slow) and sharpness (or lack thereof). And Canon should be able to optimize one for the RF mount, which should perform better and maybe be significantly lighter.

 

[Skux]

Sorry wrong thread

 

[geo07]

Continue reading...

A 250 mm is a good idea : different from the 70-200 and not so big as 300mm. I am very intrested but the price should be very high, too high!! its sure i would prefer a 2.8/250 !! but canon want build and sell very high end lenses. I dont know if its not a mystake because no many people can buy lenses at 5000 euors or more....

 

[Michael Clark]

EF 180 is just too slow for AF compared to Sigma 180mm OS(now discontinued) also lacks weather sealing, stabilisation and build is quite mediocre at best. As for 100mm L it sure can do with an RF update with new added features- higher max mag ratio.

Who uses AF when doing macro work? Set the lens at MFD and then move the camera on the focus rail until the subject is in focus.

 

[Michael Clark]

Many seem to complain about the AF speed (slow) and sharpness (or lack thereof). And Canon should be able to optimize one for the RF mount, which should perform better and maybe be significantly lighter.

I've seen excellent work done with it. Those who complain about softness on the long end need to either learn how to do AFMA (a necessary evil with longer focal lengths when using a DSLR) or improve their camera stabilization technique up to the level needed to shoot more demanding longer focal lengths.

 

[Chaitanya]

Who uses AF when doing macro work? Set the lens at MFD and then move the camera on the focus rail until the subject is in focus.

Many people use AF for macro, it's very useful for butterflies, lizards, amphibians and snakes. For dead subjects (or even flowers in field) on table using MF with focus rails for stacking is appropriate but using rails and tripod in field in harsh conditions is slow and a sure shot method to miss the moment. For both these photos I relied on AF of 100mm L and both were shot during Monsoons in western ghats in forest filled with fog(technically they were clouds that bring monsoon rains with 100% humidity).
Nyctibatrachus petraeus (3) by Chaitanya Shukla, on Flickr
IMG_9039 by Chaitanya Shukla, on Flickr