RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
shawnphoto Regular Member • Posts: 495
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

quiquae wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

joenj wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Agree on the weight while traveling. But I've got to believe a wedding or event shooter will love a much lighter version of this staple lens. Looking forward to seeing the results.

But I'm really looking forward to an f4 version...

There have been no rumors of an F/4. But there have been rumors of a 16-28 F/2 non-IS. It could mean that besides the 2.8 IS trinity there is a F/2 non-IS trinity which could mean no plans for a third i.e. F/4 trinity.

Understood, but I'd still love to see what Canon could do to lighten my bag with some f4 RF lenses. Honestly, I have no need for extra speed.

In the meantime, I'll suffer with the lenses I have; the RF 24-105 and EF 70-300 L.

The problem with f/4 lenses is that they're totally antiquated by modern standards. There's no reason to make them other than lightweight. And it seems Canon is pulling out all the stops to keep their fast glass relatively light this time around...

In other words, don't be surprised if an f/4 trinity never happens for the RF mount.

An interesting story that might scare children at night, if it weren't for the fact that RF 24-105 *F4* L was announced on launch day....

Exactly my point actually. The RF 24-105mm completely negates any urgency to create an f/4 “trinity”.

BTW it is the “kit lens” for the RF mount. Which tells you about how special Canon thinks an f/4 lens is.

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
Abu Mahendra Veteran Member • Posts: 5,299
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
2

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

-- hide signature --

>> I'm already lovin' my Canon 35IS lens! <<

 Abu Mahendra's gear list:Abu Mahendra's gear list
Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +5 more
dmanthree
dmanthree Veteran Member • Posts: 8,067
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

joenj wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Agree on the weight while traveling. But I've got to believe a wedding or event shooter will love a much lighter version of this staple lens. Looking forward to seeing the results.

But I'm really looking forward to an f4 version...

There have been no rumors of an F/4. But there have been rumors of a 16-28 F/2 non-IS. It could mean that besides the 2.8 IS trinity there is a F/2 non-IS trinity which could mean no plans for a third i.e. F/4 trinity.

Understood, but I'd still love to see what Canon could do to lighten my bag with some f4 RF lenses. Honestly, I have no need for extra speed.

In the meantime, I'll suffer with the lenses I have; the RF 24-105 and EF 70-300 L.

The problem with f/4 lenses is that they're totally antiquated by modern standards. There's no reason to make them other than lightweight. And it seems Canon is pulling out all the stops to keep their fast glass relatively light this time around...

In other words, don't be surprised if an f/4 trinity never happens for the RF mount.

Oh, I get that. But I'm just hoping, really.

-- hide signature --

---enjoys shooting with inferior gear---

dmanthree
dmanthree Veteran Member • Posts: 8,067
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
2

shawnphoto wrote:

quiquae wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

joenj wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Agree on the weight while traveling. But I've got to believe a wedding or event shooter will love a much lighter version of this staple lens. Looking forward to seeing the results.

But I'm really looking forward to an f4 version...

There have been no rumors of an F/4. But there have been rumors of a 16-28 F/2 non-IS. It could mean that besides the 2.8 IS trinity there is a F/2 non-IS trinity which could mean no plans for a third i.e. F/4 trinity.

Understood, but I'd still love to see what Canon could do to lighten my bag with some f4 RF lenses. Honestly, I have no need for extra speed.

In the meantime, I'll suffer with the lenses I have; the RF 24-105 and EF 70-300 L.

The problem with f/4 lenses is that they're totally antiquated by modern standards. There's no reason to make them other than lightweight. And it seems Canon is pulling out all the stops to keep their fast glass relatively light this time around...

In other words, don't be surprised if an f/4 trinity never happens for the RF mount.

An interesting story that might scare children at night, if it weren't for the fact that RF 24-105 *F4* L was announced on launch day....

Exactly my point actually. The RF 24-105mm completely negates any urgency to create an f/4 “trinity”.

BTW it is the “kit lens” for the RF mount. Which tells you about how special Canon thinks an f/4 lens is.

Not in my view. I'd love an ultra wide f4 zoom, and an RF 70-300 f4/5.6.

And the RF 24-105 goes *way* beyond the usual "kit" lens. It's an L through and through and capable of stellar results.

-- hide signature --

---enjoys shooting with inferior gear---

dmanthree
dmanthree Veteran Member • Posts: 8,067
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
2

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

-- hide signature --

---enjoys shooting with inferior gear---

dmanthree
dmanthree Veteran Member • Posts: 8,067
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

24Peter wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Pretty impressive assuming the optics match those of the EF mk3.

I switched to Nikon last year - but that's (EF 70-200 2.8 III) a lens I miss!

Switched? To....God forbid...

My sympathies.

-- hide signature --

---enjoys shooting with inferior gear---

shawnphoto Regular Member • Posts: 495
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
OP quiquae Senior Member • Posts: 1,601
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
5

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

Sony FE 12-24 has half the mass and half the price tag of EF 11-24. Many people will gladly live with negative 1mm on the wide end to get negative 500g and negative $1200.

Yes, it is possible that Canon would feel pressured to make an RF 11-24 (or even a 10-24) rather than a 12-24 in order to placate existing EF 11-24 users, but they won’t get away with not making anything to succeed EF 11-24 for much longer.

 quiquae's gear list:quiquae's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD400 Canon EOS M5 Canon EOS R Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM +10 more
shawnphoto Regular Member • Posts: 495
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

quiquae wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

Sony FE 12-24 has half the mass and half the price tag of EF 11-24. Many people will gladly live with negative 1mm on the wide end to get negative 500g and negative $1200.

Yes, it is possible that Canon would feel pressured to make an RF 11-24 (or even a 10-24) rather than a 12-24 in order to placate existing EF 11-24 users, but they won’t get away with not making anything to succeed EF 11-24 for much longer.

They kind of have to do something in this range since this is supposedly where mirrorless improves over DSLR’s. So far so good with the 15-35mm. My only hope is that they can make the RF UWA a bit faster. Sigma has done a 14-24 f/2.8 on EF so what can Canon come up with? Is a 12-24 f/2.8 within reason for RF?

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
dmanthree
dmanthree Veteran Member • Posts: 8,067
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
4

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

What a strange question! They'd make it for the same reason they're making an RF 24-70, 70-200, and 24-105: because the new mount allows them to produce better lenses! Taking your logic one step further, why bother to make RF lenses at all?

-- hide signature --

---enjoys shooting with inferior gear---

evilmagicnut Regular Member • Posts: 465
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
1

shawnphoto wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Pretty impressive assuming the optics match those of the EF mk3.

I think it will exceed the EF mk3. It will have all the new coatings and the new design subtracts 5 elements. This theoretically should make the lens brighter, more contrasty, and less prone to flare.

I sincerely doubt it will not exceed the EF mk3 by a significant margin.

By this logic, they should simply go down to one element. Problem solved!  I don't pretend to understand the trade-offs of lens design but I don't think they throw in more elements than necessary for the fun of it.

I doubt that it will exceed the mk3 in any way other than weight and size. I may hope for improved transmission. Any beat on the mk3 is diminishing returns. There's so little room left for improvement.

shawnphoto Regular Member • Posts: 495
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

evilmagicnut wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Pretty impressive assuming the optics match those of the EF mk3.

I think it will exceed the EF mk3. It will have all the new coatings and the new design subtracts 5 elements. This theoretically should make the lens brighter, more contrasty, and less prone to flare.

I sincerely doubt it will not exceed the EF mk3 by a significant margin.

By this logic, they should simply go down to one element. Problem solved! I don't pretend to understand the trade-offs of lens design but I don't think they throw in more elements than necessary for the fun of it.

I doubt that it will exceed the mk3 in any way other than weight and size. I may hope for improved transmission. Any beat on the mk3 is diminishing returns. There's so little room left for improvement.

There are different ways to achieve goals in lens design. For instance you can add in elements, you can make more complex elements, you can use exotic glasses or coatings.

If two lenses accomplish the same goals (well corrected) the one with 20% fewer elements will be better. Assuming that the same quality of glass and coatings are used in both of course.

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
Photomonkey Senior Member • Posts: 2,669
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
3

shawnphoto wrote:

evilmagicnut wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Pretty impressive assuming the optics match those of the EF mk3.

I think it will exceed the EF mk3. It will have all the new coatings and the new design subtracts 5 elements. This theoretically should make the lens brighter, more contrasty, and less prone to flare.

I sincerely doubt it will not exceed the EF mk3 by a significant margin.

By this logic, they should simply go down to one element. Problem solved! I don't pretend to understand the trade-offs of lens design but I don't think they throw in more elements than necessary for the fun of it.

I doubt that it will exceed the mk3 in any way other than weight and size. I may hope for improved transmission. Any beat on the mk3 is diminishing returns. There's so little room left for improvement.

There are different ways to achieve goals in lens design. For instance you can add in elements, you can make more complex elements, you can use exotic glasses or coatings.

If two lenses accomplish the same goals (well corrected) the one with 20% fewer elements will be better. Assuming that the same quality of glass and coatings are used in both of course.

Optical engineers do not add lens elements for no reason. The current lens, as brilliant a performer as it is , does have a ton of elements that introduce surfaces that will reduce contrast and transmission. That is just a fact.

The design of the new lens with extending barrel allows the designers to entirely re-think the design. As such they have been able to (apparently) reduce the number of elements while, hopefully, maintaining or improving IQ. The advantages in surface reduction showing up in increased contrast and transmission and lower manufacturing costs and possibly ease of assembly.

 Photomonkey's gear list:Photomonkey's gear list
Kodak Pixpro S-1
Abu Mahendra Veteran Member • Posts: 5,299
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
1

dmanthree wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

What a strange question! They'd make it for the same reason they're making an RF 24-70, 70-200, and 24-105: because the new mount allows them to produce better lenses! Taking your logic one step further, why bother to make RF lenses at all?

The logic is strange indeed. The other questionable bit is the rejection that f/4 lenses make sense. In fact, with the ever increasing low-light sensitivity of sensors, slower lenses make ever  increasing sense.

-- hide signature --

>> I'm already lovin' my Canon 35IS lens! <<

 Abu Mahendra's gear list:Abu Mahendra's gear list
Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM +5 more
Bhotoz Senior Member • Posts: 1,119
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

Abu Mahendra wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

What a strange question! They'd make it for the same reason they're making an RF 24-70, 70-200, and 24-105: because the new mount allows them to produce better lenses! Taking your logic one step further, why bother to make RF lenses at all?

The logic is strange indeed. The other questionable bit is the rejection that f/4 lenses make sense. In fact, with the ever increasing low-light sensitivity of sensors, slower lenses make ever increasing sense.

I think it's great we (will) have choices. Some want smallish and light f4-zooms, some a bit brighter f2.8-zooms and some like those enormous f2-zooms. Pick the poison you want and can afford!

shawnphoto Regular Member • Posts: 495
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

Abu Mahendra wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

What a strange question! They'd make it for the same reason they're making an RF 24-70, 70-200, and 24-105: because the new mount allows them to produce better lenses! Taking your logic one step further, why bother to make RF lenses at all?

The logic is strange indeed. The other questionable bit is the rejection that f/4 lenses make sense. In fact, with the ever increasing low-light sensitivity of sensors, slower lenses make ever increasing sense.

What is strange about the logic? I don't see the point of making a 12-24 f/4 when they already make an 11-24 f/4. Presumably they can make the 11-24 f/4 much smaller and lighter on RF?

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
shawnphoto Regular Member • Posts: 495
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

dmanthree wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

joenj wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Agree on the weight while traveling. But I've got to believe a wedding or event shooter will love a much lighter version of this staple lens. Looking forward to seeing the results.

But I'm really looking forward to an f4 version...

There have been no rumors of an F/4. But there have been rumors of a 16-28 F/2 non-IS. It could mean that besides the 2.8 IS trinity there is a F/2 non-IS trinity which could mean no plans for a third i.e. F/4 trinity.

Understood, but I'd still love to see what Canon could do to lighten my bag with some f4 RF lenses. Honestly, I have no need for extra speed.

In the meantime, I'll suffer with the lenses I have; the RF 24-105 and EF 70-300 L.

The problem with f/4 lenses is that they're totally antiquated by modern standards. There's no reason to make them other than lightweight. And it seems Canon is pulling out all the stops to keep their fast glass relatively light this time around...

In other words, don't be surprised if an f/4 trinity never happens for the RF mount.

Oh, I get that. But I'm just hoping, really.

Yeah, it's like look at us, we made tiny little copies of real lenses... Basically it's like a joke to make a 70-200 f/4 in 2019. Now if they make a 70-300 f/4, or something that is actually interesting and expands what photographers can do, then yeah, go for it. Otherwise why bother is my honest opinion... Canon already lost out to Sony for this round. No reason to waste time selling low margin products to the few stragglers who didn't jump ship. They need to win back the hardcore customers not court people who aren't buying real lenses.

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3
TN Args
TN Args Veteran Member • Posts: 8,695
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked
3

shawnphoto wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Abu Mahendra wrote:

Landscapers, I reckon, would appreciate a RF12-24/4. I would appreciate a RF100-300/4IS.

I'd buy both of them in a heartbeat.

Why would Canon make a 12-24 when they already make an 11-24 for EF?

What a strange question! They'd make it for the same reason they're making an RF 24-70, 70-200, and 24-105: because the new mount allows them to produce better lenses! Taking your logic one step further, why bother to make RF lenses at all?

The logic is strange indeed. The other questionable bit is the rejection that f/4 lenses make sense. In fact, with the ever increasing low-light sensitivity of sensors, slower lenses make ever increasing sense.

What is strange about the logic? I don't see the point of making a 12-24 f/4 when they already make an 11-24 f/4. Presumably they can make the 11-24 f/4 much smaller and lighter on RF?

It is strange logic if you think there is a point to the f/2.8 RF lenses 15-35, 24-70 and 70-200. After all, they are all available in EF as well.

However, your logic is OK if you are also saying that there is no point in those RF lenses I listed above. Hey, why make any RF lens that is already available in EF, right?

cheers

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Sigma dp0 Quattro Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +7 more
BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,014
Re: RF 70-200F2.8L specs leaked

I guess we’ll find out pretty soon what compromises were made and how much improvement is there...  it’s going to be interesting for sure.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads