This is the Canon RF lens roadmap

Updates of the EF 16 and 24 TS-E’s are the most interesting for me but don’t understand the relevance of AF in a tilt and shift lens? Less distortion and sharper edges (in the 16mm) would be very welcome however.

mccasi said:

I'll say it again, we need some wide astro love! R5 is sooo good for low light... Canon teased with 14-21 F1.4 and 14-28 F2...
I don't like the Sigma 14mm F1.8, for bad coma and too narrow use case... Canon to the rescue!!!

Click to expand...

I use the 14/1.8 and I like it. Not much coma on my example but it is very limited yes, since its only 14mm.
I would love a 14-21/1.4 for Astro and for other landscapes.

bbasiaga said:

The EF 24-70f4L IS is still pretty compact and affordable even with the adapter. So there is always that to fall back on if they wait a while to put out an RF version. Although the 24-104 F4 L RF lens is pretty small and well reviewed. So we have options, which is good.

-Brian

Click to expand...

The RF 24-105, I really should consider. It is a great lens, and when wanting to carry just one lens, this would be extremely desirable.

Gazwas said:

Updates of the EF 16 and 24 TS-E’s are the most interesting for me but don’t understand the relevance of AF in a tilt and shift lens? Less distortion and sharper edges (in the 16mm) would be very welcome however.

Click to expand...

AF can probably be turned off for those who don't want it. I'd love to see a 50mm and a 90mm with AF. Portrait subjects just don't have the patience for MF anymore, though there'd still be a little fiddling to get the desired plane of focus...

I still wish for a 17-70 rumored a long time ago. If it was a f4L (OK even f/3.5-5.6L) it would be the perfect travel companion to a long tele lens (even better if it would have close up capabilities). Sometimes 24-105 is not wide enough and I do not want to carry RF15-35 2.8 since it is too big. So I revert to my trusty 5DIV with the EF16-35 f/4L IS and get a G7X MkII for the intermediate range...

Bets for that 135 1.4.... I bet for 3500$, and would be amazing (and cheap in some sense, with a 1,4x would be almost a 189mm f2)

Fran Decatta said:

Bets for that 135 1.4.... I bet for 3500$, and would be amazing (and cheap in some sense, with a 1,4x would be almost a 189mm f2)

Click to expand...

That's compelling bokeh lens. Head turner. Only DS designation missing

Conspicuous in their absence from the list: 300mm f/2.8 or any DO lenses...

privatebydesign said:

The 1200mm f8 is interesting, I wonder what, if anything, it will offer over the 600 f4 and tc? I’d expect it to be a very hard sell given its price which I would estimate to be close to breaking the $20,000 barrier.

Click to expand...

I guess that's going to be a "because we can" lens, just a bit more affordable than the nigh-mythical EF 1200mm f/5.6L.

RF 18-45? Is it something like Panasonic's 20-60 for L mount? I find those slower zooms to be attractive on the wide end but only useful in good light on the longer end.

The 1200mm is really interesting! But would be way to expensive to me^^... and you can only use it on "cold" conditions^^.

135 f1.4... oh no :'( .... this will be BIG and expensive!! I thought about a lens like the GM 135 1.8!

Lenses that I m missing here...:
f5.6 Tele Primes! Like Nikons 500 5.6!
f5.6 Zooms! Like Nikons 200-500 5.6

>100mm Macro! Like Sigma 150mm & 180mm 2.8.

Maybe a ultimate DO zoom with f8.0 and 300-800?! with 3-4KG why not?

That 135 1.4 is my 2021 spirit animal.

I'd love to know the $ of the RF 135mm f/1.4L. Where's the RF 70-135mm f/2L and the RF 14-28mm f/2L? This is starting to piss me off!!!

Give us some primes 24, 28, 35, 50mm f1.4 medium sized with USM and IS and some degree of weather sealing.
No more STM and not the huge 1.2 L.
Ok with high price.

24mm 1.8 IS STM, is this easy/cheap to make than 35mm and 85mm in RF mount?

Because canon EF prime usually get darker wider than 35mm.
Just look the EF 24mm and 28mm IS primes.

I will be purchasing the 24mm macro and the 10-24mm once announced. Having 10mm to 200mm on my trinity of lenses along with the 24mm for nice (fairly) wide gimbal shots will complete my RF line up, adding to the 35mm macro, 28-70 f2, 24-70 f2.8 and 70-700 f2.8.

Do you think telephoto lens (400 2.8, 500 f4,...) will be shorter in term of size than EF versions?

I wish they would open up the information pathway to third parties to work native or even make their own smaller non-is lenses.

I’m finally selling my Sony gear and am really going to miss the smaller lenses.

I am looking for something like the Tamron 28-75 2.8 or the sigma 85 1.4 in RF

The body has ibis, it just feels weird not taking advantage of not needing IS in every lens.

RF 14-35mm F4 sounds very tempting. If it has a 77mm filter thread and is filterable (no bulby lens likes sigmas 14-24mm please) I'll preorder this one the minute they announce it

Since a 14-21mm F1.4 is probably in the 3.500 $ (or above) plus price range, I'm hoping Canon actually releases one of their earlier rumored fast primes like the 16mm F1.4 with a not so hefty price tag. (yes, I know, this would be in the four digits price area as well)

Gazwas said:

Updates of the EF 16 and 24 TS-E’s are the most interesting for me but don’t understand the relevance of AF in a tilt and shift lens? Less distortion and sharper edges (in the 16mm) would be very welcome however.

Click to expand...

I presume you meant the TS-E17. The advantage of AF with tilt lenses is in dynamic situations, I’d love my TS-E50 to have AF for portraits, set the tilt first, then select an AF point then get that point on the eye you want and boom.

For what I use my TS-E’s for 90% of the time AF would offer no additional value, but that is a function of the fact that they didn’t have AF, once they do that will change.