Canon mirrorless

wysinawyg

Rumors are suggesting a sub-£2k FF on 5 September.

More to the point, a much more interesting (and even more expensive) opening lens line up:

RF 35 mm F 1.8 M IS
RF 50 mm F 1.2 L USM
RF 28 – 70 mm F 2 L USM
RF 24 – 105 mm F4 L USM

Though I can’t help thinking a 24-50 feels like a better walk around than a 28-70 if you’re doing a range / size trade off.

newbie1

Seems to have caused the internet to melt down - the usual sites with info are not responding

magar

Can't find any info confirming this...Maybe someone has made that up?

Johnmcl7

Well it's what seems to keep these rumour sites going...

A 24-70mm F2 seems questionable for a FF sensor given the Olympus 14-35mm and 35-100mm F2 lenses for 4/3 are comparable in size and weight to the Nikon 24-70mm and 70-200mm F2.8 lenses.

It seems odd to offer IS lenses given many of the mirrorless ones are now onboard IS including Panasonic who didn't used to offer it although it certainly is possible.

newbie1

Fingers crossed the rumor of FF body for EF lenses is correct.  Would make sense for the customers who have invested in lenses. There are other options for lighter weight.

shotokan101

I think that could be a very smart move for someone to make their mirrorless work with "normal mount" lenses.....

snerkler

It’s being discussed on TP, this is a link that was put on there

Here are the first images and specifications of the Canon EOS R and the new RF mount lenses - Canon Rumors

snerkler

The 28-70mm is a real odd one for me. Yes it’s f2, but for many 24 is the ideal width for a walkabout zoom. On a mirrorless FF 24-70mm f4 is the ideal compromise between weight and usability but canon seem to have gone in a different direction, offering a 24-105mm f4 instead. Useful, but then comparing it to Nikon’s 24-70mm f4 offering it’s 200g heavier which will make a difference when out all day sightseeing.

Johnmcl7

I'm still dubious about whether it is actually F2 or not, unfortunately you can't tell from the pictures what aperture it is although the rest of the rumours were correct so perhaps that is too.  Noticeably though the lens doesn't look that big, the 15-30mm F1.8 Sigma is a bit of a monster and bigger than the 24-70mm F2.8 so I can't see how a full frame F2 lens could be that small.

I do agree about 24mm vs 28mm although I guess if it can offer F2 in that small a package, that would be a reasonable trade off.

John

snerkler

I’d rather them do a 24-60mm for example if they wanted to do F2. 4mm at the wide end makes far more difference imo.