Canon's new mirrorless system - announcement on September 4

[Bernard ODonovan]

The Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM would be even bigger and heavier in an EF mount...

The Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM probably has floating optics for better near field correction. Canon did not bother to do that on the EF version which is much lighter and has a more basic optical design (Lens construction (elements/groups) 8/6)

The RF mount gives Canon the freedom to make those lens designs they could not justify before...

Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM

Lens composition: 13 groups 19 sheets
Minimum focus distance: 39cm (15.35 inches)
Filter diameter: 95mm
Size: 103.8mm (4.08 inches) × 139.8mm (5.5 inches)
Weight: 1430g (3.15lbs)

Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM

Lens construction: 9 groups of 15
Minimum focus distance: 40cm (15.74 inches)
Filter diameter: 77mm
Size: 89.8mm (3.53 inches) x 108.0mm (4.25 inches)
Weight: 950g (2.09lbs)

[Martin Kristiansen]

I use larger lenses on my APSC sensor camera regularly. Turns the 90mm macro into a 135 which is much better for catalogue work and I also use it hand held for various things. The balance issue is a total non issue for me. You just learn to hold the system differently.

No IBIS on the new Canon? That’s total deal breaker for me. No way I’m buying a camera without IBIS. I was kind of hoping Nikon and Canon would come up with something really great but I’m not seezing it.

[armand]

Nothing wrong with that, if you're willing to lock out entire large segments of the market (and have them go over to Canon or Sony).
...

No. Depends what you want for your system.
If you want it as an addition to the full frame or if you only have that system, I want the light and good sooner than later.
If you want the system as a replacement, than you can start with those big lenses. I would suspect the light and good first has more clients unless you offer a possibly needed lens not offered elsewhere, which is what Canon seems to be doing.

Either way, from the specs neither raises the bar significantly over current top mirrorless, be it m43, APS-C or full frame. Or even the cheaper medium format; if Fuji gets it's new GFX 50R at a lowish price there will be competition from above too.

[chez]

Then there would be less of a reason to switch. Providing this sort of capability only on the new body gives users a reason to switch to the new system. If they had made this lens for EF mount, they would be in much the same position as Nikon, with a new mirrorless system that doesn't provide much of an incentive for existing users to switch across.

Balance isn't an issue if you hold the setup by the lens, with the right hand only used to operate the controls. I can balance a 2.8kg lens on a Sony body with no problems.

But the Canon mirrorless body sure isn't targeted at event or wedding shooters so this behemoth lens has no partner.

[kers]

...
Nikon has a miniature 24-70/4 lens for the hipster crowd, but offers nothing at all at the moment if you want something which gives you more options. If you want the same kind of speed and background blur you're used to getting with SLR, you're stuck with SLR - or moving to Canon/Sony.

you forget you can use a lot of the fast F-Nikkor lenses on the Z with the adapter + they can use IBIS. a big +
Obviously you loose on size and weight, but that would be true anyway.
Nikon produced Z-lenses that offer something new : good quality , small and lightweight.

[Dan Wells]

What is there about the optical design of the 28-70 that would make it significantly bigger or heavier in an EF-mount? I had always heard that the real extra flexibility of mirrorless was at extreme wide angles? According to Canon Rumors, the new RF mount is the same diameter as the current EF mount. Nikon had an extremely constrained throat in the F mount, so the Z mount's much wider opening is an advantage - but the (much newer) EF mount was already quite wide, and Canon doesn't seem to have opened it any more. The RF mount definitely has a shorter flange distance than EF.  I was unable to find an optical diagram of the 28-70 to see if the rear element is very close to the mount, although fast normal zooms often do have a very close element, so the short flange could make a difference.

If it is mostly marketing strategy (lens would be fine on EF, but they released it on RF to get people to switch), I think that's a terrible idea... Would people who would use a lens like that be willing to switch to a completely unproven body? Especially one that is really the next generation of the EOS-6D? Event photographers at the level that they'd use a much heavier, much more expensive lens to gain a stop are using 5D series and 1D series bodies, not 6D series bodies. Fashion photographers are using the top bodies if not medium format... If they're really after the top end of the event market, they need to get a 1D class body out there...

There's also the theory that the lens isn't for taking pictures at all - it's an entry in the "see what I can do" contest among manufacturers, and in the "my lens is bigger than your lens" contest among a certain breed of  hobbyists. The president of Leica once admitted in an interview that he could leave the sensor out of half the cameras he made, and the owners would never notice - they're prestige objects, not working cameras. Leica does it more than anyone else. in photography, but every manufacturer makes products for bragging rights - is this one of those?

[Bernard ODonovan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFaNE7MEFsE
Published on 3 Sep 2018
At 9:00 pm on September 5th, Canon Hongkong's full-line social platform will broadcast a Live Show for you. Here:

https://www.youtube.com/user/CanonHongkong/videos?disable_polymer=1

I guess they will have other global events round the world as normal

The HK one starts:
https://www.timeanddate.com/countdown/to?iso=20180905T21&p0=102&msg=EOS+R&font=serif


Just over 21 hours...

[Bernard ODonovan]

What is there about the optical design of the 28-70 that would make it significantly bigger or heavier in an EF-mount? I had always heard that the real extra flexibility of mirrorless was at extreme wide angles? According to Canon Rumors, the new RF mount is the same diameter as the current EF mount. Nikon had an extremely constrained throat in the F mount, so the Z mount's much wider opening is an advantage - but the (much newer) EF mount was already quite wide, and Canon doesn't seem to have opened it any more. The RF mount definitely has a shorter flange distance than EF.  I was unable to find an optical diagram of the 28-70 to see if the rear element is very close to the mount, although fast normal zooms often do have a very close element, so the short flange could make a difference.

If it is mostly marketing strategy (lens would be fine on EF, but they released it on RF to get people to switch), I think that's a terrible idea... Would people who would use a lens like that be willing to switch to a completely unproven body? Especially one that is really the next generation of the EOS-6D? Event photographers at the level that they'd use a much heavier, much more expensive lens to gain a stop are using 5D series and 1D series bodies, not 6D series bodies. Fashion photographers are using the top bodies if not medium format... If they're really after the top end of the event market, they need to get a 1D class body out there...

There's also the theory that the lens isn't for taking pictures at all - it's an entry in the "see what I can do" contest among manufacturers, and in the "my lens is bigger than your lens" contest among a certain breed of  hobbyists. The president of Leica once admitted in an interview that he could leave the sensor out of half the cameras he made, and the owners would never notice - they're prestige objects, not working cameras. Leica does it more than anyone else. in photography, but every manufacturer makes products for bragging rights - is this one of those?

The EF and RF mounts have the same diameter (ID)

The EF flange is 44.0 mm so 24.0 mm deeper than the RF body flange

If the new lens has the rear element within 24mm of the rear, it would rule out Canon making a EF version with the same optical design, to get the same performance, it would likely then need a bigger lens...

I doubt Canon would limit the EF range this long if they could have made it a similar size and weight...

When Canon launched the EF mount, some of the original lenses were to show the capability of the mount. I guess history is repeating and they want to show what the RF mount allows...

[Bernard ODonovan]

The new 35mm appears to show case the ability to get the rear element into the body to reduce the distance further. Their slightly deeper flange distance than the Nikon Z is not stopping small compact lens designs... Macro lenses are normally bigger than a standard lens...

It would be typical of Canon to choose these designs to showcase the new mount...

Since USM lens are in the launch the EF range should work quite well on the RF bodies, albeit the new RF mount has extra contacts and some patents from canon suggest a possible next gen interface which can also work with legacy EF via the RF EF adapters...

If the rumour is true that this is the fastest full frame mirrorless AF then it will be related to the new interface tech that allows faster body to lens communication...

 

[faberryman]

The 24-105 looks quite small compared to the 50.

[Bernard ODonovan]

The 24-105 looks quite small compared to the 50.

The pictures are not to scale

Here are the dimensions:

"Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM

Lens composition: 13 groups 19 sheets
Minimum focus distance: 39cm (15.35 inches)
Filter diameter: 95mm
Size: 103.8mm (4.08 inches) × 139.8mm (5.5 inches)
Weight: 1430g (3.15lbs)

Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM

Lens construction: 9 groups of 15
Minimum focus distance: 40cm (15.74 inches)
Filter diameter: 77mm
Size: 89.8mm (3.53 inches) x 108.0mm (4.25 inches)
Weight: 950g (2.09lbs)

Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro

Lens construction: 9 groups 9 pieces
Minimum focus distance: 17cm (6.69 inches)
Filter diameter: 52mm
Size: 74.4mm (2.92 inches) × 62.8mm (2.47 inches)
Weight: 305g (0.67lbs)

Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Lens construction: 14 groups 18 pieces
Minimum focus distance: 45cm (17.71 inches)
Filter diameter: 77mm
Size: 83.5mm (3.28 inches) × 107.3mm (4.22 inches)
Weight: 700g (1.54lbs)"

[Bernard ODonovan]

At 24 on the zoom the 50 is longer and the 50 is larger in diameter...

[BJL]

The 24-105/4 is actually smaller in comparison to the 50/1.2 than the photo suggests: same length rather than longer, a bit narrower, and 26% lighter.

[armand]

So the new 24-105 is 700g, while their own dSLR version is 795. Meanwhile the Sony is 663 and Nikon 24-120 is 710. So no free lunch to be had here.

[shadowblade]

But the Canon mirrorless body sure isn't targeted at event or wedding shooters so this behemoth lens has no partner.

It looks pretty good for event photography to me. I wouldn't use it for weddings if it only has one card slot, but, for shooting events with a view to immediate sale/printing/publication (a very large group, for everything from parties to corporate events to live music gigs to nightclubs) it looks good compared to the 6D2, or even the 5D4. Don't underestimate the impact of real-time JPEG preview for exposure/colour (face detection is a nice bonus).

And Canon will almost certainly release a higher-end body in short order. Remember, they are only releasing one body, whereas Nikon is releasing two - there is room in Canon's lineup for a second body. Expect a wedding-oriented body (dual slots, etc.) when they release a 70-200/2.8 and 85/1.2. They'll probably also release a high-resolution mirrorless body at some point - i doubt there will be a 5Ds2.

[shadowblade]

you forget you can use a lot of the fast F-Nikkor lenses on the Z with the adapter + they can use IBIS. a big +
Obviously you loose on size and weight, but that would be true anyway.
Nikon produced Z-lenses that offer something new : good quality , small and lightweight.

You also diminish your AF capability.

Use your F-mount lenses on a Sony body and you can also get IBIS, in addition to having dual slots and an increased number of native lenses available. Or you can stick with SLR for another generation, keep your high-performance AF and keep your dual card slots.

(Incidentally, this also raises the issue of Sony's throat diameter. If you can fit an f/1.2 lens, 200/2 or 400/2.8 to a Sony body via an adapter with no issues, you can also make a native lens with the same focal length/aperture for it with no issues. I've had no clipping/vignetting with an 85/1.2 or 200/2, and I hear the new 400/2.8 works pretty well...)

[BernardLanguillier]

You keep saying that F mount lenses will not peform as well AF wise on the Z compared to an F mount camera but:
- a large majority of hands on report claim just the opposite such as this one: https://youtu.be/t-nGejFGlO8 where the notoriously slow focusing 70-200 f4 is used successfully to shoot mountain bikers in a forest
- there are other advantages such as better coverage and on sensor AF that will remove the need to calibrate lenses.

Now, back on the Canon, is the value of the mirrorless R camera and lenses for a Canon current DSLR user more clear for you than the value of the Z for a D850 user?

Cheers,
Bernard

[DougDolde]

It IS the 4th where is it?

[BJL]

It IS the 4th where is it?

The rumor was updated to "September 5" some time ago, as confirmed by this from Canon Hong Kong: Canon Hong Kong R system teaser (shall we now also debate whose teasers are lamer?)

Of course it is already the morning of the 5th in Japan (and Hong Kong).


On another subject: a lot of the recent debate claims one way or the other how well SLR lenses will autofocus on these new EVF bodies, with some insisting that the count of system native lenses is a dominant factor in the system's strength. I would say we can't know for sure until production bodies with production level firmware are out for testing, but Canon at least seems confident: the three biggest of the initial four R mount lenses have USM motors in and has said in an interview that USM is the faster AF system for its mirrorless cameras too, with STM only preferred for video. I cannot find where I originally read that, but here is a similar claim:
https://www.canon-europe.com/lenses/tech-guide/focusing/

[phila]

"Of course it is already the morning of the 5th in Japan (and Hong Kong)."

And in Oz... but no offical news as yet...