p.4 #1 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
melcat wrote:
Not really. “Deprecated” means ”express disapproval of”; for example, in software engineering it means “stop using this now, we’re going to take it away soon”. I don’t think that’s what you meant, and of course Canon have no way to make existing DSLRs stop working because third parties reverse engineered the raw formats.
They are discontinued old technology which still works.
Old lenses are discontinued old technology which usually doesn’t work as well as the newer stuff... when the camera maker deigns to make the equivalent new lens. Which is a problem with the overall market having shrunk.
Maybe, but we are going to get there very quickly, as there have been no more DSLRs for a long time, and service will be discontinued on the most recent of bodies soon enough. Canon marketing is taking care of the latter part of the description, as evidenced by the move to mirrorless and RF lenses for fear of lack of support for EF. This is the definition I have, and it says nothing about making old things not work.
Deprecation in the software world doesn't mean things stop working either. Many libraries in java have been deprecated (have been for years), yet we still use them. We deprecate things in our old software, yet we still support some of it. I have been trying to get our users to move to a newer version of a screen so I can shut down the old, but there is always an excuse to keep it around, despite it be deprecated.
Merriam Meaning: to withdraw official support for or discourage the use of (something, such as a software product) in favor of a newer or better alternative
This is pretty much an apt term for DSLRs, especially when you consider the shutdown of manufacturing of these, and the marketing genius of Canon getting people to move to mirrorless and RF lenses despite the EF lenses working just fine.
p.4 #3 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
While I'm very excited at the prospect of more RF lenses, Canon screwed the pooch on this one. This is an announcement that should have coincided with the RF mount.
If you were someone that was seriously interested in exotic lenses, you have already moved one for at least some of your shooting.
p.4 #4 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
How did canon mess this up? Was this a canon issued news article or just another 3rd party issuing a manual focus RF lens?
If these exotic lenses have EF mounts, then why would people change platforms when they could just switch to RF with a simple adapter? Much cheaper that way than to change platforms…
p.4 #5 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
Yep, hoping by tapping into the shorter flange depth we'll see new compact/high quality designs eventually for the 200mm f/2.8L and perhaps a 200mm f/2-ish one as well. I suspect those are on the lower end of priority for Canon as they are niche, but for some of us, we use that focal length often. All of Canon's last EF 200mm primes were pretty damn good.
The pandemic certainly had an impact on all sorts of things. Most of the lens companies and camera companies have told me it's cost 1-3 years on development. I think most glaringly visible here is Zeiss who hasn't announced a new still-minded lens since 2019. I am an Otus owner and enjoyer, would have loved for the additional two focal lengths to come, but I think most contemporary established lens manufacturers are going to be focusing hard on mirrorless mounts.
I agree rscheffler on the flange distance design. And I'll go into that deeper as Sony has working contracts with various companies. None, zero, zip of the new mirrorless mount flange depths and designs were by accident. All seem to be focused on locking you into their modern lineup, with the added benefit to us at least, being able to adapt 60+ legacy or cinema mounts to these very short depths. That does come at a cost occasionally optically.
p.4 #7 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
PhilH wrote:
The pandemic certainly had an impact on all sorts of things. Most of the lens companies and camera companies have told me it's cost 1-3 years on development. I think most glaringly visible here is Zeiss who hasn't announced a new still-minded lens since 2019. I am an Otus owner and enjoyer, would have loved for the additional two focal lengths to come, but I think most contemporary established lens manufacturers are going to be focusing hard on mirrorless mounts.
That's interesting. I haven't followed Zeiss very closely for a while - what were the two other focal lengths on the Otus roadmap? Assuming there was one.
p.4 #8 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
DSLRs are antquated? Perhaps. But please don't say that around my EOS 650. (Not 650D). It still thinks it is useful. It shot a birthday party last Saturday.
p.4 #9 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
Little known fact: for the CP+ show in 2019 (the last one prior to Covid), Cosina had on display a Voigtlander Leica M-mount to Canon RF-mount close focus adapter ring mounted to a Canon R camera.
For some reason, it wasn't released. Maybe a victim of the pandemic? Or perhaps Canon's objections at the time?
Here's proof, thanks to another FM member who attended the show:
p.4 #10 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
rscheffler wrote
That's interesting. I haven't followed Zeiss very closely for a while - what were the two other focal lengths on the Otus roadmap? Assuming there was one.
Nothing was finalized, but what was discussed mainly was a 40mm and 21mm if you spoke with the team at NAB or other shows for a few years. We got close, but mirrorless sort of screwed all of that up as EF development from nearly everybody has died and a great deal of focus was put into their motion picture lenses.
But a set of 21, 28, 40, 55, 85, and 100 Otus primes would have been nice. The 55mm stands as the best 50mm-range lens they have ever produced and it's really not even close. 100mm is the odd duck in that series for me, but that's okay. That 85mm is tremendous. 21mm would have been very welcome considering the pedigree of their previous 21mm offerings.
If I get really, really bored the fun side by sides would be Canon RF f/1.2L Primes, Zeiss Otus Primes, Sigma Art, and Leica L-Mount Summicron and Summilux Primes. Crons will be better in some ways there, but not all. For yucks, tossing the very popular EF L primes in there could be fun mainly to show how far we've come.
I've done rough tests sans the Leica L-Mount glass (likely exploring that this year) and it's really a fight to the top and an aesthetic choice when it comes down to it. But on a pure technical merit it's: 1. Canon 2. Otus 3. Sigma. And it's bloody close. But huge congratulations for Sigma really going hard and making a whole range of high speed lenses of this caliber and pursuing it aggressively. Canon will be obviously releasing more L-Series RF prime lenses, but they need to be up to snuff to the bar they set for the 50 and 85 as well as the newer 135, which I think is sort of it's own thing.
We know a 24 and 35 are coming. The question is if they hold to f/1.2 or not for those, and on mirrorless they certainly could. There was an unreleased 35mm f/1.2L for EF shown under black tape one year at NAB long ago, but I suspect that got scrapped nearly equally as far back. There are talks about intermediate fast L-Series RF primes that would break the mold of what was available for EF mount. Also, there were also a 24-105 f/2.8 (size issues) and 28-135 f/2.8 (even more size issues) designs that were scrapped, but I suspect if this 24-120mm f/2.8L IS RF becomes a reality, that is where that was going all along whether the lens is deemed too big or not by some. With that range, people will use it who need it.
p.4 #11 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
I kept going with Canon bc my wife wanted us to keep using their products. That was fine for awhile, weddings and general photography don't push the limits of glass and body like sports does. Now I'm left with a semi-frequent lockup situation bc I'm hand-holding the EF/RF/300 2.8 mk2 on my R5. The issue comes down to added weight on the adapter setup. I'd love a native RF300 but nope, still waiting. While the MF glass is nice for things like astro and landscape, it does me zero good for sports when needing reach (and not wanting to fork out $12k for an RF400).
p.4 #12 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
goalerjones wrote:
I kept going with Canon bc my wife wanted us to keep using their products. That was fine for awhile, weddings and general photography don't push the limits of glass and body like sports does. Now I'm left with a semi-frequent lockup situation bc I'm hand-holding the EF/RF/300 2.8 mk2 on my R5. The issue comes down to added weight on the adapter setup. I'd love a native RF300 but nope, still waiting. While the MF glass is nice for things like astro and landscape, it does me zero good for sports when needing reach (and not wanting to fork out $12k for an RF400). ...Show more →
That’s interesting I’ve also been getting occasional lockups with that setup R5 plus EF 300 2.8 mk2 plus often use 2.0 tc
It never occurred to me that the weight on the mount could be an issue
However since updating to the latest firmware I haven’t had a lockup
Was only getting the occasional lockup and never did figure out exactly what was going on, fingers crossed that it’s now resolved
Focal : 50mm
Maximum aperture: 1:1
Minimum aperture: f/16
Lens configuration: 7 groups 9 elements
Angle of view: 48.0°
Number of diaphragm blades: 12
MFD: 0.45m
Maximum shooting magnification: 1:6.9
Maximum diameter x total length: 79.3×64.0mm
Filter size: 67mm
Weight: 650g
Lens hood: Dedicated screw-in hood included
Aperture ring: Equipped (manual aperture)
Electronic contacts: Available
Exif information: Correspondence
Other: Selective Aperture Control System
Too bad they seem to have chosen a Canon RF style focusing ring...The classic Voigtlander focusing ring is sooooo good (yes, I'm saying it: better than Zeiss focusing rings )....
Makes one wonder: is the design/appearance of this lens part of agreements between Cosina and Canon, or is its design fully decided by Cosina themselves?
p.4 #14 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
Deathchant wrote:
Too bad they seem to have chosen a Canon RF style focusing ring...
This actually looks more like the film-era OM focussing rings, with the diamond pattern. Canon use ribs for focus and diamond for the control ring.
Makes one wonder: is the design/appearance of this lens part of agreements between Cosina and Canon, or is its design fully decided by Cosina themselves?
The point of the diamond pattern is that is different from the ribs so you can easily tell them apart by touch, so I am sure Canon did not insist on this. They probably see it as a way their own lenses are superior (as do I).
p.4 #15 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
melcat wrote:
The point of the diamond pattern is that is different from the ribs so you can easily tell them apart by touch, so I am sure Canon did not insist on this. They probably see it as a way their own lenses are superior (as do I).
I really really appreciate the classic Voigtlander style focus rings (with the rounded indents). I like them even better than the Zeiss classic lens focus rings. But each to their own of course, for me, it's a sensory thing .
Well, not to jump to conclusions so easily already, but if this lens has the same (not very good) performance and price as the VM and Z Mount versions, the RF 50/1.2L do seem to be a better option...
Maybe it was better if they ported the Apo Lanthar first (optically superior, and far more affordable).
p.4 #16 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
Looks cool, but probably not a lens for me. I suspect this was a 'splash' lens for them entering the RF market - choose the 1.0 for the wow factor, and to not directly compete with the Canon offerings. Then later port over the more typical lens designs.
Or - queue Canon conspiracy theory music - they were only allowed to choose this design by Canon, so it would not directly compete. I honestly thinks that's a garbage theory, but its the internet so have at it! This MF lens does not directly compete with any of the AF lenses. There is a group of buyers for this and they know who they are, and so does Canon and Cosina.
p.4 #17 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
I own the emount 50mm f1.2 Nokton Aspherical, its very much a lens that I bought for its more “classic” rendering. Wide open it has a glow and is fairly soft but it can create absolutely gorgeous images. Its probably closer in performance to the EF 50mm f1.2 L that’s MF only but will mount natively to RF cameras.
Deathchant wrote:
I really really appreciate the classic Voigtlander style focus rings (with the rounded indents). I like them even better than the Zeiss classic lens focus rings. But each to their own of course, for me, it's a sensory thing .
Well, not to jump to conclusions so easily already, but if this lens has the same (not very good) performance and price as the VM and Z Mount versions, the RF 50/1.2L do seem to be a better option...
Maybe it was better if they ported the Apo Lanthar first (optically superior, and far more affordable).
p.4 #18 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
I might be off base here, but I have a feeling that the RF mount lenses will be mostly the same as what's being presented for the Z mount over on the "dark side".
p.4 #19 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
There are a couple of other lenses they're bringing out that are interesting - a 27 mm pancake (probably APS-C, I don't really know) and the 35/0.9.
Feb 21, 2023 at 01:49 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.4 #20 · First licensed(?) 3rd party Canon RF lens(es?) to be announced at CP+ Feb. 23
$1799 for the Voightlander 50/1, which can already be adapted to Canon in leica m mount I'd think. And I said similar about 50/1 L vs EF 50/1.2, I'd probably just get the Rf 50/1.2. Has af, great lens, 1/2 stop not that big of a deal, really. $300 more.
)....