Canon Announces New Full Frame Zooms: 20-50 T2.4 & 45-135 T2.4

[Thomas Smet]

These are a surprising release. That said, I can see a market for Full Frame PL glass. EF not so much.

Its about adaptability. As nice as RF mount is its limited to just Canon cameras. By going with the EF mount BMD, Varicam, current EF Canon cinemas, current EF DSLRs and current and future RF Canon cameras can use these new lenses.

EF lenses adapt perfectly to RF mount so even if cinema cameras eventually go the RF mount route they will still work exactly the same as they do now. In the meantime there are a lot of Canon cinema cameras out there still using EF mount. There are a ton of BMD cameras out there using EF mount of m43 mount that can easily adapt to EF.

It 100% makes sense to make a EF option. Even if using them on a s35mm camera. Even more so since there are EF to RF focal reducers out there which can make use of the FF glass to gain a stop. On a s35mm or APS-C sensor or crop RF body one could have something like a t1.8 pair of zooms.

 

[Liam Hall]

Its about adaptability. As nice as RF mount is its limited to just Canon cameras. By going with the EF mount BMD, Varicam, current EF Canon cinemas, current EF DSLRs and current and future RF Canon cameras can use these new lenses.

EF lenses adapt perfectly to RF mount so even if cinema cameras eventually go the RF mount route they will still work exactly the same as they do now. In the meantime there are a lot of Canon cinema cameras out there still using EF mount. There are a ton of BMD cameras out there using EF mount of m43 mount that can easily adapt to EF.

It 100% makes sense to make a EF option. Even if using them on a s35mm camera. Even more so since there are EF to RF focal reducers out there which can make use of the FF glass to gain a stop. On a s35mm or APS-C sensor or crop RF body one could have something like a t1.8 pair of zooms.

Yes, I understand all that and you're right. For me, two years ago, when the C500MKII was still a newly released camera I'd have seen these as a very good option in EF. Not so much now.

Anyway, here's a little promo video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMYBR_08MzM

And fair to say, they do look like very good lenses.

 

[Mitch Gross]

It's not that complicated. These are professional cinema lenses for professional cinema cameras at professional cinema prices.

 

[Tom Roper]

That's because RF went into your kit. Without an RF camera body, there are zero advantages. Totally with Thomas Smet on this point. It's was Canon's peril to discontinue manufacturing EF lenses, a move that has not been followed by Sigma, Tamaron, Tokina to name a few. RF is the featured benefit, part of the planned obsolescence of the intricate, mirrored single lens reflex EF body design to help launch the less costly-to-manufacture future for RF bodies. The cost savings don't exist for C300/500 however, so segregation of pro verus consumer lens markets keeps the former relevant, as does 3rd party support. Now comes Nikon calling with Z9 version 2.0 firmware, smashing R5 and R5C features and performance, less money and no need to rebuy Nikon lenses.

 

[Liam Hall]

It's not that complicated. These are professional cinema lenses for professional cinema cameras at professional cinema prices.

Yes we know that. No need to be a dick, Mitch. I say that a a working professional who uses professional kit and pays professional prices.

 

[morgan_moore]

That's because RF went into your kit. Without an RF camera body, there are zero advantages. Totally with Thomas Smet on this point. It's was Canon's peril to discontinue manufacturing EF lenses, a move that has not been followed by Sigma, Tamaron, Tokina to name a few. RF is the featured benefit, part of the planned obsolescence of the intricate, mirrored single lens reflex EF body design to help launch the less costly-to-manufacture future for RF bodies. The cost savings don't exist for C300/500 however, so segregation of pro verus consumer lens markets keeps the former relevant, as does 3rd party support. Now comes Nikon calling with Z9 version 2.0 firmware, smashing R5 and R5C features and performance, less money and no need to rebuy Nikon lenses.

every need to re-buy nikon lenses.. my 600f4 and 400.28 and 20-35 and 50 1.4 dont work on the z9. yes my lenses are old but they hve been my staple for 20 years and nikon dumped me on the floor.. exact why i switch to canon (EF)

RF lenses only have value when the designers use the wide throat to deliver something .. speed or low mass.

Currently all RF lense are just a costly rehash of ef - 70-200f2.8 and the like.. with no advantage - basically a rip off.

The rf 16 2.8 for little money and the 28-70/2 are lenses that actually didnt exist in the EF world and are using the wide throat and are useful tools.

RF c500iii and 28-70/2 would be a bit special but not a defacto tool to chuck out the 2/3 cams.

 

[Thomas Smet]

That's because RF went into your kit. Without an RF camera body, there are zero advantages. Totally with Thomas Smet on this point. It's was Canon's peril to discontinue manufacturing EF lenses, a move that has not been followed by Sigma, Tamaron, Tokina to name a few. RF is the featured benefit, part of the planned obsolescence of the intricate, mirrored single lens reflex EF body design to help launch the less costly-to-manufacture future for RF bodies. The cost savings don't exist for C300/500 however, so segregation of pro verus consumer lens markets keeps the former relevant, as does 3rd party support. Now comes Nikon calling with Z9 version 2.0 firmware, smashing R5 and R5C features and performance, less money and no need to rebuy Nikon lenses.

May be less need to buy new Nikon lenses but how many serious video shooters out there are using Nikon? Nikon has no cinema cameras and nobody else uses the lens mount on their bodies.

Nikon is entering into some very niche territory. They basically want their photographers who might dabble in video to suddenly care about 8k and internal raw video. Those are really the only people that have a serious existing Nikon lens collection. Everyone will be new users who will have to start over buying lenses. I see that as a hard sell no matter how neat the features are on Nikon.

Many of us either used Canon DSLRs in the past, Canon cinema cameras, BMD cinema cameras or m43 cameras with SpeedBoosters where we heavily invested in EF glass. Nikon was never really a good choice due to the lack of electronic lens control on Nikon adapters. Plus not many Nikon lenses were designed specifically for video or better optimized for video so adapting any older lenses may not be all that great of an option. Having not used many Nikon lenses I'm kind of assuming on this one but photo centric lenses are rarely optimized for video as well. The same is true of many older EF lenses. They may be fine optically but their stabilization and focus motors are pretty clunky by video standards today.

The other group are likely Sony or Fuji users who would not have used Nikon glass either.

I just don't see a large enough market to justify a Nikon with 8k raw video. Its really cool they did it but I know its a hard pass for me and likely the same for many others.

 

[DLD]

The Z-mount ecosystem is fairly barren, Nikon's share in mirrorless is about 8% and a $5,500 camera is not going to set any unit record sales either. Maybe the supposed Z8, which is sort of A7RIV with 8K, may show up sooner than later. Otherwise, shooters who want to see some support from their company across the entire width of its lineup are going to be taking a chance.

 

[cpreston]

If you are really worried about future proofing these lenses, just get the PLi mount. If you are using a C500II, buy the PL mount and it will work just as well as the ef mount. Or buy an ef mount lens and have it converted to PLi mount. Canon actually seems to have thought through most of the use situations for these lenses. I'm assuming that is why they called them "Flex".

I do think it would be nice if Canon released an RF mount adapter for the C300III/C500II, but it still wouldn't make me want to buy cinema lenses in RF. I would really only be interested in the RF L lenses with their better AF, iris control, and image stabilization.

 

[Mitch Gross]

Yes we know that. No need to be a dick, Mitch. I say that a a working professional who uses professional kit and pays professional prices.

I didn't think I was, thank you very much. But the discussion of these lenses continues in comparison to glass that costs a few hundred bucks a pop. It's just not the same conversation. There are reasons that some product is made for one market and other product is made for another, and while you say you know the difference there seems to be others who don't. I'm not trying to denigrate anyone or anything, just stating that they are different devices for different use. Comparisons are just not the point.

 

[Liam Hall]

I do think it would be nice if Canon released an RF mount adapter for the C300III/C500II, but it still wouldn't make me want to buy cinema lenses in RF. I would really only be interested in the RF L lenses with their better AF, iris control, and image stabilization.

It can’t be done, RF flange is shorter than ef.

 

[Liam Hall]

I didn't think I was, thank you very much. But the discussion of these lenses continues in comparison to glass that costs a few hundred bucks a pop. It's just not the same conversation. There are reasons that some product is made for one market and other product is made for another, and while you say you know the difference there seems to be others who don't. I'm not trying to denigrate anyone or anything, just stating that they are different devices for different use. Comparisons are just not the point.

You completely missed the point. Mirrorless cameras were mentioned because the direction of travel for Canon cinema cameras looks to be the RF mount not because people are misunderstanding what a cine zoom is.

 

[morgan_moore]

Mention of RF by some doesnt seem to acknowledge that the wider throat is better and will lead to wider/faster/lighter/cheaper AT the cost of cross compatability

It seems that that trade off is the chat.

It is also worth considering that with todays lens correction breathing control and other corrections that 'cheap' lenses can be extremely good.

I got the 24-105 f7.1 rf with my r6 camera and assumed that I would dispose of immediately... actually it is sharp and has fine AF - it is a thing of horror and beauty and was 'free' with the body.

 

[cpreston]

It can’t be done, RF flange is shorter than ef.

What I was trying to say was that even if Canon made full frame RF cinema lenses and somehow managed to overcome the limitations of the C500II in order to create and RF mount, I would still prefer to buy and PLi mount and PLi lenses. The RF mount might allow better lens design, but the PLi or EF mount lens is far more adaptable if you end up working with a different camera.