Canon FF MILC + 28-70 F2.0 Rumored

mee · 08-31-2018, 08:19 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Faster doesn't mean better corrected - it could be fast and sloppy and small. Time will tell.

It looks huge to me. Images on Nokishita page.

serothis · 08-31-2018, 08:23 PM

I'm liking this trend towards using more readable top lcd screens.

**UncleVanya** · 08-31-2018, 08:36 PM

Originally posted by mee

It looks huge to me. Images on Nokishita page.

I had missed that. Yes it is huge. The 24-105 f/4 is just slightly smaller than the DFA 24-70 to get some perspective.

disconnekt · 08-31-2018, 08:48 PM

Originally posted by serothis

a 24-70 f/2 would be crazy. I assume it's going to have a price to match.

Thats what I was thinking, and probably a big filter to match

**UncleVanya** · 08-31-2018, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by disconnekt

Thats what I was thinking, and probably a big filter to match

Looking at the pictures - maybe 95mm at the smallest or perhaps 105mm?

disconnekt · 08-31-2018, 09:08 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Looking at the pictures - maybe 95mm at the smallest or perhaps 105mm?

Good chance near that size, it's going to be *maybe* a 82mm (really doubt that though, but you never know).Their 28-70 f2.8L (even though it came out in '93) was a 77mm, so a same zoom-range lens with a faster aperture is going to have a bigger filter.

**UncleVanya** · 08-31-2018, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by disconnekt

Good chance near that size, it's going to be *maybe* a 82mm (really doubt that though, but you never know).Their 28-70 f2.8L (even though it came out in '93) was a 77mm, so a same zoom-range lens with a faster aperture is going to have a bigger filter.

The 24-105 f/4 is 83mm and the pictures clearly show a much larger lens with the 24-70 f/2 - The slope up from the mount to the first size increase looks like maybe 83mm or wider then it gets bigger. It will be a whale.

**Tony Belding** · 09-01-2018, 04:21 AM - **1 Like**

If I understand this news rightly… We're looking at Canon introducing a new lens mount for full-frame mirrorless, incompatible with the EF-M mount that their already-successful APS-C mirrorless cameras use? Am I the only one who thinks that is a painfully stupid move? I mean, if they can't fit a full frame sensor into EF-M, wouldn't it make a ton more sense to just stick with APS-C format? It seems to be working Just Fine for Fujifilm. The difference in imaging performance between full frame and APS-C is fairly trivial. They're introducing a whole new lens mount for the sake of something trivial.

**ffking** · 09-01-2018, 04:31 AM

Those lenses look very interesting - but very expensive for a (rumoured) $1,900 body - I'm very interested to see if there's a pro body in the wings - not that I could afford it even if I wanted it, but it would be great to see what Canon could do if they threw everything at it - and would they go for a 50Mp sensor or a lower Mp speed monster like the 1DX? Or both?

rawr · 09-01-2018, 04:38 AM

Originally posted by Tony Belding

Am I the only one who thinks that is a painfully stupid move?

Yes, another new mount for Canon. Riding alongside the arrival of a totally new mount for Nikon.

The industry has gone a little mad, I think, due to mirrorless.

**Tony Belding** · 09-01-2018, 05:15 AM

Originally posted by rawr

Yes, another new mount for Canon. Riding alongside the arrival of a totally new mount for Nikon.

The industry has gone a little mad, I think, due to mirrorless.

I don't think "mirrorless" is the problem. I think "full frame" is the problem. It's full frame madness.

Now there's a rumor that Panasonic are getting ready to introduce a full frame mirrorless camera. But they already have a well developed Micro Four Thirds system!

Mark Ransom · 09-01-2018, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by Tony Belding

If I understand this news rightly… We're looking at Canon introducing a new lens mount for full-frame mirrorless, incompatible with the EF-M mount that their already-successful APS-C mirrorless cameras use? Am I the only one who thinks that is a painfully stupid move? I mean, if they can't fit a full frame sensor into EF-M, wouldn't it make a ton more sense to just stick with APS-C format? It seems to be working Just Fine for Fujifilm. The difference in imaging performance between full frame and APS-C is fairly trivial. They're introducing a whole new lens mount for the sake of something trivial.

The difference in perception is much larger than the difference in performance. Lots of people won't settle for second best.

surfar · 09-01-2018, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by ffking

Those lenses look very interesting - but very expensive for a (rumoured) $1,900 body - I'm very interested to see if there's a pro body in the wings - not that I could afford it even if I wanted it, but it would be great to see what Canon could do if they threw everything at it - and would they go for a 50Mp sensor or a lower Mp speed monster like the 1DX? Or both?

My guess the 50mp model is under development,likewise the $$$ony 60-75mp FF(its been rumoured for a while).

---------- Post added 09-02-18 at 08:30 AM ----------

Originally posted by rawr

The industry has gone a little mad, I think, due to mirrorless.

It'll be madder by the end of the month!When everything is official.

**Rondec** · 09-01-2018, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by Mark Ransom

How do you figure that? 70mm/F2.0 = 35mm.

The Pentax 24-70 f2.8 uses 82mm filters (they aren't cheap) and the DA *16-50 takes 77mm filters. Not sure how this would be so much smaller. I don't think your math quite works. (The DA 15 f4 is 49mm filter).

mee · 09-01-2018, 07:09 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Looking at the pictures - maybe 95mm at the smallest or perhaps 105mm?

Yes that has to be 95mm or larger. But I'm guessing 95mm.

What I'd like to see is a 3rd party release more novel lenses. Something like a 50-105 f/2 portrait lens and/or a 50-135 f/2.8 walkaround.

Something either with better performance than a 70-200 f/2.8 at the same size/weight OR similar performance at a reduced focal length range and size/weight.

I like having f/2.8 speed but don't need a lens as long as 200mm with it. On the other hand, a lens with faster aperture in a tighter focal range would be advantageous in some capacities too.

Eventually one of them is probably going to get around to making pancakes-like lenses now that the IS is in body (hoping the Canon body has IBIS too...). Drive motors can be made pretty small it seems as well.... for those of us not needing larger apertures for every day shooting and want to reduce weight.

Update: CR has specs on the lenses Canon RF lens specifications - Canon Rumors | Canon Rumors Forum

Quote:

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)

That's a beefy lens.

09-01-2018, 07:09 PM	#30
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by UncleVanya Looking at the pictures - maybe 95mm at the smallest or perhaps 105mm? Yes that has to be 95mm or larger. But I'm guessing 95mm. What I'd like to see is a 3rd party release more novel lenses. Something like a 50-105 f/2 portrait lens and/or a 50-135 f/2.8 walkaround. Something either with better performance than a 70-200 f/2.8 at the same size/weight OR similar performance at a reduced focal length range and size/weight. I like having f/2.8 speed but don't need a lens as long as 200mm with it. On the other hand, a lens with faster aperture in a tighter focal range would be advantageous in some capacities too. Eventually one of them is probably going to get around to making pancakes-like lenses now that the IS is in body (hoping the Canon body has IBIS too...). Drive motors can be made pretty small it seems as well.... for those of us not needing larger apertures for every day shooting and want to reduce weight. Update: CR has specs on the lenses Canon RF lens specifications - Canon Rumors \| Canon Rumors Forum Quote: 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) That's a beefy lens. Last edited by mee; 09-01-2018 at 07:24 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
a Full-Frame System MILC to boost Pentax market share...	geo444	Pentax Full Frame	85	05-23-2018 04:56 PM
rumored Pentax mirrorless camera - something between K1000 and K-01	grahame	Pentax News and Rumors	480	01-26-2017 09:36 AM
Canon 5DmkIV @ $3,799 - rumored - early 2015	interested_observer	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	33	01-10-2015 02:07 PM
Canon as the last MILC player?	farhagh	Photographic Industry and Professionals	2	05-08-2012 03:56 PM
Canon's Evil Specs are rumored	Samsungian	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	2	01-28-2010 06:37 AM

08-31-2018, 08:19 PM	#16
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	Originally posted by UncleVanya Faster doesn't mean better corrected - it could be fast and sloppy and small. Time will tell. It looks huge to me. Images on Nokishita page.

08-31-2018, 08:23 PM	#17
serothis Veteran Member Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 538	I'm liking this trend towards using more readable top lcd screens.

08-31-2018, 08:36 PM	#18
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,406	Originally posted by mee It looks huge to me. Images on Nokishita page. I had missed that. Yes it is huge. The 24-105 f/4 is just slightly smaller than the DFA 24-70 to get some perspective.

08-31-2018, 08:48 PM	#19
disconnekt Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: SoCal/I.E. Photos: Albums Posts: 1,699	Originally posted by serothis a 24-70 f/2 would be crazy. I assume it's going to have a price to match. Thats what I was thinking, and probably a big filter to match

08-31-2018, 08:55 PM	#20
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,406	Originally posted by disconnekt Thats what I was thinking, and probably a big filter to match Looking at the pictures - maybe 95mm at the smallest or perhaps 105mm?

08-31-2018, 09:08 PM	#21
disconnekt Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: SoCal/I.E. Photos: Albums Posts: 1,699	Originally posted by UncleVanya Looking at the pictures - maybe 95mm at the smallest or perhaps 105mm? Good chance near that size, it's going to be maybe a 82mm (really doubt that though, but you never know).Their 28-70 f2.8L (even though it came out in '93) was a 77mm, so a same zoom-range lens with a faster aperture is going to have a bigger filter.

08-31-2018, 09:16 PM	#22
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,406	Originally posted by disconnekt Good chance near that size, it's going to be maybe a 82mm (really doubt that though, but you never know).Their 28-70 f2.8L (even though it came out in '93) was a 77mm, so a same zoom-range lens with a faster aperture is going to have a bigger filter. The 24-105 f/4 is 83mm and the pictures clearly show a much larger lens with the 24-70 f/2 - The slope up from the mount to the first size increase looks like maybe 83mm or wider then it gets bigger. It will be a whale.

09-01-2018, 04:21 AM - 1 Like	#23
Tony Belding Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Hamilton, Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 781	If I understand this news rightly… We're looking at Canon introducing a new lens mount for full-frame mirrorless, incompatible with the EF-M mount that their already-successful APS-C mirrorless cameras use? Am I the only one who thinks that is a painfully stupid move? I mean, if they can't fit a full frame sensor into EF-M, wouldn't it make a ton more sense to just stick with APS-C format? It seems to be working Just Fine for Fujifilm. The difference in imaging performance between full frame and APS-C is fairly trivial. They're introducing a whole new lens mount for the sake of something trivial.

09-01-2018, 04:31 AM	#24
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	Those lenses look very interesting - but very expensive for a (rumoured) $1,900 body - I'm very interested to see if there's a pro body in the wings - not that I could afford it even if I wanted it, but it would be great to see what Canon could do if they threw everything at it - and would they go for a 50Mp sensor or a lower Mp speed monster like the 1DX? Or both?

09-01-2018, 04:38 AM	#25
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Tony Belding Am I the only one who thinks that is a painfully stupid move? Yes, another new mount for Canon. Riding alongside the arrival of a totally new mount for Nikon. The industry has gone a little mad, I think, due to mirrorless.

09-01-2018, 05:15 AM	#26
Tony Belding Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Hamilton, Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 781	Originally posted by rawr Yes, another new mount for Canon. Riding alongside the arrival of a totally new mount for Nikon. The industry has gone a little mad, I think, due to mirrorless. I don't think "mirrorless" is the problem. I think "full frame" is the problem. It's full frame madness. Now there's a rumor that Panasonic are getting ready to introduce a full frame mirrorless camera. But they already have a well developed Micro Four Thirds system!

09-01-2018, 06:24 AM	#27
Mark Ransom Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 498	Originally posted by Tony Belding If I understand this news rightly… We're looking at Canon introducing a new lens mount for full-frame mirrorless, incompatible with the EF-M mount that their already-successful APS-C mirrorless cameras use? Am I the only one who thinks that is a painfully stupid move? I mean, if they can't fit a full frame sensor into EF-M, wouldn't it make a ton more sense to just stick with APS-C format? It seems to be working Just Fine for Fujifilm. The difference in imaging performance between full frame and APS-C is fairly trivial. They're introducing a whole new lens mount for the sake of something trivial. The difference in perception is much larger than the difference in performance. Lots of people won't settle for second best.

09-01-2018, 02:29 PM	#28
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,141	Originally posted by ffking Those lenses look very interesting - but very expensive for a (rumoured) $1,900 body - I'm very interested to see if there's a pro body in the wings - not that I could afford it even if I wanted it, but it would be great to see what Canon could do if they threw everything at it - and would they go for a 50Mp sensor or a lower Mp speed monster like the 1DX? Or both? My guess the 50mp model is under development,likewise the $$$ony 60-75mp FF(its been rumoured for a while). ---------- Post added 09-02-18 at 08:30 AM ---------- Originally posted by rawr The industry has gone a little mad, I think, due to mirrorless. It'll be madder by the end of the month!When everything is official.

09-01-2018, 07:00 PM	#29
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by Mark Ransom How do you figure that? 70mm/F2.0 = 35mm. The Pentax 24-70 f2.8 uses 82mm filters (they aren't cheap) and the DA *16-50 takes 77mm filters. Not sure how this would be so much smaller. I don't think your math quite works. (The DA 15 f4 is 49mm filter).