Thoughts about Canon's RF lens strategy 5 December 2021

Spangled Drongo  R5 with RF 100-500mm L + RF 1.4x extender

This post is speculative. I have no inside knowledge of product development processes at Canon or any other camera/lens maker.

However since introduction of the RF mount in 2018 Canon has delivered several innovative models  which have some feature or capability not previously seen in the catalogue of  lenses by Canon or other makers.

Canon’s overall RF strategy seems clear enough. Users who already have  EF lenses can mount and use them on any RF mount body with the adapter. I have read many reports that these lenses often autofocus better on RF bodies than they did on the EF mount DSLRs for which they were originally intended.

For prospective users without a drawer full of EF models, all the RF lenses thus far released have some feature or capability which improves on the EF equivalent (where there is one) in some tangible way. This is the carrot to lure users away from the old EF system to the new RF system. I think Canon will stop making EF mount bodies and EF/EFS lenses as soon as they feel they can do so without alienating too many DSLR diehards.

In the process of making the shift from EF to RF we can see that the new RF lens models fit generally into two groups.

In the first group we see RF versions of established EF models.

These include the 15-35mm f2.8, 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200mm f2.8. These three are staples of professional journalism. Others include a 50mm f1.8, 24-105mm f4, 400mm f2.8 and 600mm f4.

I suspect that if Canon had not produced these lenses there would have been a backlash from users accustomed to having those specific focal lengths and apertures in their bag.

In the second group we see models which have the same or similar focal length as an EF version but with added feature(s) plus models not seen in the EF catalogue.

Here are some of these starting with primes, shortest focal length first:

16mm f2.8 

Architecture and real estate photographers have a 15-35mm lens permanently attached to a camera body. But these UWA zooms are big, heavy and expensive.

The rest of us want a small, light budget priced UWA lens of some kind for occasional use.

Behold, the RF 16mm f2.8 which fits the bill perfectly.

Third party suppliers offer UWA primes but they are generally quite large, often have a dome type front element and usually have no electrical contacts.

The little RF 16mm takes a normal 43mm filter, has autofocus and full communication with all Canon RF mount cameras present and future.

Even better it makes very good pictures. It does this with the assistance of considerable post capture image manipulation either in camera with JPG stills or video and in post processing with Raw files. This is necessary to manage the massive barrel distortion and peripheral shading found in uncorrected Raw files.

As a bonus it can make decent close-ups which seems a bit strange for an ultrawide optic but it works quite well.

The one thing lacking as I write is a profile for Adobe Camera Raw/Lightroom. No doubt this will appear in due course.

Missing thus far  are a compact 24mm and compact 28mm. Hopefully these will appear sometime.

35mm f1.8 

This is a very popular focal length and aperture so it comes as no surprise that the 35mm f1.8 was one of the first RF lenses to be released.

It is the successor to the EF 35mm f2 of 2012 and improves on that model with lower cost, lighter weight, better optical quality especially wide open and the ability to make half life size macro photos.

50mm f1.8

The RF nifty fifty of 2020 looks like the 30 year old EF version of 1990. They are about the same size and price, have a similar optical formulation and fit into the same niche in their respective catalogues. But the RF version offers something extra and that is close focussing ability which enables 0.25x lifesize reproduction. The older lens offered 0.15x. In addition overall optical quality is improved by the inclusion of an aspheric element in the optics.

50mm f1.2

The EF 50mm f1.2 of 2007 is basically a 6 element double gauss design with an additional aspheric element positioned at the rear. I see in reviews it is optically very poor at the widest aperture and very soft in the periphery at any aperture. By current standards it would be unacceptable.

The RF version of 2018 utilises a totally different optical formulation with more elements and greater complexity.

Reviewers report this lens delivers excellent optical qualities right from f1.2.

The RF version is dramatically better than the old EF model.

Missing thus far is a standard RF 50mm f1.4.

85mm f2

This is the RF version of the EF 85mm f1.8 which was introduced in 1992. This lens has remained in the catalogue for almost 30 years,  testament to its good overall performance.

The RF 85mm f2 of 2020 has a completely different optical formulation. This delivers slightly improved sharpness across the frame at all apertures and the front focussing design enables 0.5x lifesize macro capability. The EF lens offered only 0.13x.

85mm f1.2

Wide aperture 85mm lenses are ideal for portraiture. They have long had a place in the Canon catalogue. The EF 85mm f1.2was introduced in 2006. In its day this was regarded as one of the best and sharpest lenses available.  But when I look at lens test results I see it is weak across the frame at the widest aperture and really weak in the periphery at all apertures.

The RF version released in 2019 is on a different level altogether. The author of lens test site Optical Limits goes into raptures about this lens, describing it as “breathtaking”,  “stellar” and “pure lens porn”  with “outlandish” sharpness across the frame right from f1.2.

Still no stabiliser though and the RF is big, heavy and expensive.

But for the portrait photographer who demands only the best, here it is.

100mm macro

Canon has a long history of making high quality 100mm f2.8 macro lenses. 

The EF 100mm f2.8 macro was released in 1990 with 1x lifesize reproduction but no stabiliser. I used this lens through the 1990s for wildflower close-ups, producing many photos on transparency film which still look good today.

This was followed   by a version with ultrasonic focus in 2000 then an L version with stabiliser in 2009.

Each of these EF 100mm macro lenses delivered very good results so I guess the question for product developers entering the RF mount era was …what comes next ?  Do we just repeat the EF formula but with RF mount or go for something special ?

As it happens they went for something special in the form of the RF 100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM lens which for the first time offers 1.4x lifesize reproduction. It also delivers extremely high sharpness right across the frame right from f2.8 at both normal and macro focus distance. The stabiliser is very effective and the autofocus super fast.

All this means I can make close-ups of wildflowers waving in the breeze quickly, easily, without a tripod and without any other aids. This has dramatically changed the way I approach wildflower photography.

The 100mm macro has evolved from a special purpose lens into a high speed, high function, do anything 100mm lens which is effective for sports, action, birds in flight, portraiture and anything else for which the 100mm focal length is appropriate.

600mm f11 and 800mm f11

These two implementations of new type of super-telephoto lens were announced in 2020.

Super teles utilising diffraction/refraction optics are not new. Canon introduced a 400mm f4 (non-L) DO (Diffractive optics) IS USM in 2001 and updated this in 2014 with a Mk2 version.

You will notice that there are no EF or EF-S lenses with a maximum aperture smaller than f5.6. This is because the SLR and DSLR cameras of the era could not reliably autofocus at smaller apertures.

But the on-sensor dual pixel AF in Canon mirrorless models can focus right down to f22.

Canon has used this new found capability to great effect with the new 600 and 800mm f11 lenses which deliver very good  super tele capability at previously unattainable  levels of size, mass and price.

In Australia you can buy a new RF 600mm f11 for $1289  or an  RF 600mm f5.6 L for $20,000  which is 15 times as much.

I had a 600mm f11 for a while and was very impressed with the remarkable value for money which it can put into the hands of enthusiast photographers.  Sharpness, contrast and AF performance are all very good. The downsides are a limited close focus capability and restricted area of the frame available for focussing.

Professional sport photographers will continue to use the big whites as they are a bit better optically and mechanically and allow more background blur.

I sold the 600mm f11 after getting an RF 100-500mm L, which offers greater versatility but costs 4x as much.

Zooms

Zooms can benefit even more than primes from the new found ability of RF mount bodies to focus at apertures smaller than f5.6.  Canon has used this to make a range of zooms with focal length and aperture ranges not seen previously.  The strategy here is clear enough. Canon wants to offer RF system users lenses which have a greater zoom range or lighter weight and smaller size or closer focus distance or better stabiliser or better autofocus or better optical performance or all of the above than could be had in the EF system.

RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 STM

This is Canon’s least expensive (for now anyway) RF zoom. It is usually sold together with one of the lower priced RF mount bodies as a kit. This provides a budget priced entry into the full frame EOS RF mount system.

It is the RF successor to the EF 24-105mm f3.5-5.6 of 2014.

The RF version is a completely new design with fewer elements providing the same focal length range in a smaller, lighter package at a lower price.  This has been made possible by

a) utilising post capture corrections to manage the massive barrel distortion and peripheral shading  at 24mm and

b) reducing the widest aperture to f4-7.1.

All of which should be just fine in practice and in some respects that is so.   Center of frame sharpness is very good as are the stabiliser and AF speed and accuracy.

But my experience with four copies is that something is not quite right with this lens.  I have been unable to find one which is decently sharp in the periphery at all focal lengths.

So in concept this lens is exactly what the RF system needs for an entry level zoom but there appears to be a problem with the implementation.

I cannot recommend this lens for landscape and similar subjects requiring sharpness across the frame.

RF 24-240mm f4-6.3 IS USM

Superzoom lenses are quite commonplace on cameras with small sensors. For instance the Sony RX10.4 bridge camera with a 15.9mm diagonal sensor has a 25x zoom of very good quality. But as sensor size increases lens designers become increasingly challenged when trying to produce a superzoom of consumer friendly size.

In 2004 Canon released the 10.7x EF 28-300mm  f3.5-5.6 L. This was a very large, heavy, expensive “big white” which must have been a pain to lug around but apparently found favour with some professional photographers for exactly the reason amateurs like superzoom lenses which is the ability to manage changing circumstances without having to change lens.

Sony got into full frame mirrorless first with the FE series lenses starting in 2013. In 2015 they introduced the FE 24-240mm f3.5-6.3. This was the first consumer grade 10x superzoom for full frame mirrorless cameras.  This was a bold move from Sony but from reviews which I have read, not altogether successful optically. One well regarded reviewer described corner sharpness as “disastrous” and “appalling”.  Ouch. It would appear this lens could benefit from an upgrade.

Canon introduced the RF 24-240mm f4-6.3 in 2019. This lens is very similar to the Sony in length, mass and specifications. Reviewers were initially shocked at the amount of barrel distortion and peripheral shading at 24mm in uncorrected raw files. Once corrected however the lens can turn in a good optical performance  with excellent stabiliser and autofocus operation.

My experience with the RF 24-240mm is a bit mixed. I have bought and used three copies of this lens since it was released in the quest for one which could meet my rather picky optical expectations.  It would appear that as with the 24-105 f4-7.1 above, this lens is subject to considerable sample variation.  It has a complex optical formulation with 21 elements. I am guessing that Canon can only meet the price point for this lens by minimising the amount of testing applied to each sample before it leaves the factory.

My first copy was soft at the long end. The second was soft on the left side. I have kept the third copy which is by no means perfect but acceptable for this type of consumer product.

Overall this is a better lens than the RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 STM and one I am happy to recommend provided you get a good copy.

RF 100-400mm f5.6-8

Introduced in 2021, the RF 100-400mm is the RF system successor to the EF 70-300mm.

I bought and used the EF 70-300mm for a while because at the time there was no RF tele zoom. I found the EF 70-300mm to be a nice lens with very good sharpness at all focal lengths. It is still available and is very good value for money.

However…..the new lens is a better match for either the RF 24-104mm f4 L or the RF 24-105mm STM and provides greater zoom reach.

The RF lens is lighter than the old one and the same length if you add the adapter to the EF 70-300mm. The new RF lens also benefits from the new 12 pin connection to RF mount cameras with faster AF which is better able to track moving subjects.

Canon has achieved size/weight reduction by reducing the aperture one stop from f4-5.6 to f5.6-8.  I find this no problem as the RF bodies especially the R5 and R6 focus just fine at f8 and have very good high ISO noise characteristics.

The RF 100-400mm is a very nice compact budget alternative to the next lens which is the:

RF 100-500mm f4-7.1 L

Introduced in 2020 this is the RF successor to the highly regarded EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L of 2014. As such it had to be something special and it is.

I have one of these and have never been quite so impressed by any other lens, ever.  It has greater reach than the EF lens yet is lighter and shorter (if you count the EF-RF adapter needed for the EF) and amazingly sharp at all focal lengths. It has an excellent stabiliser and superb tracking capability for fast moving subjects.

It is substantially more expensive than the EF 100-400 (but that lens is now 7 years old) and costs four times as much as the RF 100-400mm described above.

But I still rate the RF 100-500mm L good value for money because it is such a fine lens.

Summary

As the RF full frame mirrorless system catalogue evolves it is apparent that Canon has put considerable research and development into developing best-in-class lenses from the largest and most expensive, like the 600mm f4L to the smallest and least expensive like the 50mm f1.8 STM.  There is something in the catalogue for all levels of user from full time professionals right down to hobbyists who want something better than a smartphone.

What’s next ?

We shall see, but the total number of cameras sold has declined precipitously  over the last few years with the low end bearing most of the reduction.

So why is Canon producing budget lenses for the RF system ?

My guess: they want to terminate production all DSLRs, all APS-C, all EF and EF-S lenses and all EF-M bodies and lenses.

The situation until recently has been that “entry level” meant a Rebel style crop sensor DSLR with EF-S kit lens or an EF-M mirrorless body with a kit EF-M zoom.

If I were running Canon I would be working to quietly delete all those options from the catalogue to concentrate research and development, inventory, sales, marketing and support into just one system.

Support for this idea can already be seen in the form of the entry level  EOS RP and the RF 24-105mm STM kit lens.

I got these kits and prices from the same vendor. I could not get an exact match as you can see. The RF-M 15-45mm is a low grade kit zoom which I found hardly worth using when I had EF-M gear.

 The EF-M 18-150mm doesn’t match the RF 24-105 very well but is the best fit that I could find.

The crop sensor M6.2 has a faster frame rate than the RP so might be preferred for fast moving subjects. On the other hand the RP is much nicer to hold and use. I have bought and owned both and would pick the RP every time if asked to choose.

You can see where this is going. Already you can have a compact full frame mirrorless kit for less money than an approximately comparable crop sensor one.

As usual we shall see.