WEX Deals: Use code 10CAN to save 10% on select Canon lenses

F7.1 - Canons new lenses

JackAllTog Plus
11 6.0k 58 United Kingdom
31 Mar 2020 1:58PM
Why,when mobile phones are going below F2, is canon creating new F4 to 7.1 lenses?
Even and L lens, as in the RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM
they also have the RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM - Canon

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

sherlob Plus
14 3.1k 129 United Kingdom
31 Mar 2020 3:47PM
I should imagine part of the answer is down to cost. Fast aperture lenses cost more to produce and cost a whole lot more to buy. Not everyones budget stretches to the costs needed, and not everyone needs ultra fast apertures. E.g.a landscaper will likely seldom use f2.8 so the 16-35mm f4 is likely to be a good and much cheaper alternative (a saving of approx. 1k on todays new prices at WEX).
Philh04 Plus
14 2.1k United Kingdom
31 Mar 2020 4:54PM
The answer as well as cost is equivalence, a mobile phone has a much smaller sensor...
Dave_Canon Plus
13 1.7k United Kingdom
31 Mar 2020 5:01PM
The manufacturers know what they are doing. A mobile phone has a small sensor and the lens is very close to the sensor. As the sensor is so small a large aperture is necessary to capture enough light. However, do not imagine that the f2 lens on a phone will produce a narrow depth of field as it will probably be equivalent to about f13 on a DSLR.

dark_lord Plus
16 2.5k 663 England
1 Apr 2020 11:38AM
Cost, certainly, or rather affordability to a larger customer base absd so more potential sales.
Size and weight so there's more mass appeal there.
These are interlinked.
Especialy so on a big zoom. Yes it would be nice to have f/2 at 500 mm (even if cost were not a factor I'd not relish carrying that sort of lens).

Small maximum apertures are not an issue in terms of viewfinder brightness on mirrorless.
Better noise performance at higher ISOs also makes smalll apertures less of an issue.
It's easy and cheap (comparatively) to make an f/2 lens with a focal lenghth of 3mm.

But when you're up against it a wider aperture is going to win out, in terms of getting a viable image.
Not forgetting the creative aspects.
Philh04 Plus
14 2.1k United Kingdom
1 Apr 2020 3:50PM
Dave_Canon has the answer spot on...
LenShepherd 12 4.2k United Kingdom
2 Apr 2020 9:43AM
It should be well known both pro sports photography and pro general photography is in constant and significant decline - reducing the customer base for f2 and other "exotic" lenses.

ML does not have the "AF brightness" limitations of many DSLR's with an f8 lens combination. The Nikon Z6 & 7 AF quite well with f11 combinations - and I expect Canon ML is similar.

It should be well known the photographic user base has got much older than 30 years ago - and lighter weight packages are attractive to older people - as obvious from 4:3 sales. To some extent 4:3 trades ultimate potential quality for smaller size and less weight.
Nikon has 14-200mm covered with 2 quite light ML lenses and Canon has 24-500 covered with 2 relatively lightweight lenses.

Ultimate potential as in very high ISO's noise performance and the ability to make a print as big as a door which looks good viewed from 15 inches is beyond the needs of most photographers - as distinct from increasingly fewer specialist photographers.

Canon and Nikon seem to have the evolving market worked out. Some photographers may not have accepted the overall camera market is significantly different to the end of last century - hardly 20 years ago.

If you cannot get a good A3 print from recent 4:3 equipment - the limitation is more likely to be the photographers skill than the equipment.
For better or worse for Nikon, Canon and Sony it is possible to get a good A3 print from the latest top of the range cameraphones.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.