Here is the unannounced Canon RF-S 10-18 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM

[Canon Rumors Guy]

We have reported recently that an ultra-wide RF-S zoom lens was coming this year, and it looks like Canon will be bringing the RF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM to fill that need in the RF-S lineup. You can see that this lens has a tiny 48mm filter thread. Unfortunately we don’t have any other specifications

See full article...

 

[bbasiaga]

Instead of the 11-22 ef-m port? Or in addition to? Time will tell....


-Brian

 

[padam]

Instead of the 11-22 ef-m port? Or in addition to? Time will tell....


-Brian

They won't make two. This is more useful.
Little slower than the EF-S, but probably even sharper and hopefully not that much more expensive.

First picture shows that it needs to be extended like the EF-M lens.

 

[kypr.eos]

Well done Canon for making this lens start at 10mm and for the impressively small size (especially compared to the EF-S lens), while still including IS. I suppose image quality will be on par with most other RF-S lenses, so at least decent.

 

[H. Jones]

Honestly, a really compelling size. I think it's really cool that Canon has found a way to make the huge RF mount still work for compact EF-M styled lenses like this.

Crop sensor DSLRs and EF-S lenses never struck me as being small enough to make it worth not bringing a full frame camera. It does seem like the RF-S lenses and cameras are getting a lot closer to that, though. At this point you could toss a R50, RF 10-18 and RF 18-150 into a tiny camera bag and have everything from 16mm to 240mm covered in a tiny set-up. Throw in a RF 28mm pancake and you have a decent option when it gets dark, too.

 

[Stig Nygaard]

Thanks god it goes down to 10mm.
I was hoping for something looking (and spec'ed) a bit more like a "prosumer" lens and going down to maybe 9mm. But this will probably/hopefully be good enough to replace my current EF-S zoom.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Nice!

Good to know that if I need/want to at some point, I can pair a crop R body with RF-S equivalents of my two most used EF-M lenses.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Nicely done!!!! This looks like a great small lens for a crop body. Looks like a great choice when hiking or such or for light city travel.
Maybe, just maybe I'll end with a complete small setup when I don't want to carry my FF equipment.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Honestly, a really compelling size. I think it's really cool that Canon has found a way to make the huge RF mount still work for compact EF-M styled lenses like this.

Crop sensor DSLRs and EF-S lenses never struck me as being small enough to make it worth not bringing a full frame camera. It does seem like the RF-S lenses and cameras are getting a lot closer to that, though. At this point you could toss a R50, RF 10-18 and RF 18-150 into a tiny camera bag and have everything from 16mm to 240mm covered in a tiny set-up. Throw in a RF 28mm pancake and you have a decent option when it gets dark, too.

Add the RF 100-400mm to that and you're good to go to 640mm equivalent. Really nice setup!

 

[nunataks]

Canon really doesn't know how to make attractive lenses anymore, but at least its small (while incredibly slow) at this point the iphone aperture in some cases is actually better (despite a tiny sensor).

 

[kypr.eos]

Canon really doesn't know how to make attractive lenses anymore, but at least its small (while incredibly slow) at this point the iphone aperture in some cases is actually better (despite a tiny sensor).

So a third of a stop slower than the EF-S lens and f/6.3 on the long end is incredibly slow?

I personally believe that the size difference (including going from a 67mm to a 49mm filter thread) outweighs such a small difference in maximum aperture. Of course, YMMV.

 

[blackcoffee17]

As cheap as possible. Canon didn\'t bother much with this. Even darker than the EF-M version.

 

[blackcoffee17]

Canon really doesn't know how to make attractive lenses anymore, but at least its small (while incredibly slow) at this point the iphone aperture in some cases is actually better (despite a tiny sensor).

I agree, all RF-S lenses are ugly with that super cheap look and oversized mount area.

 

[john1970]

I agree, all RF-S lenses are ugly with that super cheap look and oversized mount area.

Fair point. Personally, I would rather place a FF lens on a cropped body, but that is my opinion. I do see the advantages of the RF-S glass been smaller and considerably less expensive.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon really doesn't know how to make attractive lenses anymore, but at least its small (while incredibly slow) at this point the iphone aperture in some cases is actually better (despite a tiny sensor).

Sure, you can cherry pick. The iPhone 15 Pro ultrawide camera f/2.2 with a 1/2.55” sensor. That’s equivalent f/8.5 on APS-C (though it’s also wider, 8mm APS-C equivalent framing).

The iPhone 15 Pro main camera is f/1.78 with a 1/1.28” sensor. That’s equivalent f/3.8 on APS-C, which is ~1/2-stop better than the 18-45 kit lens at the wide end. Of course, the RF 16/2.8 on an R100 is 2/3-stop faster and the combo costs much less than an iPhone 15 Pro. See, anyone can cherry pick.

 

[EricN]

I agree, all RF-S lenses are ugly with that super cheap look and oversized mount area.

You could glue some gold and silver leaf to it, if you want it to look expensive...

 

[blackcoffee17]

Sure, you can cherry pick. The iPhone 15 Pro ultrawide camera f/2.2 with a 1/2.55” sensor. That’s equivalent f/8.5 on APS-C (though it’s also wider, 8mm APS-C equivalent framing).

The iPhone 15 Pro main camera is f/1.78 with a 1/1.28” sensor. That’s equivalent f/3.8 on APS-C, which is ~1/2-stop better than the 18-45 kit lens at the wide end. Of course, the RF 16/2.8 on an R100 is 2/3-stop faster and the combo costs much less than an iPhone 15 Pro. See, anyone can cherry pick.

But then where is the advantage when a phone fits in your pocket? Maybe one way to fight smartphones would be to offer substantially better image quality even with the cheapest kit lens.

 

[blackcoffee17]

You could glue some gold and silver leaf to it, if you want it to look expensive...

Of, the sarcasm! Well done, clap yourself! I don't want it to look expensive, I want it to look better than a £5 Chinese toy. Somehow Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Signa all can design good looking APS-C lenses.

 

[Czardoom]

Really good to see. Will complement the RF-S 18-150 for all wide angle landscape and general purpose needs. I've got the RF 100-400, so I now will have everything covered when using my R7.

 

[Czardoom]

Of, the sarcasm! Well done, clap yourself! I don't want it to look expensive, I want it to look better than a £5 Chinese toy. Somehow Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Signa all can design good looking APS-C lenses.

Maybe it's just me, but I have never looked at a lens while taking photos. A complete non-issue for me. I'm not holding a camera to impress anyone.