Will we see an L Series or 3rd Party Pro Level Super Zoom?

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

Any chance we could see an L series 24-240 or similar zoom range from Canon or a 3rd party in the near or distant future? A zoom in that range with a constant aperture or minimally variable aperture with L level elements, coatings, motor, and weather sealing would be nice.

 

[RedCobra]

Any chance we could see an L series 24-240 or similar zoom range from Canon or a 3rd party in the near or distant future? A zoom in that range with a constant aperture or minimally variable aperture with L level elements, coatings, motor, and weather sealing would be nice.

And very big, very heavy, and very expensive. (unless it was a F/9 or greater.) The Object lens at bigger apertures would be huge. Look at the upcoming 200-800. My MZ 150-400 f/4.5 is nearly twice as heavy as my RF 100-500 and has a 95mm Object lens.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

I think if it was kept between 200 and 300 at the long end at 5.6 it would be manageable. A Canon L lens probably would be very expensive, but a Sigma or Tamron lens would probably be around $2,500.

 

[RedCobra]

I think if it was kept between 200 and 300 at the long end at 5.6 it would be manageable. A Canon L lens probably would be very expensive, but a Sigma or Tamron lens would probably be around $2,500.

If a Tamron or Sigma, it wouldn't be an L lens. Part of the L benefits is the dual Nano motors and weather sealing. The Siggys and Tamrons I have had in the past were never as fast (AF) or as edge to edge sharp or as weather proof as my Ls. YMMV

 

[AntonLargiader]

Canon is pushing the zoom/aperture balance lately, so it's possible they could improve on the 24-105 f/4. But keeping in line with recent improvements (as seen in the 28-70/2, 100-300/2.8, and 24-105/2.8) something like a 28-150/4 could be in reach. I don't think they would put a lot of development into a zoom like that that was slower than f/4; they'd exclude too much of the L market.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

I find shooting ice hockey something like a 50-250 would be perfect. 70 can be too tight when the play is right on top of you.

 

[AntonLargiader]

I want to think they could recreate the EF-S55-250 as an RF-S lens, but if the past is any indication it would be a half stop slower than the EF-S version was.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

Canon is definitely relying on processing with their RF-S and RF zooms.

That being said I could probably shoot an entire hockey game at ISO25,600, run it through LR and the images would look just fine…