EF 200mm f/2L IS discontinued. Updated list of (18) EF and EF-S going away soon.

chuckmiller wrote in post #19208345
I haven't kept up. Have all the RF lenses received high praise?

L

I don't see most RF lenses as anything special. I don't expect any RF lenses to be worse than EF though. I think many EF lenses were already so good it's hard to improve on.
The RF 28-70 f2 is special though, a new speed class for 28-70.
The RF 50 is a different design philosophy compared to the EF. A move from the dreamy to technically perfect and much bigger as a result.
Both the RF 70-00 and 100-500 have different compromise choices. Compact, but less Teleconverter friendly. The 70-200 is downright hostile and refuses to play at all, while the 100-500 plays but not by all the rules (becoming a 420-700 rather than a 140-700 and loss of the stowed size advantage with TC attached).

I think there will be many users who will use some of their favourite EF lenses (with or without other RF lenses) for years on R bodies and may even look for used versions if something happens to their lenses rather than buy RF. eg, an EF 70-200 that can be used with TC may be a choice some want rather than RF 70-200 that can't use a TC.

Choderboy wrote in post #19210306
I don't see most RF lenses as anything special. I don't expect any RF lenses to be worse than EF though. I think many EF lenses were already so good it's hard to improve on.
The RF 28-70 f2 is special though, a new speed class for 28-70.
The RF 50 is a different design philosophy compared to the EF. A move from the dreamy to technically perfect and much bigger as a result.
Both the RF 70-00 and 100-500 have different compromise choices. Compact, but less Teleconverter friendly. The 70-200 is downright hostile and refuses to play at all, while the 100-500 plays but not by all the rules (becoming a 420-700 rather than a 140-700 and loss of the stowed size advantage with TC attached).

I think there will be many users who will use some of their favorite EF lenses (with or without other RF lenses) for years on R bodies and may even look for used versions if something happens to their lenses rather than buy RF. eg, an EF 70-200 that can be used with TC may be a choice some want rather than RF 70-200 that can't use a TC.

1000% agree

If I had to buy an RF lens the 24-105 is very good and the RF50 is outstanding. Otherwise I will be using the converter and using my EF lens. I have excellent copies

After looking at all the possibilities. Im going to get another 150-600 Sigma. You just cant beat the price point and all the advantages when comparing to the 100-500. I made a mistake selling the Sigma

By total chance, basically the day that Canon announced the discontinuation of this wonderful lens, I found one used in a shop at a very reasonable price and just couldn't resist.
Of course I'm already floored of how this lens renders, especially for people shots of course, I'd say it's the perfect "candid compressed portrait lens" for when you cannot or don't want to get too close to your subject, it's at that full-body distance that most of the magic happens (of course even close up portraits looks almost unreal, but it's a look can be almost replicated in full by a F2.8 lens).

It also work surprisingly well adapted on a Sony body via MC-11 as a bonus

Tirpitz wrote in post #19212787
By total chance, basically the day that Canon announced the discontinuation of this wonderful lens, I found one used in a shop at a very reasonable price and just couldn't resist.
Of course I'm already floored of how this lens renders, especially for people shots of course, I'd say it's the perfect "candid compressed portrait lens" for when you cannot or don't want to get too close to your subject, it's at that full-body distance that most of the magic happens (of course even close up portraits looks almost unreal, but it's a look can be almost replicated in full by a F2.8 lens).

It also work surprisingly well adapted on a Sony body via MC-11 as a bonus

It is an amazing lens! I've used it for full body senor portrait sessions and truly loved the results. One can do quite well with an f/2.8 200mm, (zoom or prime) but that extra goodness that come from f/2 (or 1.8 with the older version) is unmistakable and unbeatable.

Yes it is, and for what I've seen from various comparisons, even at F2.8 it has smoother bokeh than both the EF 2.8 prime and the EF 2.8 zooms.
Would be interesting to see how it compares to the mighty new RF 70-200 F2.8 one in that regard.

Folks are not generally made aware of a worldwide shipping bottleneck, that is slowing down goods going everywhere.

• Cargo not getting offloaded from ships to trucks, as not enough truckers to move the containers...
  
• causes a shortage of shipping containers because they are not being turned around
  
• causes a long queue of ships at anchor waiting to get into dock to offload, adding to the shortage of shipping container
  

Chris Frost recently posted one of his very nice reviews on the lens, still rocking on the R5 and even on the super-dense M6 II's APS-C sensor

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=Qd2DZWDUuHA&​t=551s

Tirpitz wrote in post #19213438
Chris Frost recently posted one of his very nice reviews on the lens, still rocking on the R5 and even on the super-dense M6 II's APS-C sensor

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=Qd2DZWDUuHA&​t=551s

Are his hands HUGE? Makes the lens look positively diminutive!

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19213489
Are his hands HUGE? Makes the lens look positively diminutive!

Haha, I didn't notice until you mentioned it. His fingers wrap more than half around the body.

It's astonishing to see basketball players who can palm and hold a basketball with one hand.

You have to show this video to whomever complains that this lens is too big and heavy to be practical

But seriously, is all really relative, every time I use it after having hauled around my massive 400 2.8 IS vI, this one just feels like a feather in my hands..

Tirpitz wrote in post #19213908
You have to show this video to whomever complains that this lens is too big and heavy to be practical

But seriously, is all really relative, every time I use it after having hauled around my massive 400 2.8 IS vI, this one just feels like a feather in my hands..

And there is a thread running from a guy who does or wants to hand hold a 600 f/2.8. Yowsa.

I've just read that the popular EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "pancake" has also been officially discontinued. Can the EF-S 24mm be far behind?

This is doubly a shame. We finally got Canon to make a nice little short stack of pancakes, and they end up being the shortest lived EF releases in Canon history.

I amazed that;
A- The impression I have of their popularity is so far off target. It seems every forum these lenses are praised.
B- Likewise that the "big" 3rd party lens manufacturers aren't offering something like this. One needs to find obscure Chinese brands to get something in 3rd party.
C- In an era of mirrorless, "smaller is better", that Canon is dropping their only entries in this popular and sensible lens design.

like some other recent " discontinued" EF news, I can only hope this means an RF version is right around the corner. time will tell.

Also, it appears that the Canon EF 70-200 F4II and EF 85 f1.2II have also been discontinued. These at least have already received RF versions.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19216468
I've just read that the popular EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "pancake" has also been officially discontinued. Can the EF-S 24mm be far behind?

This is doubly a shame. We finally got Canon to make a nice little short stack of pancakes, and they end up being the shortest lived EF releases in Canon history.

I amazed that;
A- The impression I have of their popularity is so far off target. It seems every forum these lenses are praised.
B- Likewise that the "big" 3rd party lens manufacturers aren't offering something like this. One needs to find obscure Chinese brands to get something in 3rd party.
C- In an era of mirrorless, "smaller is better", that Canon is dropping their only entries in this popular and sensible lens design.

like some other recent " discontinued" EF news, I can only hope this means an RF version is right around the corner. time will tell.

Also, it appears that the Canon EF 70-200 F4II and EF 85 f1.2II have also been discontinued. These at least have already received RF versions.

It looks like the EF 70-200 F/4L IS II has been discontinued now too, as well as the EF 85 F/1.2L II.

Going rapidly now ....

Yepper, rapidly tightening the thumbscrews on the user base.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19216468
I've just read that the popular EF 40mm f/2.8 STM "pancake" has also been officially discontinued. Can the EF-S 24mm be far behind?

This is doubly a shame. We finally got Canon to make a nice little short stack of pancakes, and they end up being the shortest lived EF releases in Canon history.

I amazed that;
A- The impression I have of their popularity is so far off target. It seems every forum these lenses are praised.
B- Likewise that the "big" 3rd party lens manufacturers aren't offering something like this. One needs to find obscure Chinese brands to get something in 3rd party.
C- In an era of mirrorless, "smaller is better", that Canon is dropping their only entries in this popular and sensible lens design.

like some other recent " discontinued" EF news, I can only hope this means an RF version is right around the corner. time will tell.

Also, it appears that the Canon EF 70-200 F4II and EF 85 f1.2II have also been discontinued. These at least have already received RF versions.

Signals the death knell for the dslr then.
Or at least canon dslr.