Phil's Cine RF Mount & Adapter F.A.Q.

[Phil Holland]

Thanks for the article Phil. For Leica-M mount lenses that are wider than 50mm, specifically say the Zeiss ZM 15mm with a rear element that protrudes significantly past the locking lugs of the mount, do you suspect the rear element to still fit inside the flange distance?

Yep and as Blair mentions there's a good amount of space.

On DSMC2/DSMC cameras due to the general design of the Sensor Box/Cavity/Gate/whatever you want to call it, the Leica-M Mount has issues with some of the wider lenses in particular due to the fact that the retrofocus and rear elements protrude very far into the body. Similarly there are older PL lenses that really like to stick their glass down the throat of a camera and have proven not compatible on many systems even.

Komodo should not have any of those limitations due to the way further back sensor and optical array (Sensor Cover Glass, OLPF, etc).

Talking about adapters I wonder if anyone can help me. I have a Canon 300mm F2.8 FD lens modified to PL mount. Since I mainly use EF lenses I was thinking of getting an adapter from PL to EF, so I ordered one from Fotodiox. Strangely enough the PL mount on the lens was too big for the adapter so it is useless for me. I read somewhere that PL mounts can vary in size/depth, but I'm a bit at a loss and would like to hear if there is more knowledge about this kind of problem, as well as finding a working adapter. Thanks

Generally speaking many of the EF>PL adapters are "narrowly compatible" with PL lenses. If you look at all the glass out there, some PL Mounts have a lot of "tube" after the fingers of the mount, some don't. Each manufacturer should list compatibility or provide a measurement so you know if your glass will work or not. The limitation comes from the 44mm to 52mm flange focal distance difference and there's not a lot of space to make a cost effective adapter that would be compatible as well as even avoiding the mirror in some of those cameras. I think most at the end of the day will go with proper RF>PL Adapters with or without behind the lens ND solutions.

Thanks Phil for all you do here. Have you stumbled on any RF to PL (positive locking) adapters for Nikon, Canon EF, Leica M or yet, and if so, build quality?

I'd say a fairly safe bet for a straight mechanical RF>PL is the Metabones at the moment, it was the first available outside of the early custom machined ones. I think this is their 5th generation mount and it's pretty solid. It's what some of the peeps who have been testing Komodo have been using as well and there's a few others out there. I'll add this to the top shortly because more are being released weekly now, but manufacturers that currently or soon will have RF>PL adapters are:
- Metabones
- KipperTie
- Wooden Camera
- Fotodiox
- MTF Services
- Vocas
- C7 Adapters (ciecio7)

These all represent different price points and build quality. There are cheaper knock-off models as well, but I can't speak for the tolerances of everything out there. I rarely cheap out on mounts for a reason.


RF to EF? It will be absolutely difficult to find a better adapter than the one Canon makes already. I mean it's all them really. I have a box full of RF>Leica-M, all work great and it's just a small mount really. I won't be doing RF>Nikon-F because I use adapters to EF and go from there. But I imagine somebody will have a newer electronic support adapter for RF>Nikon in the coming year.


Also, just a quick note as you're Google'n about searching for RF adapters. Remember Contax RF was a thing. We are dealing with Canon RF. I know, confusing, but people either ran out of letters or ideas in this case

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

A special word on L-Mount and Unreleased Lenses
Sigma, Panasonic, and Leica have formed the L-Mount Alliance in 2018. Something must have been in the air that year I've spoken to Sigma as well as various newer and older manufacturers about RF Mount support. I personally would expect some of the L-Mount glass to come to RF-Mount as it in some cases wouldn't require re-inventing the wheel but rather swapping mounts and possibly electronics.

Would it not be easier for RED to make an L mount Komodo, rather than expecting lens manufacturers to do RF versions of their products? Of course if they want to make RF versions anyway, fine by me, but personally I think that RED would profit more by making two or three variants of Komodo. Just my 2 cents.

But for many people, or most people, all this is irrelevant, as they will probably be using PL or M lenses. Probably.

I tested a Micro 4/3 super wide zoom on an APS-C Sony camera, and the results were encouraging. If only there was an adapter that allowed electronic control. Micro 4/3 FFD is 19.25mm, FWIW. E FFD is 18mm.

 

[Lee Saxon]

Would it not be easier for RED to make an L mount Komodo, rather than expecting lens manufacturers to do RF versions of their products?

Unquestionably, if we were talking about some Red-specific (or other niche) mount. But RF is likely to end up second only to Sony E (and well ahead of L itself) in proliferation, so that's a lot of potential customers Sigma is very likely to want to reach.

BUT, I still agree with you that I would love to see other Komodo versions. I personally would pick up the Nikon Z version, since I'm already a Nikon shooter *and* Z mount unlike RF can accept Sony E lenses (TechArt already has a passable AF adapter).

 

[Phil Holland]

Would it not be easier for RED to make an L mount Komodo.

Actually no. I know it's hard to comprehend and it's not ego or brand bias, but rather just sales related. Even in this era of mirrorless popularity Canon EF has a 70%+ share of the lens market. I fully suspect RF will slowly become very popular despite Canon coming a little late to the party.

Sigma in particular will be making RF lenses because it will conservatively outsell L-Mount 5:1 today. Perhaps more-so even. The fp1 is their first L-Mount camera and they do have at least one more coming. But Canon already has several RF cameras on the market with more coming and going on a limb that that there's a notable quantity more out there than you'd think.

I'm not saying the L-Mount Alliance is a bad thing, I think it's fine. But even those 3 companies, especially now, don't have the ability to compete with Canon on the camera technology alone. It would take over 5-7 generations to even get there of a high slope in sales.


And to the rest of that, yes, I'm already mostly using PL, EF, and M on RF and of course anything I adapted to EF in the last 20+ years. In my mind it's go RF if you are trying to go super small, and then explore the creative options the shorter flange distance allows with the adapters from there.

Unquestionably, if we were talking about some Red-specific (or other niche) mount. But RF is likely to end up second only to Sony E (and well ahead of L itself) in proliferation, so that's a lot of potential customers Sigma is very likely to want to reach.

BUT, I still agree with you that I would love to see other Komodo versions. I personally would pick up the Nikon Z version, since I'm already a Nikon shooter *and* Z mount unlike RF can accept Sony E lenses (TechArt already has a passable AF adapter).

The likelihood of Z-Mount support I would say is very, very low and equally if not lower for E-mount. This is coming from somebody who loves Nikon, but is rather tuned into the realities of things in terms of market presence and sadly where they are boxed in. I wouldn't be shocked if we see custom or new version Komodos though if things go gangbusters

The world of mass market mirrorless cameras is mainly a Canon/Sony fight from here on out. I own a bunch of both of their cameras looking at the shelf behind me, but Canon now is in full go mode in RF. They haven't been until sort of now. There's some stuff Sony does better, there's some stuff Canon does better. Sort of the whole game now.

RED is making both an educated and radical move by having the first designed for motion picture camera on the market to support this mount. It's pretty sensible from an image maker's perspective though and fortunately it's pretty damn flexible.


On a personal and historical level, Canon is a textbook example of a company who became huge through steady innovation laced with occasional stagnation or reluctance to adapt to industry trends due to ever evolving landscape of the camera market and emerging "cine" market. They grew large and at that size it's hard to remain nimble. But take note that every time they innovated it changed the entire industry. Whether it's mounts, AF tech, or DSLRs, it's all landed a big punch. Strangely RED is very much of a similar cloth or you'd all be shooting 1080p or 2160p cameras and modular would have stayed exclusively a RED thing. Hell, interchangeable mounts even really. Some manufacturers have also focused on an angle of refinement without a huge focus on emerging trends and technology. But no matter what, this industry moves forward while holding damn tight to what was before. Which is good actually.

 

[Luke Marcus Rosen]

Thanks for your answers, Phil, Lee and Blair.

Now to decide if I want to get Leica or Zeiss M mount glass, or stick with EF and get the Canon VND adapter. I'm thinking about keeping the most compact size, lowest weight, highest optical quality... but worry about the ease of sourcing costly variable ND's for M mount glass.

Would love to see Komodo with a fixed PL mount next, just for extra support and rigidity... this comes before my full frame sensor KOMODO request.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

I wouldn't be shocked if we see custom or new version Komodos though if things go gangbusters

I suspect that Jarred is chuckling to himself right now.

 

[Adam Weinberg]

Re: speedboosters - given that the sensor is a little wider than S35, will full frame glass vignette at 6K on Komodo + speedbooster? And if so, how much are you needing to go down in res to negate?

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

My guess would be fixed RF mounts for base price Komodos. If custom mounts are offered, I'd expect a mark up that covers their cost plus normal profits.

As Phil notes, the short FFD of the RF mount means it can be adapted to a huge universe of longer mounts like EF, PL, M, etc. Jarred chose well.

If a decent RF mount can swing around up to 6 lbs without a foot in normal trim it makes ultra lightweight rigs even more attainable. Yes please.

Cheers - #19

 

[Phil Holland]

Re: speedboosters - given that the sensor is a little wider than S35, will full frame glass vignette at 6K on Komodo + speedbooster? And if so, how much are you needing to go down in res to negate?

It's going to be a bigger concern on image performance in the edges on each individual Speedbooster and unless they are all using the same optics there will be some variance in quality. Coverage-wise you are actually within the design spec of FF35 3:2's image circle despite having a wider FOV similar to a 38mm sensor on a typical 0.71X reducer.

 

[Adam Weinberg]

For sure and great to hear!

 

[Alain M]

I've been summoned

Jarred is right. I haven't just been testing and experimenting with adapters since Komodo's announcement, but this started when the RF-Mount was announced. I'm a lens nut as well as a camera nut. Some of this advice has already been used in the field prior to Komodo's official release, which you've seen here and there via bts pics.

Much like RED's initial offerings of multiple mounts and subsequent use of a adapters as well, Komodo inspires a great deal of creativity and flexibility with it's compact and forward thinking mount RF-Mount.

But RF is new. So new, some don't even know about it in the world of motion picture production.

Let's jump in.


What is the RF-Mount?
RF-Mount Canon's new shorter flange depth electronic mount introduced in 2018. Similar to the wildly popular and successful EF Mount, but with a flange focal distance of 20mm rather than the EF's 44mm FFD. And that means you can adapt nearly 70 of the about 85 mount standards to it. That's a lot of glass. It's a locking bayonet with a button release. If you've ever used an EF Mount, this will be super familiar to you.


So what can you easily adapt to Komodo?
- RF>Canon-EF (that's a given and Canon's electronic adapter is great and they make 3 of them)
- RF>Leica-M (Simple mechanical as well as helicoid for closer focus)
- RF>PL Mount
- Anything you can adapt to EF Mount like Leica-R, Olympus OM, Nikon F, Canon FD/FL, etc. The sky if virtually the limit.


What can't you adapt to RF?
Focusing on the modern stuff, notably you can't mount:
- Nikon Z-Mount
- Sony E-Mount or FZ-Mount
- Fujifilm's X-Mount

Those all have shorter flange focal distances, so no go. Physically impossible and honestly you'd need new electronics anyways.


Who is currently or will be making RF>PL Mount Adapters?
- Metabones
- KipperTie
- Wooden Camera
- Fotodiox
- MTF Services
- Vocas
- C7 Adapters (ciecio7)
- and others


A special word on L-Mount and Unreleased Lenses
Sigma, Panasonic, and Leica have formed the L-Mount Alliance in 2018. Something must have been in the air that year I've spoken to Sigma as well as various newer and older manufacturers about RF Mount support. I personally would expect some of the L-Mount glass to come to RF-Mount as it in some cases wouldn't require re-inventing the wheel but rather swapping mounts and possibly electronics. Totally exploiting my relationship with a few lens manufacturers as well, expect much more RF glass incoming from the usual and unusual sources. Laowa for instance has some nice tiny wide angle primes coming.


Some Canon RF-Mount Notes
RF-Mount is the newest in Canon's lineup and it took them a few decades to flesh out their massive EF lens line-up to where it is today. However, they are focused and releasing some pretty kick butt newer lenses like very high speed zooms and extremely modern designed high speed primes, an avalanche more incoming. Also their new focusing motor system in RF glass is pretty rad for autofocus, still and motion. I suspect actually faster, more accurate, and more robust than anything EF actually.

One thing Canon introduced with the RF-Mount is the new concept of a Control Ring. Really cool to see something new in the mix. For RF-Mount native lenses, this ring exists on the lens itself. On their cameras you can map it to do certain things. They also make an RF>EF Control Ring Adapter. I mention this because we don't know yet how RED and Komodo plans to tackle this, but the imagination runs wild. Iris control? ISO control? User configurable? Tune-able AF speed? We just don't know. Too early. But it does possibly give you a potential shortcut key/ring, which is cool.


Behind the Lens Neutral Density (ND)
One of the exciting things about this RF-Mount is we have some space to work with. Which allows for behind the lens ND and Variable ND solutions. Canon makes an official Variable ND, but there are others as well. Though I have their RF>VND EF adapter here, I prefer physical NDs as they don't have many of the pitfalls of VNDs. But if you are looking to save dough and work fast, these work.

Notably and likely very useful will be KipperTie's upcoming Revolva-RF>PL which much like the DSMC2/DSMC model uses a mechanical rotating cartridge system with 4X physical ND windows that you can configure yourself. John's nearly done with the prototype as of March 2020. Expect it to drop likely around Komodo time. I think he is also working on a Revolva RF>EF, but I don't recall. Certainly possible.

There's also more ND related stuff incoming. 2020/2021 will be fun on this front.


Support Your Glass
The RF-Mount is pretty robust, but it's still a thin mount in comparison to say PL. I personally would recommend lens support for glass 5-6lbs and heavier and certainly longer lenses that might even fall under the weight class I just mentioned.

Many of the PL-Mount Adapters include a support foot. That is there for you to mount your base plate to for a very rigid and strong little package.

Many lenses in the modern era also have a support foot for a rod support or plate support.

In some instances, like long super-telephoto lenses, you might just be supporting the lens and letting Komodo dangle, that will work. I like to imagine a tiny Komodo with legs wiggling in the air


Small or Big
Komodo expresses itself as a mini-cinema camera, mini-utility camera, tiny-block cam, or whatever you want to call it. One of it's biggest strengths is just how small you can have a shooting package. I'm talking < 4lbs in some cases. Which is insane. But get creative. Use the big glass too. Use whatever it takes to make the shot. Komodo allows for that sort of mindset. Much like RED has displayed with it's modular compact cinema cameras, you can always make a small camera bigger, but you can nearly never make a large camera smaller.


Komodo Specific Specs
RED Komodo 6K is an S35+ sensor, which means it's format size is a bit larger than Super 35mm in width, but is actually within the Super 35mm 4-perf image circle spec.

Here is a comparison of Komodo 6K FF and Kodak Super 35mm 3-perf

And here is a comparison of Komodo 6K FF and Kodak Super 35mm 4-perf

That means you can use VistaVision, Large Format, FF35, 135 Still lenses as well as Super 35mm and APS-C lenses on Komodo. And likely very good coverage on older Academy 35mm lenses. Especially at 6K HD.


Komodo 6K RF + Speedboosters
Yes Speedboosters (focal reducers) will work with RED Komodo 6K. Metabones has been sort of dominating here, but expect others to join in shortly. At the moment RF>EF Speedboosters are available. I'm expecting an RF>PL Speedbooster later this year.

For those new to these things. In the case of a FF35<APS-C Focal Reducer/Speedbooster you traditionally have about 0.71X reduction of the FF35 image to the APS-C image plane, giving Komodo's 27.03mm wide sensor an effectove Field of View of a 38mm wide sensor with the added benefit of gaining about 1 stop of light. So your T2.8 lens becomes effectively as sensitive as a T2.

Pros and cons to all of that. You are still adding more optics into the mix, and though mostly brag about higher center MTF, you might see enhanced distortion, CA, artifacts, etc. I still personally like to stop down a stop when using Speedboosters, pretty much my advice for all optical adapters. They are incredibly useful, but they don't walk on water. And remember if your lens tops out at T16 and you've boosted it, you now have a minimum aperture of T8. Plan for ND accordingly.


Feel Free to Ask
Komodo has brought a lot of new peeps to this corner of the internet and hopefully I can be an informative resource for you. I am in the rare position of owning, used, or have tested nearly lens ever made in the last 100+ years. If you have a question, I can likely answer it. I'm super excited about what this new RF-Mount brings to keeping Komodo small but also empowering the more common cinema-minded mount standards to be more flexible than ever.

Thanks for sharing bro... Excellent summary :ihih:

 

[Lee Saxon]

The likelihood of Z-Mount support I would say is very, very low and equally if not lower for E-mount.

I agree, just mentioning my own caviar dreams...

 

[Jarred Land]

phil you are awesome.. thanks a ton.

 

[Trevor Meier]

Thanks for your work on this Phil, super helpful as always.

What ever happened to that lens circle database that you and Matt Duclos were working on? I’m currently in the process of choosing EF glass to mount on both GFX and RF-mount adapters for a project. It’d be great to know what glass out there has a big enough image circle for these bigger sensors

 

[Lee Saxon]

Thanks for your work on this Phil, super helpful as always.

What ever happened to that lens circle database that you and Matt Duclos were working on? I’m currently in the process of choosing EF glass to mount on both GFX and RF-mount adapters for a project. It’d be great to know what glass out there has a big enough image circle for these bigger sensors

Have you seen this thread https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1496482

 

[Phil Holland]

phil you are awesome.. thanks a ton.

Anytime. It's actually been fun tinkering with potential here using this mount.

Thanks for your work on this Phil, super helpful as always.

What ever happened to that lens circle database that you and Matt Duclos were working on? I’m currently in the process of choosing EF glass to mount on both GFX and RF-mount adapters for a project. It’d be great to know what glass out there has a big enough image circle for these bigger sensors

Woof. Long, long topic to discuss. But I'll keep it short. Ages ago, when MX and eventually Dragon ruled the land I started doing a lot and I mean a lot of lens coverage tests. There's a lot of ways to go about this including the use of larger format digital sensors, projectors, and *gasp* even a scanner. When Dragon was new this resulted in a lens coverage "guide" circa 2013:

https://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?103766-Dragon-Lens-Coverage-Information

Which led to when VV being new I even created a tool:
http://phfx.com/tools/lensData/

Outside of RED, there was also a host of Alexa 65 coverage tests I had to do for a studio.

Fast forward to a modern era with a rather large explosion of optics, mounts, format sizes, and cameras in general it became difficult to re-craft a tool as the most important thing became pretty damn apparent to me prior to all the "larger format sensors".

You need to test the glass on the sensor and format itself for a variety of reasons. In the past you've seen me write about sensor smear, which has much to do with the micro-lens design on the sensor itself. Famously Leica-M lenses, particularly wides, sometimes created an off-putting magenta vignette and/ora smeared detail due to this. Also some uniqueness on lens fitting, each camera system's unique optical path, interchangeable mounts, mount adapters, etc..... It just became a ball of tangled yarn that was easier to just stuff in a box and add to rather than untangle.

Once I got a couple thousand lenses deep, I kept detailed notes really, but generally I would still test them on whatever the newer tech was. Jay Holben and a few others on the ASC MITC Lens Commitee (Duclos is on there too) are working on cataloging "every lens that has ever been on a movie camera" which is a daunting task. I think they are up to 3500 lenses or so last time I checked in.

But in truth I've been treating it like if I was to shoot a film with every lens tested for a given format size. And there's certainly some stuff that passes through on built on knowledge and experience, but it's super damn important to test things out.

One key story that comes to mind was when a specific cheaper PL Mount adapter infused a "ring reflection" as part of the lens flare itself due to not well planned out design and lack of flocking. And that had nothing to do with the lens or camera, but rather the mount itself. I've also seen some things prohibit the light path of certain lenses that "should cover". Then there's weird stuff like all the potential coverage variation and even mount fitting issues between long manufactured lenses over time. A few lenses out there have had several versions, sometimes not even noted by manufacturers. Though thankfully Canon and a few others rock the Mark I, II, III, IV, etc. In other cases it goes by serial number, but sometimes also origin of manufacturing. And lets not get started on zooms that don't just have coverage variation on the wide or long side, but also in the middle of the zoom range! And it gets weirder with all the Speed Boosters, Reducers, Expanders, and Cheaters (Teleconverters/Doublers) out there. And then there's the variance of manufacturer's tolerances even.

I'll even go deeper on my rather tight tolerances as I was testing lenses with the full aperture range under a variety of targets. For instance, some iris designs were fine wide open to T5, but at T8 would no longer cover formats that stretched the lens' ability. And then there's the uneven field illumination or drastic performance fall off if a lens even did cover some formats. Won't name names, but that's led a few to see rather expensive prime sets when they realize 30% of a potential image just can't resolve outside of field or the aberrations would be so bad/prone to happen, or the flare would get weird and start bouncing off the lens housing or iris mechanism, etc. And then there's coverage related stuff that actually has to do with close focus and infinity. Some would cover at say 6' but not below, or would cover most of the way and not at infinity. I can't stress enough, a bunch of people testing lenses aren't testing their entire range and capability to have a well rounded knowledge of what a lens can do and when it can't do something. Jarred and co. got to see that first hand way back when it took a few days for me just to test the usual PL cinema suspects on Dragon at RSH when it was new because I tested thoroughly and it took time to find all the points of potential issue.

TL;DR - It has become a rather simplified mess for me. Which is why so many in the industry just shoot me an email, message, or call. Because sometimes it's as simple of just reaching in a box and slapping a lens on a new camera or just going to my notes. Often in many cases it's stuff I've already tested that became impossible to just present in an effective way and considering all the mentioned variables it became harder deep down to just run with something without testing it on a specific sensor/format/mount combination.

Dragon 6K S35+ and VV actually created a pretty simple ecosystem where sort of a similar answer was apparent. Be cautious when filming wider than a 35mm focal length generally speaking. But now we have literally more newer lenses than old. And with VV it's really about the varianece between FF35 optics and that image circle + the combined chaos of adding a matte box into the mix. Duclos got to experience that first hand when nudged him to make the bayonet mount 114mm for the Otus because I was indeed filming at 8K FF/maximum format and if you just made a screw on say 95mm adapter you'd get vignette, portholing, and light occlusion. And I guess I won't mention the several times I got notes to a manufacturer either on prototypes or shipping lenses and they integrated a slight change and nobody was the wiser *stares passionately at the Voigtlander M-Mount primes they cut off the rear of for me*

Heh. I love being early to the party to figure all this stuff out. It oddly has a beneficial impact on the industry as a whole across a variety of camera manufacturers. But somebody needs to do that leg work to really dive deep. It's just more complicated than I can even explain above and "tolerances" become a fascinating discussion point.

Don't let any of this scare you. You have more lenses options than ever in the modern era than ever before and it's getting simpler. It's very literally the reason I own so much glass. I'm not exactly collecting them, these are tools I deploy as I desire what they can do.

 

[paulcurtis]

Yep and as Blair mentions there's a good amount of space.

On DSMC2/DSMC cameras due to the general design of the Sensor Box/Cavity/Gate/whatever you want to call it, the Leica-M Mount has issues with some of the wider lenses in particular due to the fact that the retrofocus and rear elements protrude very far into the body. Similarly there are older PL lenses that really like to stick their glass down the throat of a camera and have proven not compatible on many systems even.

Komodo should not have any of those limitations due to the way further back sensor and optical array (Sensor Cover Glass, OLPF, etc).

The only thing i'd add (because i'm seeing some issues) is that whilst that means physically they will fit but will all the lenses perform as best they can? The wider M mounts tend to have very shallow rays hitting the sensor. So the sensor itself can affect the quality - you often seeing colouring at the edges because some rays don't hit the pixels fully because of the cell designs. Then before that the light has to go through a filter stack and the type of thickness of that can really affect the image. The M mount lenses are designed with M mount cameras which have a stack between 0.5 and 0.8mm. But stacks on lots of mirrorless are thicker and give smearing results. Leica have been tweaking their lens designs to help this. The very latest 28mm summicron is leagues away from the pre 2016 one in this regard.

I'd imagine you'd need to test this combination to see.

On a positive note a lot of the lenses do work fairly well on Helium aside from the ones that physically hit the OLPF.

Fingers crossed on this because i would love to stick to M mount glass on Komodo.

Apart from that i don't really know of any lighter weight APO style lenses

cheers
Paul

 

[C. Burkhart]

One of the things I don't think people are taking into consideration about the RF line of lenses, is that it may be less video friendly.
While smaller and lighter for instance, the RF 70-200 is telescoping out to the size of the original EF version depending on your chosen focal length.
So obviously, this is not exactly mattebox friendly, not to mention the potential for dust and weatherproofing issues with an extending and retracting barrel.

 

[Gregory Karydis]

One of the things I don't think people are taking into consideration about the RF line of lenses, is that it may be less video friendly.
While smaller and lighter for instance, the RF 70-200 is telescoping out to the size of the original EF version depending on your chosen focal length.
So obviously, this is not exactly mattebox friendly, not to mention the potential for dust and weatherproofing issues with an extending and retracting barrel.

Weatherproofing is my concern as well.
But I trust that GDU wink5, Sigma or even Canon will come up with more cinema friendly versions.

 

[Phil Holland]

Based on the fact that we've seen Matthew in the freezing cold getting pelted by wetness and snow, I've got little worry about using Komodo in heated or frosty conditions.

In my own personal experinece I've had the DSMC and DSMC2 bodies in a pretty vast range of weather conditions without issue as well.

I will say though, water always wins. Nothing is waterproof, even in underwater housings. There's only levels of water resistance until it's resilience and determination show you that resistance is futile.

Signed,

The Borg