Upcoming 2024 Canon RF lens recap

[EricN]

Is it sharp wide open with no extension tubes?
I really did not want to buy an EF lens... but reasons

I love it. I simply adore it

Yes, it's nice and sharp without an extension tube at minimum focus distance. I can read cat food ingredients from about two meters away. Looks great at full length portraits. I spotted a crow about 100 meters away and it was about the same sharpness as the 28-70 f2 . I didn't think to try, but I'll check it with the moon tonight.

 

[hunck]

That would make it more expensive than a grey import RF50 f/1.2 here in Europe.

wow, I bought two RF 50mm f/1.2L lenses for 2.739,- each (at cameranu.n) ..didn't know there was a thing as 'grey import'

 

[navastronia]

I think the 35/1.4L for video leaves the door open for an RF 35/1.2L as a signature lens. I am also hoping for an RF 50/.95L halo product running ~$2,800

 

[frankchn]

I am also hoping for an RF 50/.95L halo product running ~$2,800

It won't be that cheap. An f/0.95 lens is one stop faster than a f/1.2 lens, and one stop brighter usually means 2-4x the price. The other first party f/0.95 FF lenses from manufacturers are the Leica 50/0.95 at $13k, and the Nikon Z 58/0.95 Noct at $8,000 -- both without AF.

If Canon makes one, it will be around that range -- if it has AF, I can see it breaking 5 digits.

 

[DhlcadR6]

You could probably get a used RF 50 f/1.8 for under whatever Yongnuo will charge.
Then you would need to wait until cheaper used Yongnuos.

Yongnuo 50/1.8 is an internal focus lens with a quieter STM.

 

[steen-ag]

wow, I bought two RF 50mm f/1.2L lenses for 2.739,- each (at cameranu.n) ..didn't know there was a thing as 'grey import'

It's very,very Cheap. How can they do it?

 

[EricN]

Yes, it's nice and sharp without an extension tube at minimum focus distance. I can read cat food ingredients from about two meters away. Looks great at full length portraits. I spotted a crow about 100 meters away and it was about the same sharpness as the 28-70 f2 . I didn't think to try, but I'll check it with the moon tonight.

It's too hazy tonight

 

[navastronia]

It won't be that cheap. An f/0.95 lens is one stop faster than a f/1.2 lens, and one stop brighter usually means 2-4x the price. The other first party f/0.95 FF lenses from manufacturers are the Leica 50/0.95 at $13k, and the Nikon Z 58/0.95 Noct at $8,000 -- both without AF.

If Canon makes one, it will be around that range -- if it has AF, I can see it breaking 5 digits.

Good call, I just made up numbers. Thanks for thinking through my idea.

 

[Del Paso]

View attachment 216178

Dangerous, wasn't he the first 35mm f/1,2 fan to get murdered?

 

[john1970]

I think the 35/1.4L for video leaves the door open for an RF 35/1.2L as a signature lens. I am also hoping for an RF 50/.95L halo product running ~$2,800

For reference the Nikon 58 mm f0.95 is a manual focus lens and sells for $8000 USD new. I believe that a RF 50 mm f 0.95 L lens would be closer to the Nikon price and likely cost significantly more than $2800. Personally, I would go with the 50 mm f1.2 at $2300 or even the upcoming 50 mm f1.4 and call it close enough.

 

[jdavidse]

Well I have been hoping for f1.4 for each of these. I know it's not real yet until they announce, but wow what a lineup they will have. The part that is bothersome is if the 24mm is first and then the 35mm isn't until Q4, that means they have pushed the 35 back yet again.

 

[jdavidse]

The photo of 35mm is obviously taken from 35mm 1.4L II. They forgot to remove the II

Also I do not believe 50mm 1.4 will be an L since it will be very expensive and its price will be close to RF 50mm 1.2L It will also compete with it.

There are no images of the new lenses out yet, nor are there fake images being peddled as real. CR simply uses photos of the product being replaced whenever they post rumors about a lens or camera.

 

[jdavidse]

But I am with you - this list of RF lenses + the rumored R5 II and R1 specs are not something that would make me part with my money.
I will need to see the official specs of everything before deciding of course.
I am still holding on a tiny weeny hope that there will be some surprises...
If not, I may decide that an EF 35mm f/1.4L II, second hand, is good enough for me after all.

You should deffo try out the 85 1.2 - it is an amazing lens, it never lets me down. Ever. The 135 1.8 is great as well, but more niche and, to me, it doesn't have the same "magic" as the 85 1.2

The EF 35mm f/1.4 II is basically the finest EF lens ever made. There is very little to improve upon. If the RF can match it in image quality then they are basically selling it on the improved form factor of RF, not having to use an adapter etc. (I for one will happily buy one). But you can't go wrong getting the EF now and save some money.

 

[EricN]

Dangerous, wasn't he the first 35mm f/1,2 fan to get murdered?

The first of many. Was it a coincidence that Paul was an avid photographer?

 

[roby17269]

Dangerous, wasn't he the first 35mm f/1,2 fan to get murdered?

Nothing will deter me!

 

[roby17269]

The EF 35mm f/1.4 II is basically the finest EF lens ever made. There is very little to improve upon. If the RF can match it in image quality then they are basically selling it on the improved form factor of RF, not having to use an adapter etc. (I for one will happily buy one). But you can't go wrong getting the EF now and save some money.

I am sure it is a great lens.
But I would not be happy with this decision... not because the lens is not good, but because I did not want to consider EF lenses anymore and I really (really) wanted an RF 35 1.2, which would be a visible upgrade over the EF 35 1.4 II.
Oh well, Canon giveth and Canon taketh

 

[Del Paso]

I am sure it is a great lens.
But I would not be happy with this decision... not because the lens is not good, but because I did not want to consider EF lenses anymore and I really (really) wanted an RF 35 1.2, which would be a visible upgrade over the EF 35 1.4 II.
Oh well, Canon giveth and Canon taketh

What I'm convinced of, is that the RF 35 f1,4 will even be better than the EF version. It's always been the case with RF replacements.
(I know, an f1,2 would even be better...)

 

[R1-7D]

*Sigh... apparently, I need more coffee. I initially read the thread title as "Upcoming 2024 Canon RF lens cap" and thought: At last! They’re improving the rear RF lens cap!

Then I re-read the title. Oh well...

 

[jdavidse]

*Sigh... apparently, I need more coffee. I initially read the thread title as "Upcoming 2024 Canon RF lens cap" and thought: At last! They’re improving the rear RF lens cap!

Then I re-read the title. Oh well...

It would be THE release of 2024... reviews of it would trend on youtube for months. A 23 minute in-depth review would be Jared Polin's most viewed video. The rear lens cap would outsell even lenses. Nikon users would buy them just to marvel at the design. Pre-orders would take months to fill. Dpreview would post an interview with the execs of Canon on how the pulled off the design...

 

[neuroanatomist]

*Sigh... apparently, I need more coffee. I initially read the thread title as "Upcoming 2024 Canon RF lens cap" and thought: At last! They’re improving the rear RF lens cap!

Then I re-read the title. Oh well...

I was waiting for one of the trolls to come along and read it as, "Upcoming 2024 Canon RF lens crap."