|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
In this patent application (2025-023325), Canon is demonstrating some advanced primes with IS. We already know that Canon has come out with the Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L IS USM, this isn't the same element design, but a new one from Canon. Could we see a Canon series of f/1.8L IS USM primes from 85 to 150? I'm not sure there is a market for a series of L lenses in this focal range, but Canon knows better than I do.
The goal of this patent is to provide a smaller and lighter focusing group and a more lightweight lens in general. According to Canon,
The object of the present invention is to provide an imaging optical system that can achieve a lightweight focusing group, and an image capturing device having the same.
Considering the Canon RF 135mm F1.8L IS USM is only 2 years old, it won't get replaced for years. But for the sake of artistic license, I've called the one showing up here as Mark II.
Going by the element complexity, I will assume these are most certainly L variants.
Canon RF 85mm f/1.8L IS
Canon right now bookends this lens with the Canon RF 85mm F1.2L and the Canon RF 85mm F2.0 IS STM Macro. Another L variant for the 85mm as long as it was less expensive and smaller than the 85mm F1.2L may be welcomed. The Canon EF 85mm F1.4 was well received on the EF mount.
| Focal Length | 85.40 |
| F-Number | 1.85 |
| Half Angle of View | 14.22 |
| Image Height | 21.64 |
| Lens Total Length | 109.49 |
| Back Focus Distance | 13.39 |
Canon RF 100mm F1.8L IS II
Outside of Macro lenses, Canon hasn't make an L 100mm lens, but the EF 100mm F2 USM was considered one of the legendary bang for the buck lenses in the EF mount. This one features far more elements than that lens, and most certainly won't be inexpensive.
| Focal Length | 101.78 |
| F-Number | 1.85 |
| Half Angle of View | 12.00 |
| Image Height | 21.64 |
| Lens Total Length | 123.44 |
| Back Focus Distance | 13.39 |
Canon RF 135mm F1.8L IS USM II
Canon has already released the Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L IS USM, so it's doubtful that this lense will be coming out soon. It's a slightly different optical design than the current production lens.
Of all the embodiments shown, I find this one to be the most unlikely to be done any time soon.
| Focal Length | 131.00 |
| F-Number | 1.85 |
| Half Angle of View | 9.38 |
| Image Height | 21.64 |
| Lens Total Length | 146.99 |
| Back Focus Distance | 13.64 |
Canon RF 150mm F1.8L IS
This lens is curious to me as Canon has never done a 150mm lens before. In the past, Canon has traditionally done 135mm and then 200mm.
| Focal Length | 148.00 |
| F-Number | 1.85 |
| Half Angle of View | 8.32 |
| Image Height | 21.64 |
| Lens Total Length | 159.49 |
| Back Focus Distance | 14.69 |
As with all Patent Applications, this is a look into Canon's research and may never end up in an actual product.
Japan Patent Application 2025-023325
The original filing date for this application was July 8, 2021. What that means is that this patent was first filed in another country under the PCT (basically an international patent) on that date.
A long macro would interest a bunch of people. Can you tell from the patent what the magnification is?
I'd like one too and it's a lens that is really low hanging fruit for Canon to make and implrove upon.
I suppose, you could count me in for the 100, if my bank account is not offended with me 😉
I still love it for slower moving stuff, like stationary insects.
Having greater shooting distance is not an advantage underwater as more particulate would be present and strobe power is restricted.
Using the RF100 seems to be a good compromise between working distance and magnification especially if cropping in post to avoid touching the subject. That said, people use wet lenses with +8 etc dipoters for super macro but so hard to nail focus.
I also leave focal range to "full" as sometimes there are larger but more distant subjects appear. No strobes used in that case.
Any RF version will definitely focus faster if the EF50/1.2 to RF50/1.2 is an example.
The depth of field would be thin enough for a f3.5 let alone a f1.8 as f1.8 is not really needed for macro work. It could have dual purpose for portrait and macro though to increase popularity.
I had a 2nd photographer who hired one and brought it to a wedding, expecting to use it for portriture....it was a disaster. So i showed him what it was designed for (gave him a crash corse in tripod macro photography, on a nearby rose...and he then saw how amazing it can be. But he soon realised that it wasn't the lens for him. It's not the lens' fault but just the wrong use case scenario. For specific macro work, it is superlative. Outside of that use case and it's generally a disaster.