|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
In this patent application (2026-004077), Canon shows off an embodiment of the fabled unicorn lens for the RF mount, the Canon RF 35mm f/1.2. I think everyone has long theorized that this lens is coming to form the trinity of f/1.2 primes along with the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM and the Canon RF 85mm f/1.2L USM.
No doubt this will be large, heavy, and expensive. Canon tends to spare no expense when it comes to its top-end lenses.
Option A: Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM
The lens design of the 35mm looks reasonable for Canon's premier 35mm lens with 17 elements packed into a lens around 130mm in physical lens length. The image height shows that this is meant to provide the full image circle with no stretching, as the image height is 21.64mm, suitable for a full-frame sensor size. The backfocus distance is inset into the mount by around 6.55mm, which again, is relatively decent for a prime and has been done before on the RF mount.
Nothing glaring seems to be out of order on this embodiment that would prevent Canon from developing this prime lens and releasing it to market. Of special note, L2 and L3 are the focusing groups, so this may require more than one focus motor to control both groups.
| Focal length | 34.00 |
| F-number | 1.24 |
| Half angle of view | 32.47 |
| Image height | 21.64 |
| Total lens length | 154.96 |
| Back Focus Distance | 13.45 |
Option B: Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM
The second embodiment for a 35mm prime is surprising in its own way. It's small, since we have been told that size does not matter, let's look at this one. At a physical lens length of around 68.52mm, it would be remarkably smaller than the preceding embodiment. However, taking a 10,000-foot level at the patent application's lens response graphs, which I don't really read that much of, the first embodiment has less distortion, so to make the lens smaller, there's going to be more distortion to fix in post (not a significant amount, though). That could be a worthy tradeoff.
| Focal length | 34.97 |
| F-number | 1.24 |
| Half angle of view | 31.75 |
| Image height | 21.64 |
| Total lens length | 88.52 |
| Back Focus Distance | 13.45 |
Closing Thoughts
This is a patent application discussing one of the rare unicorns of the Canon RF ecosystem. It is anyone's guess if this will come about as a product, but if they are researching and applying for patents, there's a likely chance the focal length and aperture are sitting on someone's desk to come up with a design.
This would close out the trinity and is certainly a lens that people are waiting for.
Just a Reminder!
With all patents and patent applications, I have to stress constantly – this is simply a look into Canon’s research; the only thing we can quantify accurately is that Canon is researching this. A patent application doesn’t mean they are going to release this in the next month, or even year, or even at all.
But I am sure, this will be interesting in IQ.
Of course, there will be the "no IS" whiners, too 😛
@Richard CR: By the way, the two drawings of the options A and B look pretty similar.
Why should the second one be so much smaller? Is there a different scaling? Doesn't look like that, comparing the front elements.
the embodiments are not usually drawn to scale at all so I presume there's just less empty space. I was a little surprised by the lens length, unless there was an error on the patent application (possible).
OTOH the second drawing doesn't look more than 2 cm longer.
I usually guess and call it an L or not. sometimes you can gather the intent and if Canon would slap the L onto the lens, and sometimes, it's just being shamless about it all 😉
this one is obvious 35mm f1.2, over 15 elements, a full image circle projected, and very low distortions and abberations.
Where is the "L" in my nickname coming from? 🤣
How can I be quick at replying to a new thread if they post them in the night? (ET) 😴
Where I am, let's see... 🤔
This is not even a rumor. At least I do not count patents as rumors. I'm not getting my underwear in knots 😖
If it is going to materialize, I would prefer the first option for sure! IQ uber alles! - I've stated my position on the "great" distortion debate multiple times and I have not seen anything that would make me change it. So bring the big beast on! 🏋️♂️
But... again, not even a rumor 😢