It would be too expensive. Only a lens in the range of 24-50mm may perhaps be made a little bit faster than f 2.0 with good IQ and acceptable price - think of an f1.8. An RF 24-50/1.8L may easily cost 4000€. Who will spend so much money?

So, if Canon will make a fast zoom, we should expect a plastic phantastic with low image quality like the 1.2/45 or APS-C glass. But definitely not a L Lens.

SirIssacNewton said:

Wax wing looks amazing, wish we had them in North Carolina! Last one is spectacular! Well done

Click to expand...

@SirIssacNewton thank you, kindly!

DhlcadR6 said:

I can't wait for RF 10-1200mm f0.95L IS VCM Macro x1.4 Extender.....

Click to expand...

Give it another 20-30 years. We are heading in that direction.

I can't wait for RF 10-1200mm f0.95L IS VCM Macro x1.4 Extender.....

Jokes aside, something like 50-150 or 35-70 f2/1.8/1.4L IS VCM/USM and under $3000USD will be pretty decent.

So for example if you look the lowest path of those 3 lines starting from down drawn on the patent, it bounces once and then goes through the second time.

But if you had another photon coming on the red arrow I drew (poorly) so it enters the same trajectory as the bounced photon, would they both pass the same spot on the back of the lens or would the red arrow photon make bounce while the other one goes through.

Photons don't have memory so if they hit the same spot, they should both behave the same. But then the red arrow path wouldn't make the bounce. So there's something strange here, maybe they left out something critical.

Exploreshootshare said:

Looking at Richards table with all the different zoom ranges from the patent, I´d personally say 28-55mm F1.4 sounds the most intriguing. I´d also love 35-70mm and I´d consider buying one of these lenses if the prices allows it. An UWA f1.4 zoom such as 16-24mm F1.4 wouldn't interest me at all. But that's just me

Click to expand...

Keep in mind, and my article mentioned this, that most of those lens designs would be almost impossible even for a fixed lens camera with a back focus distance of .4mm, which basically has the rear element touching the sensor. basically 2 hair thicknesses away from the sensor, and I'm not sure if that includes the IR filter stack or the physical sensor itself. which could mean it's touching the sensor.

There is one design, and one design only (which was highlighted at a 15mm back focus distance).

Also, all those designs are huge - think 8" lens designs as well for a very narrow focal zoom range. While a lot of the .4mm back focus designs were collapsable I think, they are still far larger than what we would expect from a compact camera, and an ultra wide zoom lens even if it's f/1.4

danfaz said:

Hi guys, a few portraits (and one tiny BIF) from the last weekend.
We have a Cedar Waxwing, Say's Phoebe, Bewick's Wren and a Red-winged Blackbird.

View attachment 228252View attachment 228253View attachment 228254View attachment 228255

Click to expand...

Wax wing looks amazing, wish we had them in North Carolina! Last one is spectacular! Well done

Got mine on Monday. Took very few test shots on Tuesday. Here is a single 15-second long exposure.

Del Paso said:

24-45: For me, a very interesting focal range, to complement a 70-200 and a 14mm TS-E.
Even if it were no f/1,4, but an f/2,8.

Click to expand...

I really enjoyed using the Sigma 24-35 f/2 for a few years. Like 3 primes.

Del Paso said:

70-135 f/1,4 would be very nice and useful for many.
I do not expect this zoom to cover an extreme range, f/1,4 will be already difficult to design.
But Canon have already used us to spectacular lens developments in the past, so, who knows?

Click to expand...

70-135 f/1.4... stop trying to seduce me.

NjalF said:

7D Mark II in May/June this year?

Click to expand...

Good news, it already came out in Sept 2014.
just teasing you

I hope they really release something like this.
For my use ... something in the area of 35-85mm f1.4 would be a dream lens. Even if it is a 50-85mm f1.4 I would still buy it.

scyrene said:

Is IS necessary when IBIS works so well with it?

Click to expand...

Agree. I don't think so, at least not for high end lenses with short focal lengths.
I understand the need when pairing budget lenses with cameras like the RP/R8, but he who buys a 28-70mm f/2 should at least afford a R6.

I'll take the development of groundbreaking new lenses over the addition of IS any day.

Heck, I'd even take lenses without IS up to 200, maybe 300mm, if it meant other benefits like wider apertures or crazy zoom ranges.
I'm happy as long as I can get one to two stops of IBIS. I remember my old EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L non-IS allowed me 1/50 at 200mm on my R6 and I always found it to be more than adequate.

The video is really great and the photos are even more awesome.

I’d be overjoyed if they made the 15-35 1.4 for APSC.

Way back when, after the EOS R release, Canon teased the possibility of a wide angle 1.4 zoom - this is a long time coming.

It's truly a shame. Here in Austria one of four wolves was shot in 2025. Since 2022 in Austria five times as many wolves have been shot as in Germany.

tpatana said:

How would the light know only bounce one round-trip?

Click to expand...

It's rather complicated to understand, a least for me. The HM element (HM = Holographic Mirror) acts like a catadioptric lens. The centre of the front allows transmission but directs light to peripheral areas of the back surface that reflect it back to reflective regions of the front surface that then reflect it to transmissive regions of the back surface. So the light is folded as in the patent for one round trip. It requires incredible accuracy of engineering at the nanometer level to work.

7D Mark II in May/June this year?

Old Man FL/FD said:

When I tore down my G15 and G1X Mk I after they were ‘crippled,’ I was so excited to get to the sensor core, that I forgot to check out any dust protection design.

Click to expand...

I think mine was G15 too. And the Sony was the first in the RX100 series.

riker said:

In this case, I'd be happy if Canon just did what others and finally brought us 28-70/2 II, this time with IS and considerably less wright.

Click to expand...

Is IS necessary when IBIS works so well with it?

eero said:

Have you ever had issues with pocketable cameras that end up full of dust inside? Happened to me two times, once with a Powershot and once with a Sony DSC-RX100. I kept them in a jeans pocket and after some time (and travels), they were so full of dust that they were completely useless. I opened the Sony one to see if there was something I could do about it, but the dust was everywhere inside. It looked mainly like small fabric particles, probably from the jeans. Those were earlier versions of both cameras, and I don't know how they are nowadays, as I have moved on to bigger cameras. But it would be interesting to know how dustproof they are. Does anyone know?

Click to expand...

Good question!

I’ve owned numerous PowerShots and have never seen significant dust spots – even in the usual places – skies and broad expanses of uniform color/density.

One would think with the greater apparent dept-of-field with small sensors, dust visibility would be a problem.

I keep my PowerShots in either a coat pocket or fanny/lumbar pack until shooting time and I’ve never used one on a sandy beach.

I thought perhaps there was an internal ‘air filter’ surrounding the sensor. Maybe a ‘dust delete’ algorithm? That would be tough without a ‘reference’ image.

When I tore down my G15 and G1X Mk I after they were ‘crippled,’ I was so excited to get to the sensor core, that I forgot to check out any dust protection design.

P-visie said:

There is this patent application, from way back for a RF 14-21mm f 1.4 zoom, not likely with the RF14mm f.14 and RF20mm f1.4 just released.

Click to expand...

Canon will just add the price of those two lenses together ($4500) and then add 50% more. $6750. Sounds about right.

In this case, I'd be happy if Canon just did what others and finally brought us 28-70/2 II, this time with IS and considerably less wright.
If they even make it 24-70/2 or 28-85/2 or whatever, I'm all in.

Eventually we need to arrive to 24-120/2 anyway Maybe another 20y.
24-105/2 in my active lifetime pls?

I'd really appreciate a 28-50/1.8 as well, but not a big L version. I need it for street and travel.

josephandrews222 said:

It must be pocketable and include a serviceable fill-flash.

Click to expand...

Have you ever had issues with pocketable cameras that end up full of dust inside? Happened to me two times, once with a Powershot and once with a Sony DSC-RX100. I kept them in a jeans pocket and after some time (and travels), they were so full of dust that they were completely useless. I opened the Sony one to see if there was something I could do about it, but the dust was everywhere inside. It looked mainly like small fabric particles, probably from the jeans. Those were earlier versions of both cameras, and I don't know how they are nowadays, as I have moved on to bigger cameras. But it would be interesting to know how dustproof they are. Does anyone know?

There is this patent application, from way back for a RF 14-21mm f 1.4 zoom, not likely with the RF14mm f.14 and RF20mm f1.4 just released.