Patent Application Shows Prime that may be Announced Soon

[Richard CR]

In this patent application (2025-149754) we see some interesting primes that Canon is applying for a patent. Now while it’s unusual to see a patent application before the lens is released, it does happen. As well, with this year being a hot mess in terms of planning it could be that alot of things were […]

See full article...

 

[Maximilian]

The graphics look pretty much like classical Double-Gauss design.
So I wouldn't expect magical resolution numbers from them.
But we know the magic such lenses might have...

I hope that the AF motor is fast enough...

And, @Richard CR, don't you think that 48.6 mm is closer to 50 mm than to 45?
Could also be named 50/1.2, couldn't it? (apart from the rumored name)

 

[blackcoffee17]

They should do a 70mm F2 1:1 macro that is also a great portrait lens.

 

[m4ndr4ke]

And, @Richard CR, don't you think that 48.6 mm is closer to 50 mm than to 45?

If I'm not mistaken, the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM is a 48.5mm as well

By the way, could these be plastic moulded elements? Such material would certainly be a lot lighter

 

[Canon Rumors]

If I'm not mistaken, the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM is a 48.5mm as well

By the way, could these be plastic moulded elements? Those would certainly be a lot lighter

Canon can go on either side of a reported focal length.

If this design is a related patent to the final product, there could be a technical reason that they market it as 45mm. I could see confusion simply having a 50 1.2 and 1.4 already in the lineup for much more money than this will cost.

 

[Maximilian]

Canon can go on either side of a reported focal length.

If this design is a related patent to the final product, there could be a technical reason that they market it as 45mm. I could see confusion simply having a 50 1.2 and 1.4 already in the lineup for much more money than this will cost.

Fully understand. I had the same thought but was to lazy to add it to my post.

 

[Tom R5R7]

The graphics look pretty much like classical Double-Gauss design.
So I wouldn't expect magical resolution numbers from them.
But we know the magic such lenses might have...

I hope that the AF motor is fast enough...

And, @Richard CR, don't you think that 48.6 mm is closer to 50 mm than to 45?
Could also be named 50/1.2, couldn't it? (apart from the rumored name)

Indeed, it does. Reminiscent of the EF 50/1.2 or the 50/1.4. I would imagine performance closer to the 1.2, but who knows. A very lightweight 50/1.2, even if not optically stellar like the current RF 50/1.2L, would be a welcome lens to many. And there is 'some' magic in that slightly less than perfect old 50/1.2. It has character.

 

[LCDVS00]

The 9-element lens design looks much simpler than that of the L series, but it’s obviously not something you can buy for just a few hundred dollars.How many elements in 50F1.4 Vcm？

 

[P-visie]

The 9-element lens design looks much simpler than that of the L series, but it’s obviously not something you can buy for just a few hundred dollars.How many elements in 50F1.4 Vcm？

The RF 50mm f1.4 has 14 elements in 11 groups. See: https://www.canon-europe.com/lenses/rf-50mm-f1-4l-vcm/specifications/

 

[mxwphoto]

Would be wild to see a new Canon 45 or 50mm 1.2 cost less than the 50 1.4L. One can hope though!

 

[Askeladden]

Back in the NFD days they had both a 50 1.2 L and non-L for sale at the same time, prior to that they had the FD 55 1.2 SSC and 55 1.2 SSC Aspherical so it isn't like it has never been done before.

 

[Cerulean42]

It's a modern short backfocus double gauss derived design just as I anticipated in the other thread. Checked the patent and looks like they are using some really high abbe number glass. Another improvement is it's rear group focus instead of full group focus, so a lot less moving mass.
As for abberation correction with this few elements, they definitely would have to make tradeoffs. Just as I predicted, it lean toward a little residual SA, which can be desirable for bokeh and oof background. Distortion is sacrificed, CA is lower than the EF but still present. Overall I think they made good choices
It would sell like hot cakes if they price it right.

 

[Maximilian]

Back in the NFD days they had both a 50 1.2 L and non-L for sale at the same time, prior to that they had the FD 55 1.2 SSC and 55 1.2 SSC Aspherical so it isn't like it has never been done before.

I remember those. My father used to own one. But I don't remember which. I suppose, the non-L

 

[Maximilian]

It's a modern short backfocus double gauss derived design just as I anticipated in the other thread. Checked the patent and looks like they are using some really high abbe number glass. Another improvement is it's rear group focus instead of full group focus, so a lot less moving mass.
As for abberation correction with this few elements, they definitely would have to make tradeoffs. Just as I predicted, it lean toward a little residual SA, which can be desirable for bokeh and oof background. Distortion is sacrificed, CA is lower than the EF but still present. Overall I think they made good choices
It would sell like hot cakes if they price it right.

Thanks for that analysis, Cerulean42.
Let's keep fingers crossed for the price...

 

[BFG9000]

Can't wait for the 46mm f1.2, the 48mm f1.2 and the 52mm f1.2.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I do wonder if this a soft abll landing for the fact that Canon have trolled us with inadequate ef 50mm primes for years and are not intending releasing a rf 35mm f1.2 lens, Sure the RF 35mm f1.4 L is a great lens, but it's hardly a revolution when compared to the nearly identically performing ef 35mm f1.4 L mk II. The upgrade is erm...you don't need an adapter....gee wizz...that's a beneficial spend for a photographer!

 

[Adam Shutter Bug]

50mm f1.2 I get, 35mm f/1.2 interesting but I am not sure I get the need for a 45mm f/1.2. I get VCM is an in thing to make more videography focused lenses, de-clicked, less throw etc. the test though will be how it handles focus breathing. As even the 50 f/1.2 focuses quick for the size of the glass.

 

[Michael Clark]

The graphics look pretty much like classical Double-Gauss design.
So I wouldn't expect magical resolution numbers from them.
But we know the magic such lenses might have...

I hope that the AF motor is fast enough...

And, @Richard CR, don't you think that 48.6 mm is closer to 50 mm than to 45?
Could also be named 50/1.2, couldn't it? (apart from the rumored name)

This looks considerably more complex than a double Gauss design. (Gauss was a person, thus the capitalization of a proper noun. Double is not.)



Here's the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM with a classic double Gauss design:



For more about what makes a lens a double Gauss, please see Roger Cicala's excellent article:

Why are modern 50mm lenses so damned complicated?​

 

[Maximilian]

This looks considerably more complex than a double Gauss design...

Call it Double-Gauss design BASED, if that makes you feel better.
And about the propper notation:
Start complaining at wikipedia first:

Double-Gauss lens - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You'll find there:
Double-Gauss
Double Gauss
double Gauss

And you'll find there numerous lens designs all claimed to be Double-Gauss (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss).
So if you'd ask me about consideration, this RF 45 could be closer to a Taylor&Hobson.
And "your" reference of the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM has two elements more than than the "classic Double-Gauss" (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss).
So it's an evolution as well, closer to a "Zeiss Planar" design.

In the end:
If you'd use German it would have been even better and more precise:

Gaußsches Doppelobjektiv

Gaußsches Doppelobjektiv – Wikipedia

de.wikipedia.org

as for the meaning of a symmetrical mirroring of a basic Gauß lens.
(as this German person Carl Friedrich Gauß is correctly spelled with a German "ß", called "Eszett" or "scharfes S", but in the past as well with an "ss", so welcome to maximum confusion).

Enough "know-it-all"?

And in the end th inventor of the Double-Gauss design (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss) was Alvan Clark, acording to wikipedia. Is he a relative of yours?

 

[Michael Clark]

Call it Double-Gauss design BASED, if that makes you feel better.
And about the propper notation:
Start complaining at wikipedia first:

Double-Gauss lens - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You'll find there:
Double-Gauss
Double Gauss
double Gauss

And you'll find there numerous lens designs all claimed to be Double-Gauss (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss).
So if you'd ask me about consideration, this RF 45 could be closer to a Taylor&Hobson.
And "your" reference of the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM has two elements more than than the "classic Double-Gauss" (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss).
So it's an evolution as well, closer to a "Zeiss Planar" design.

In the end:
If you'd use German it would have been even better and more precise:

Gaußsches Doppelobjektiv

Gaußsches Doppelobjektiv – Wikipedia

de.wikipedia.org

as for the meaning of a symmetrical mirroring of a basic Gauß lens.
(as this German person Carl Friedrich Gauß is correctly spelled with a German "ß", called "Eszett" or "scharfes S", but in the past as well with an "ss", so welcome to maximum confusion).

Enough "know-it-all"?

And in the end th inventor of the Double-Gauss design (or Double Gauss, or double Gauss) was Alvan Clark, acording to wikipedia. Is he a relative of yours?

Since when is Wikipedia an authoritative source for anything? It's crowd sourced. It's not peer reviewed.