Canon Teases Us with a Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L

[Richard CR]

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 […]

See full article...

 

[Maximilian]

WOW! That sounds lovely! Of course not the price tag.
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.

 

[Del Paso]

RobyL17269, where are thou?

 

[Richard CR]

WOW! That sounds lovely! Of course not the price tag.
But I am sure, this will be interesting in IQ.
Of course, ther 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 element.

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).

 

[Maximilian]

...unless there was an error on the patent application (possible).

Maybe a "1" is missing and the length should read 188.52?
OTOH the second drawing doesn't look more than 2 cm longer.

 

[Quantum Mechanic]

Can somebody please explain why the patents often include the 'L' designation of the lens? I mean, the 'L' mark is rather a marketing feature, not a technical detail.

 

[Richard CR]

Can somebody please explain why the patents often include the 'L' designation of the lens? I mean, the 'L' mark is rather a marketing feature, not a technical detail.

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.

 

[EricN]

And now back to the distortion correction debate!

 

[Del Paso]

And now back to the distortion correction debate!

I'm already missing it!

 

[stillviking]

Body is looking really big tbh!

 

[EricN]

I'm already missing it!

What they need is something like SA on the RF macro, but it changes how the image is corrected while increasing or decreasing the mass of the lens. They just need to subcontract it out to @HarryFilm

 

[Del Paso]

What they need is something like SA on the RF macro, but it changes how the image is corrected while increasing or decreasing the mass of the lens. They just need to subcontract it out to @HarryFilm

What about pneumatically or hydraulically in- and -deflatable lenses? I'm sure he has already developed them in his secret laboratory in Canada.

 

[Bob Howland]

I'd rather have a f/1.4 lens that is smaller, lighter and cheaper.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'd rather have a f/1.4 lens that is smaller, lighter and cheaper.

Then buy the RF 35/1.4L VCM.

 

[roby17269]

RobyL17269, where are thou?

Riiight (in my best fake BBC English)
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

 

[EricN]

What about pneumatically or hydraulically in- and -deflatable lenses? I'm sure he has already developed them in his secret laboratory in Canada.

They could be inflatable similar to an airplane life preserver, but filled with hydrogen! A clumsy person could drop it , but it's balanced to gravity and it would never hit the ground hard. Then clumsy people's wive's (who can't drive or park a car) wouldn't say "That lens is too expensive for you to be dropping all the time when we need to pay for car accident repairs!" Priorities...

 

[EricN]

Riiight (in my best fake BBC English)
Where is the "L" in my nickname coming from?
How can I be the 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

You're more relaxed than me! I had to change my underwear yesterday when I saw about the 14mm and now today. Sometimes I envy those with impotency.

 

[roby17269]

You're more relaxed than me! I had to change my underwear yesterday when I saw about the 14mm and now today. Sometimes I envy those with impotency.

I will get duly excited I promise.... when there will be a solid rumor with an announcement date

 

[Del Paso]

I will get duly excited I promise.... when there will be a solid rumor with an announcement date

It will come!

 

[Quantum Mechanic]

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.