Is an RF 135mm f/1.4L USM in development? [CR1]

Tom W

EOS 80D
Sep 5, 2012
198
128
Speak for yourself. It's a great tool and one with a unique look when used correctly. Age has nothing to do with it. It's a great design, timeless.
Indeed, one of Canon's greatest lens is the old 400 f/5.6L. It has but 7 lens elements, but is tack sharp and it definitely not a new design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

Larsskv

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 12, 2015
764
183
But what if new one will be sharper AND maintain all the good qualities of the old 135 f2 or even improve them? Also there are some super-mega-pixel bodies these days and people who want to use them and make large prints.
If so, GAS would hit me hard, and I would buy (yet another) lens I don’t need. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Talys

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,270
181
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
Indeed, one of Canon's greatest lens is the old 400 f/5.6L. It has but 7 lens elements, but is tack sharp and it definitely not a new design.
Good to read that I am not alone: I am always impressed about the detailed and contrasty images of this lens where everything seems "right" (natural?). If the atmosphere is fine.
Some of my first images were made from a brownish crop field after a very cold night in the strong morning sun (end of february / beginning of march) and it was VERY unsharp, maybe 640x480 pixels downsizing would have made it acceptable - I learned that the weather conditions contribute more to sharpness compared to the "old" lens itself.
 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,270
181
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
I think an xF 1.4 135 would cost in the region of 5 kEUR / k$ because of its large front element. A 2.0 135 IS version with 1:3 max reproduction ratio would be my favorite as a very flexible medium telephoto lens! And weight only 30% while being much more compact.

At the moment I would be fine to use my aged EF 2.0 100 on a good full frame body meaning good IQ, flexible video modes, 3 fps were sufficient and reasonable price. (No current EOS R camera fulfills all these specs.)
 
Last edited:

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D + 100-400mm mkii
Feb 7, 2019
138
97
UK
A bit off topic but I’ve been wondering would it be possible for canon to make RF mount DSLRs?

I like the idea of a lineup where mirrored and mirrorless bodies exist but all using the same lenses natively.
 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,270
181
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
A bit off topic but I’ve been wondering would it be possible for canon to make RF mount DSLRs?

I like the idea of a lineup where mirrored and mirrorless bodies exist but all using the same lenses natively.
It would great to use RF lenses on SLR but the mirror needs to move outside the optical path for the exposure and for
a single sheet mirror this is impossible: The RF lenses leave not enough room between sensor and last lens
element (except for future tele primes maybe).

But I like the idea too and maybe a split mirror might help: Use two semi transparent mirrors where DPAF
on the sensor can do its job. The upper half of the mirror swings upwards and the lower half swings downwards.
The mirror is split from left to right.
While you have two mirrors which must be adjustet you do not have to adjust a special PD AF sensor array because
the sensor plane is the (DPAF) plane.

Add an optional EVF and you have a DSLR + mirrorless combo-camera which works in bright daylight, allows
checking the scene while turned off but also gives you an EVF for night vision, video, exposure pre-check through
a viewfinder on brighter days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jasonmc89

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
526
501
The 135 f2 is showing its age, compared to the Sigma f1.8 and the Samyang f2 it's pretty lousy with softness and CA all over the place. It needed to be upgraded to a II about a decade ago.

Back in 1996 it was stunning. Even by 2009 it was still a good lens. Today it's just another old lens bypassed in Canon's obsession with new-shiny-sexy.

I wonder who works on Canon's assembly lines for lenses like that. It must be tough on their morale.
Sorry, but you got it all wrong!
Not only is the EF 135 still an excellent lens (do you own it, or was it all theory?), but I'm still waiting for a "modern" macro lens to beat the sharpness of my 1972 2,8/60mm Macro Elmarit or 1987 Apo Macro-Elmarit 2,8/100.
Many great photographs are still taken with old lenses, or with "obsolete" DSLR's.
For the weight of the Sigma, excellent lens, of course, you could almost carry the 135 Canon + EF 1,4/85. Sure you'd notice a difference in quality????:unsure:
PS: Ever had a look at the build quality of a Samyang?:ROFLMAO:
 
Aug 22, 2010
1,617
313
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
Not exactly. The "holly trinity" is awesome. The RF 70-200 f2.8 is incredibly small. So I would say, they push in both directions: extreme super-species and normal workhorses. Where they are not focused is the third one: smaller and cheaper non-L lenses. Any ways, I agree with you, a good 135 f1.8 IS would be more appealing :)
It's not "incredibly" small...it's actually longer than the current model when racked out to 200mm. It's only short at it's 70mm length. It's likely to be a little heavier too. Sure it looks smaller when it's put away in a lens bag, but in use it's a bit bigger.
 

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
1,984
127
29
34109
www.facebook.com
A bit off topic but I’ve been wondering would it be possible for canon to make RF mount DSLRs?

I like the idea of a lineup where mirrored and mirrorless bodies exist but all using the same lenses natively.
Not physically possible. Also DSLR development has ceased while production will continue until the year 2023 or 2028.
 

suburbia

EOS M50
Aug 9, 2013
48
2
All good but give me ONE small lens for travelling light! 50/1..8, 50/1.4, 35/2, double-Gaussian is fine, I don't need ultimate sharpness, I don't need a pancake, I don't need IS, just make it half the length of the 35/1.8ISMac and we're good.
Was it ever done for the EF range? but would be nice to see a new mid-range for the RF mount, a step up of quality from the first round of non L RF lenses but not the weigh and cost of a brick of gold as the L releases so far.
 

degos

EOS RP
Mar 20, 2015
200
122
Not only is the EF 135 still an excellent lens (do you own it, or was it all theory?), but I'm still waiting for a "modern" macro lens to beat the sharpness of my 1972 2,8/60mm Macro Elmarit or 1987 Apo Macro-Elmarit 2,8/100.
Never owned a 135 f2 but shot with one once. Nice focal length and fast AF. But big dopey aperture leaves gave angular bokeh. 70-200 II had much nicer bokeh.

Sharp? It was in the film era, but is outclassed now:

And close it down to 2.8 and guess what is just as good? The 70-200 II again.

Yes, there are some old sharp lenses; Canon 200 1.8 and 300 2.8 and the Mamiya 300 5.6 being examples. But the mid-tier mid-90s lenses like the 135 were designed down to a budget. It's a disgrace that they're still in the catalogue.

So who's next up to defend the 200 2.8 II? Canon will still take a grand of your cash for that dinosaur.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark
Aug 22, 2010
1,617
313
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
Not physically possible. Also DSLR development has ceased while production will continue until the year 2023 or 2028.
Er...no it hasn't. Please get your facts right. Canon is still developing a 5D5 and a 1DxIII. Lens wise, there's a new 800mm f5.6 coming and a long rumored 200mm f2 replacement. Sure I can't see any more consumer grade lenses coming along for EF...but once all the Rf lenses are in production I'm pretty sure the EF line will go back to it's regular refresh. Certainly with the big whites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jd7
Aug 22, 2010
1,617
313
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
Never owned a 135 f2 but shot with one once. Nice focal length and fast AF. But big dopey aperture leaves gave angular bokeh. 70-200 II had much nicer bokeh.

Sharp? It was in the film era, but is outclassed now:

And close it down to 2.8 and guess what is just as good? The 70-200 II again.
Actually, I find the wide open bokeh and out of focus rendering of the 135L far superior to the 70-200 f2.8 LIS II/III. Stopped down to f2.8 and the bokeh and rendering gets harsher. But I'm a long time user and fan of the 135L and 70-200 f2.8 LIS II. Sharpness wise...the 135L is easily as sharp as the 70-200. Maybe even sharper.
I just wish the 135L had an image stabiliser and slightly closer min focus distance. It's an astonishingly versatile lens, may be more so than the 70-200 II LIS
 
Last edited:

BeenThere

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 4, 2012
842
169
These rumored lenses sound sweet. If they're not stabilized, they'd be tough to work with with cameras without IBIS.

I see a future where I adapt Canon RF lenses on Nikon Z-mount bodies. :LOL:
By the time this lens arrives, I suspect Canon’s flagship R type body will be available with IBIS.