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

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,014
585
Irving, Texas
This, from Sony IBIS, indicates that it is effective for long focal lengths. Of course there will be some implementation differences.

Actually, I think the write up in the link helps prove IBIS from Sony is not very effective at all at long focal lengths. The very old Soligor lens he is using is manual focus, at f/5.6, and hand held. I'd like to see a controlled test with a Sony native AF lens and wide open. All of Sony's long lenses are image stabilized (OSS). All of them. I must wonder why that is?;) Sony also makes nothing longer than 400mm.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Michael Clark

addola

Sold my soul for a flippy screen
Nov 16, 2015
43
13
By the time this lens arrives, I suspect Canon’s flagship R type body will be available with IBIS.
We’ll definitely see IBIS on Canon soon enough, but I think in the next few years Canon will be more aggressive with lens options and Nikon more aggressive with camera body options.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
23,828
1,002
But I'm talking about RF flange, larger rear aperture.
But...Physics. For a telephoto design, the exit pupil is irrelevant in determining overall lens dimensions. So is the image circle (it’s always big, which is why there are no long telephoto EF-S lenses). A 24mm lens, the RF flange matters. A 400mm lens, it just doesn’t.

Seriously...Physics. You two should get acquainted. Roger Cicala published a series of blog posts on lens design. There are other online resources.
 
Reactions: stevelee

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
23,828
1,002

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
804
22
I would love to see a RF 400mm f/2.0 @ the same size/weight as current model.
That would be a lens with around 200mm front element size (massive). 6-7kg is a very conservative weight gestimation. I mean it could be even heavier by mile.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
23,828
1,002
What makes you think that there is no money for Canon in a new pro sports camera released before 2020 Olympics?
I'm not sure his statements qualify as 'thinking'. As has already been pointed out to him, DSLRs continue to outsell MILCs, and Canon expo;icitly stated that they are continuing to develop DSLRs.
 
Reactions: stevelee

Trey T

EOS T7i
Feb 6, 2019
65
24
ILC is sun setting.


No point in developing a new pro sports camera for release before 2020 Olympics?
The wildlife and sport career/industry is much narrower than wedding or lifestyle photogs. For every 1000 wedding photog, there's only 1 sport photogs. The sport career is all driven by talents while the wedding career is all in the camera specs or gadgets, so-to-speak. If canon come out w/ on in the next 9mos, it will still be in transition phase for the photogs. The risks of using new camera w/o much practice is career-damaging.
 

Trey T

EOS T7i
Feb 6, 2019
65
24
But...Physics. For a telephoto design, the exit pupil is irrelevant in determining overall lens dimensions. So is the image circle (it’s always big, which is why there are no long telephoto EF-S lenses). A 24mm lens, the RF flange matters. A 400mm lens, it just doesn’t.

Seriously...Physics. You two should get acquainted. Roger Cicala published a series of blog posts on lens design. There are other online resources.
Did Roger publish a blog post on 400mm f/2.8 RF lens design that can be scaled to f/2.0 design?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
23,828
1,002
Did Roger publish a blog post on 400mm f/2.8 RF lens design that can be scaled to f/2.0 design?
You're like a bull terrier, you just won't let this go. Tell you what...why don 't you go design and manufacture a 400mm f/2.0 pancake lens. We'd all love that! Physics be damned!

Heck, I'd even settle for you finding one legitimate source that suggests supertelephoto lenses will be smaller because of the RF mount. Good luck.

While you're frantically googling, try comparing Canon's patents for two 100-400mm zoom lenses that are both f/5.6 at the long end. The scaling of the EF lens to RF mount saved a massively impressive 9.5mm, a huge, whopping 3% of the length of the lens.

EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM II (CR link)
  • Example 3
    • Zoom ratio 3.75
    • Focal length f = 104.16-166.66-391.00mm
    • Fno. 4.60-5.20-5.80
    • Half angle ω = 11.73-7.40-3.17 °
    • Image height Y = 21.64mm
    • 221.48-252.31-300.68mm overall length of the lens
    • BF 70.65-87.69-113.37mm
RF 100-400 f/3.5-5.6 L IS USM (CR link)
  • Focal distance 102.21 195.97 389.86
  • F number 3.83 4.93 5.85
  • Half angle of view (degree) 11.95 6.30 3.18
  • Image height 21.64 21.64 21.64
  • Lens total length 204.85 250.29 291.30
  • BF 4.31 31.68 97.49
But hey, you go right on believing that RF mount + 400mm lens = magic. :rolleyes:
 

sdsr

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 14, 2012
911
5
I am happy to defend the 200 f2.8LII. I got one used a couple of months ago, and I love it. Reasonably small and light (just a little bit bigger than the 135L), fast to focus, sharp across the frame at f2.8, and beautiful bookeh! It made me sell the 70-200 f2.8LIII I got on sale on black friday last november without thinking twice.

The 200 f2.8LII is plenty sharp, but yes, when pixel peeping I admit that it could be sharper. In my opinion though, I find the lack of biting crisp details to provide a very pleasing and “organic” look. I’m not sure I would want it sharper if I could choose... The only thing I miss in it is IS.
I quite agree, which is why I kept it when I switched to Sony bodies - which have the advantage of IBIS. To answer an earlier question, I find it effective on both this lens and 135mm (I've not tried anything longer), though I've not tried the 200mm with slower speeds than 1/60.
 
Reactions: Larsskv

sdsr

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 14, 2012
911
5
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.
It's true that the Sigma f/1.8 and Samyang (and Zeiss f/2 and Zeiss Batis f/2.8) have less CA and are sharper (I expect the same will be true for the upcoming Sony 135 1.8). But depending on what you're shooting the differences (esp. sharpness) may be trivial and even work to Canon's advantage. (Either way, it's hardly "lousy with softness.") Have you not seen the beautiful photos that have been taken with the 135 f2? Elena Shumilova, for instance, uses one for most of her photos. https://www.boredpanda.com/animal-children-photography-elena-shumilova/ If I worked on a Canon assembly line for the 135 f/2 knowing that such photos could be taken with it, my morale would be rather good. Or are you being sarcastic?
 

YuengLinger

EOR R
Dec 20, 2012
2,234
252
Southeastern USA
It's true that the Sigma f/1.8 and Samyang (and Zeiss f/2 and Zeiss Batis f/2.8) have less CA and are sharper (I expect the same will be true for the upcoming Sony 135 1.8). But depending on what you're shooting the differences (esp. sharpness) may be trivial and even work to Canon's advantage. (Either way, it's hardly "lousy with softness.") Have you not seen the beautiful photos that have been taken with the 135 f2? Elena Shumilova, for instance, uses one for most of her photos. https://www.boredpanda.com/animal-children-photography-elena-shumilova/ If I worked on a Canon assembly line for the 135 f/2 knowing that such photos could be taken with it, my morale would be rather good. Or are you being sarcastic?
Great link!
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
3,833
390
It’s a very good reason why some people think the 135 f2 is the sharpest lens they ever tried and some find it seriously fuzzy and lacking. It’s one of the worst offenders when it comes to copy variation along with the 35 L mk1 and 16-35 II.

I’ve had at least 8 or 9 135’s in my time and they are either very sharp or very soft, never had one in between...
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,353
328
119
It's true that the Sigma f/1.8 and Samyang (and Zeiss f/2 and Zeiss Batis f/2.8) have less CA and are sharper (I expect the same will be true for the upcoming Sony 135 1.8). But depending on what you're shooting the differences (esp. sharpness) may be trivial and even work to Canon's advantage. (Either way, it's hardly "lousy with softness.") Have you not seen the beautiful photos that have been taken with the 135 f2? Elena Shumilova, for instance, uses one for most of her photos. https://www.boredpanda.com/animal-children-photography-elena-shumilova/ If I worked on a Canon assembly line for the 135 f/2 knowing that such photos could be taken with it, my morale would be rather good. Or are you being sarcastic?
Whilst I'm not taking anything away from Elena's images, which I have linked to before and think are beautiful, we have to acknowledge the fact that they are so heavily post processed that almost all the lens characteristics are buried.
 

awair

EOS T7i
Jan 3, 2013
91
5
photo.awair.net
While I’d love to see a 135/1.4, my priority is definitely for (lens) IS, with this type of lens.

In my opinion, the 85/1.4L blows away the 1.2L for at least 98.7% of shots (approx...), if only because more of them are in focus! In fact, I made a decision to sell my 1.2 (for a loss) within 24 hours of picking up the 1.4.

The 135/2 was my first ' L' glass, and it's still great; easy to travel with, low light capability and super sharp. I've used it on my backup with the 1.4x, when the 70-200 was too big to travel with, and also on the 100D (SL1) for travel.

I've just picked up my RP, and the 135 has been firmly attached for the last 48 hours. It's a great combination, but it looks so long with the hood attached.

Although I’m happy with this purchase, I won't be switching (full-time) to mirrorless any time soon. I will be able to travel more easily with the RP, and maybe 2? Lenses. The only RF that I’m really likely to buy (apart from the rumoured 400/2 “pancake”?), is a proper pancake 35 or 40/2.8, similar to the current (EF) 40/2.8 - which also looks huge on the RP!