Patent: Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L and other fast primes

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
7,692
343
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Northlight has uncovered a USPTO patent for various fast prime optical formulas, included in the patent is the design for an RF 135mm f/1.8L. A lens we definitely think will be released sometime in 2020.
Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L USM embodiment:

Focal length: 133.0mm
F number: 1.80
Half angle of view: 9.2°
Image height: 21.6mm
Overall length of lens: 150mm
Backfocus: 18mm

This patent also includes designs for an RF 85mm f/1.2L USM (which is already announced) along with an RF 100mm f/1.4 fast prime. We think the 135mm f/1.8 is more likely to come than a RF 100mm f/1.4.
Continue reading...


 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,270
181
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
While I like the 100mm focal length most I would like to see a f/2.0 100mm with 1:2 close focus + IS in a compact outline - a good companion for the existing RF 1.8 35. Should be in the same price league as well. Might be a reason to buy into the EOS R system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso
May 19, 2019
1
1
I'm hoping the price is reasonable on this one. Perhaps I'm in the minority here, but I see little reason to buy into the R system if the vast majority of the RF lenses are going to be out of my price range.

I understand that you can use EF lenses quite well, but then you're not really getting the most out of the new RF mount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SwissFrank

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
582
209
Looks like it'will be the biggest prime lens in the RF stable (until longer lenses arrive)
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
300
116
There are 100/5mm f/1.4 from Nikon, Sigma, Sony, and Zeiss. Why wouldn't Canon make one as well?
Basically, these lenses all have a 72mm aperture: 85/1.2, 100/1.4, 135/2.0, 200/2.8. Given that Canon's been making the other three for 20+ years, there's clearly no technical block preventing a 100/1.4, merely the worry that anyone buying it would be moving their purchase from an 85/1.2 or 135/2. I've loved both my EF 85/1.2 and EF 135/2 but had there been an 100/1.4, I might have just bought that instead of the shorter and longer ones.
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
300
116
I'm hoping that Canon follows up the 28-70/2.0 with another lens that would look like a misprint at first:

135/1.4.

It'd have the same front element size as a 200/2 or 400/4. Huge but not a showstopper. It would only need the length of about the EF 135/2 I think.

The goal would be that while you could use it at 1.4 when you wanted, it'd actually be optimized to give perfectly round bokeh's from center to corner at f/2.0

Then further, it'd have a slot for drop-in apodization filters letting you make those f/2.0 bokeh balls soft-edged.

In short: the best bokeh ever in the history of the planet in any format by anybody.

Why f/1.4 but kind of to be used at f/2? Take a 135/2 design, like our beloved EF. It shows mechanical vignetting or "eclipsing," from the front element , or maybe in part from the back or middle elements. OK. Supersize the elements that are causing the problem, until the eclipsing goes away and instead of American footballs, the bokeh balls even out to the corner are real balls. My theory is that by the time you do that and it looks perfect, the only thing about your lens that's still f/2 is the aperture. So if you then upgrade that to allow 1.4, the glass is all there to give you that 1.4.

Just thinking, maybe 135/1.2 would be the way to go... round bokeh by f/1.8... and the apodization filter would then be slicing that down to T/2.8 to T.3.5. See, even with the huge wide-open aperture, by the time you stop down to get circles, then put the filter in, you're not getting a lot of bokeh. You're getting something beautiful (I hope) but the ultimate image is NOT totally over-the-top, instead it's quite restrained. That said, I'd be embarrassed to write 135/1.0. Which would have nearly the front element of a 400/2.8 or 600/4...
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
459
271
I'm hoping the price is reasonable on this one. Perhaps I'm in the minority here, but I see little reason to buy into the R system if the vast majority of the RF lenses are going to be out of my price range. [..]
The Sony 135/1.8 is about €2000, the Sigma 135/1.8 is about €1400, the Canon 135/2.0 has swung between €1100 and €850 lately. With those numbers in mind, does the idea of 'reasonable' come close to being 'in your price range'?
Personally, I think a €2400 intro price, dropping down to €2100 after a few months and combined with one of the perpetual rebates thrown in would be both 'reasonable' and 'way out of my price range'.

I hope a Canon 135/1.8 will be cheaper than the Sony version, but I fear it won't be judging from the RF50 and RF85 prices.
 

lawny13

EOS M50
Mar 6, 2019
32
43
I'm hoping the price is reasonable on this one. Perhaps I'm in the minority here, but I see little reason to buy into the R system if the vast majority of the RF lenses are going to be out of my price range.

I understand that you can use EF lenses quite well, but then you're not really getting the most out of the new RF mount.
No guarantee of course, but it seems like canon is approaching things from the opposite side of the spectrum compared to Sony and Nikon. I believe (and they do confirm this in their interviews), that their reasoning is for those going budget (RP body and such) one can easily and cheaply adapt EF lenses. I currently have the 100 L macro and the 50 stm that I adapt to the R, and I obtained both of those for €400 (€80 for the stm). In fact a whole list of non-L lenses can be had cheap second hand. Basically any one on a budget can simply permanently leave the adapter on the RP and simply sport an all EF line up.

For people who need more, but not sports (landscape, Portait and studio work) you have the R and those premium RF lens. After this year I would expect that f4, and f1.8 will follow. I for one am patiently waiting for a RF 50 f1.8 or f1.4 (preferably high quality but less than 1k, due to my experience with the 55 sonar, but hope for others that an RF 50 stm equivalent also shows up). In fact I expert/hope that canon matches or presents better priced lenses which one considers normal in design (not the unique f2 zooms and f1.2 primes etc).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roy Hunte

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
459
271
[..] After this year I would expect that f4, and f1.8 will follow. I for one am patiently waiting for a RF 50 f1.8 or f1.4 (preferably high quality but less than 1k, due to my experience with the 55 sonar, but hope for others that an RF 50 stm equivalent also shows up). In fact I expert/hope that canon matches or presents better priced lenses which one considers normal in design (not the unique f2 zooms and f1.2 primes etc).
I really, really, really hope for 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 primes in or before 2020. I'm using the 85/1.8 on the RP a lot and while it's sharp the CA in some situations drives me nuts. I accept that reflective hairclips in sunlight are a worst case scenario, but a flat hand at the edge of DoF has a lot of CA on the edges of all the fingers.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,607
2,060
I really, really, really hope for 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8 primes in or before 2020. I'm using the 85/1.8 on the RP a lot and while it's sharp the CA in some situations drives me nuts. I accept that reflective hairclips in sunlight are a worst case scenario, but a flat hand at the edge of DoF has a lot of CA on the edges of all the fingers.
If it’s an ‘affordable’ 50/1.4 or 85/1.8, don’t hold your breath on longitudinal CA. Granted that the aperture is f/1.2, but the RF 50/1.2 isn’t really all that ‘affordable’ and has ample LoCA as Bryan/TDP’s test jewelry shows.

 

Photo Hack

Hi there
Apr 8, 2019
113
149
I can be completely confident in saying: no.

Canon's goal for mirrorless full-frame is 'margin'.
Reasonable? Margin? I would hope Canon, and anyone in the world would have margin in mind at some point in their lives. That’s business.

Reasonable as compared to what? Sony & Nikon? Leica? Or just compared to your budget?

As far as I’ve seen, Canon’s lens pricing relative to the competition and factoring in quality and uniqueness is actually VERY reasonable. Browse through a BH catalog and compare list pricing and tell me Canon isn’t “reasonable”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

flip314

EOS RP
Sep 26, 2018
230
300
As far as I’ve seen, Canon’s lens pricing relative to the competition and factoring in quality and uniqueness is actually VERY reasonable. Browse through a BH catalog and compare list pricing and tell me Canon isn’t “reasonable”.
I totally agree with you. Canon lenses are almost always cheaper than equivalent lenses from Nikon and Sony. It remains to be seen if that will remain the case with mirrorless lenses, but for now a lot of the lenses that people are complaining about the prices of don't HAVE any equivalent from other manufacturers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Photo Hack

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,607
2,060
I totally agree with you. Canon lenses are almost always cheaper than equivalent lenses from Nikon and Sony. It remains to be seen if that will remain the case with mirrorless lenses, but for now a lot of the lenses that people are complaining about the prices of don't HAVE any equivalent from other manufacturers.
Exactly. And if you are the sole supplier, it’s easier to charge as much as the market will bear and then some.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Photo Hack

Photo Hack

Hi there
Apr 8, 2019
113
149
Exactly. And if you are the sole supplier, it’s easier to charge as much as the market will bear and then some.
And let’s not forget the RF lenses have way more technology and engineering involved than Sony or Nikon. Programmable ring, multiple adapter options, better pin and communication options, better size, better optics, unmatachable apertures, etc. I would expect them to be more expensive than their EF counterparts as well. But so far, intro retail prices on RF haven’t really been inflated compared to EF, all things being equal. I would say they’re a better value when you put them head to head and consider inflation and age.

IMO Canons lens technology, choices, and quality far surpass Nikon & Sony but are consistently cheaper to their equivalents.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,607
2,060
IMO Canons lens technology, choices, and quality far surpass Nikon & Sony but are consistently cheaper to their equivalents.
Agreed. But many people just see a $2000-3000 price tag and gasp. At least, people who haven’t shopped for a supertele lens. ;)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Photo Hack