Patent: Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS & RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM

kaptainkatsu

1DX Mark II
Sep 29, 2015
166
62
The 24-70 2.8 IS pretty much seals the deal for me on the EOS R. Been a hold out on the 24-70 zoom lens because of lack of IS (my current trio is 16-35, 50 and 70-200).

I might buy the EOS R after first price drop and the 35 1.8 then wait for the 24-70 2.8 to drop.

The EOS R will primarily be a Gimbal cam and as my second stills camera. If i need 4k/60 or 1080/120, I have my 1dx2 to fill that slot.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,029
120
I like the thought of an RF 24-70 2.8 IS.....








But I like the thought of an EF 24-70 2.8 IS even better. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: tron

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
579
550
Ok, please pardon what is likely a stupid question....

But why did they do two lenses so close together?

Why not do a 24-70mm f/2.0 L lens? I love my current 24-70L....(version 2)....and would be excited to get it in f/2.0...not sure I'd want to lose that extra wide end for a 28-70.

Anyway, is there a good reason not to just do the 24-70 in f/2.0?


TIA,

cayenne
Yes , there is certainly a good reason, namely the enormous optical complexity of such a lens, unless you'd accept a loss of quality.
The 28-70 seems to have attained a new summit in terms of sharpness and contrast (assumption based on the Canon MTF data), so it would be a pity to sacrify this for a wider zoom range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nitram

keithcooper

EOS 7D MK II
I still prefer the EF series (and to tell the truth I am heavily invested in EF lenses) but if they do not produce an EF version of this lens I will start worrying. True, I will still keep preferring my EF lenses/system and I will not switch but I will put an end to getting new EF lenses (keep in mind that I do not say stop updating my EOS bodies because I would be a liar!). Also being a hobbyist and not rich I do not know if I will ever be able to switch completely. I truly hope they will keep all product lines active.
They won't be producing EF versions - look at the designs. They are short back focus with large rear elements. See the Canon EOS-R white paper for a lot more about why this aspect of the RF mount is an important feature.

Now that doesn't mean you couldn't get an EF equivalent - just I see these patents as fleshing out where RF is going. There are four lenses in the patent. One is likely the 24-105, there are two designs for 24-70 and one 24-300

Remember that this is a patent application to show aspects of optical design - not a lens roadmap!
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene and nitram

fullstop

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
more I see capabilities that just are not there with EF
yes, well chosen lens parameters allow for a larger optical design space.

see also Thom Hogan's article.
https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/canon-adds-a-full-frame.html



Inner angle is Sony FE, outer is Nikon Z, middle is Canon R (close to scale). In theory, Nikon has the most design flexibility, Sony the least.


The new RF mount has a flange distance of 20mm with a throat of 54mm. Nikon's Z mount is the "big boy" now, flipping the advantage of the EF over the F mount that reigned through the film SLR and DSLR era. Whether that shows up in any real advantages to users remains to be seen, but Nikon does have more optical design space available to them than Canon and Sony.
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,085
382
They won't be producing EF versions - look at the designs. They are short back focus with large rear elements. See the Canon EOS-R white paper for a lot more about why this aspect of the RF mount is an important feature.

Now that doesn't mean you couldn't get an EF equivalent - just I see these patents as fleshing out where RF is going. There are four lenses in the patent. One is likely the 24-105, there are two designs for 24-70 and one 24-300

Remember that this is a patent application to show aspects of optical design - not a lens roadmap!
I understand about the patents and I remember EF 24-70 2.8L IS patents from the past. I am talking about Canon's determination to support and expand the EF series...
 

DaveGrice

EOS M50
Mar 14, 2018
27
12
Houston, TX
Visit site
I wonder if they intend to make an EF 24-70 2.8L IS too even as a commitment to EF line or not.
Doubt it. Since the EF 24-70 2.8 IS seems like an obvious thing to do, and it hasn't materialized, yet it's apparently now in the works for RF - I would draw the conclusion that we'll be seeing all the forward-thinking development going into RF and not EF from here on out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nitram and pj1974

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,227
416
More lenses with IS basically means that Canon has not intention of going the IBIS route
My guess is that they will go the Panasonic route compared to Olympus - Canon will concentrate on getting a camera will all the real goodies such as effective AF tracking and frame rates and will rely on in-lens IS. When they have finally got a workable IBIS they will incorporate it with a dual IS between body and lens giving an even better IS.
I am not aware so far that the top range Sony lenses without IS are noticably smaller than the Canon L lenses with IS.
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,085
382
Doubt it. Since the EF 24-70 2.8 IS seems like an obvious thing to do, and it hasn't materialized, yet it's apparently now in the works for RF - I would draw the conclusion that we'll be seeing all the forward-thinking development going into RF and not EF from here on out.
There are patents of this lens for both mounts. Now if Canon make only an RF version that will say a lot for the future of EF mount
 
Last edited:
Mar 14, 2012
2,305
193
They won't be producing EF versions - look at the designs. They are short back focus with large rear elements. See the Canon EOS-R white paper for a lot more about why this aspect of the RF mount is an important feature.

Now that doesn't mean you couldn't get an EF equivalent - just I see these patents as fleshing out where RF is going. There are four lenses in the patent. One is likely the 24-105, there are two designs for 24-70 and one 24-300

Remember that this is a patent application to show aspects of optical design - not a lens roadmap!
Any thoughts as to why Canon kept the 54mm ID and choose the flange distance it did? Seems like Canon could have chosen a shorter flange distance and a wider opening to match or surpass what Nikon chose and still have compatibility with the EF-M line...
 

DaveGrice

EOS M50
Mar 14, 2018
27
12
Houston, TX
Visit site
I agree, I've been waiting for that update as well. If they only roll it out on RF, though, I'll be quite annoyed. As much as it makes sense in the RF line, it also makes sense in the EF line.
Well, it would make sense if Canon were going to invest any more energy in the EF series. My fear is that may not be Canon's strategy going forward. Sitting nervously on a bag full of EF L glass...
 

goldenhusky

EOS RP
Dec 2, 2016
274
70
I was expecting the EF 28-300L to get replaced with a EF 24-300L with the turn to zoom instead of the old pull-push design but at this point I do not believe Canon will release the EF 24-300L instead might release the RF 24-300L. If at all Canon releases the EF 24-300L that might be a sign Canon might not introduce more FF MILC any time soon and we may see more FF DSLRs. In any case I guess we will see next version of 7D2, 1Dx2 and 5D4 in the DSLR form. I hope Canon releases the next version of 5DsR in the MILC form without AA filter. Other than that I guess we can expect Canon to release the f/2.8 RF trinity sooner than later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bob Howland

traveller

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 22, 2010
895
58
yes, well chosen lens parameters allow for a larger optical design space.

see also Thom Hogan's article.
https://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/canon-adds-a-full-frame.html

Interesting why Canon chose a 20mm flange focal distance for the RF mount. I originally thought it was so they could make an RF to EF-M adapter, but Canon News’ article suggests that’s not possible. Is there a good optical reason why they didn’t go for 18mm BFD (like EF-M), or shorter (like Nikon Z), or is it a cynical ploy to make adapting other mirrorless mount lenses impossible and complicate the efforts of third party manufacturers to make RF mount versions of their FE mount lens designs?
 

nitram

EOS M50
Jun 14, 2018
39
16
Switzerland
Besides two or three other big white telephoto lenses, EF mount is finished in terms of new lens releases. However, don’t let that fool you. Your bag full of EF glass is great and will continue to work great on the EOS R body family!
 

traveller

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 22, 2010
895
58
Besides two or three other big white telephoto lenses, EF mount is finished in terms of new lens releases. However, don’t let that fool you. Your bag full of EF glass is great and will continue to work great on the EOS R body family!
I have two concerns with the “just use the EF-RF adapter” issue:
  1. Doubling the number of lens-mount interfaces - I’ll leave the explanation to Roger Cicala: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters/ No, the sky won’t fall in because of this. In the real world and with a 30MP sensor, I doubt you’d notice unless you get an unlucky combination of lens, adapter & body that are all enough out of tolerance in the same direction. On the other hand, for those advocating a future EOS R series body with a high resolution sensor, perhaps it is a worry.
  2. MELVILLE, N.Y., April 1st, 2019: Canon U.S.A. Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the new EOS RS featuring Superduper autofocus*, 80MP orgasmic sensor and... [*feature only available with Canon RF series lenses]- I think we can all see this coming! It’s pretty reasonable to assume there’s a reason for the new 12 pin connection on RF lenses.
Whilst I’d be happy to adapt my existing lenses, I wouldn’t want to buy a new EF mount lens with the intention of adapting it to RF mount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nitram