Patent: Some crazy fast RF mount prime lenses, including an RF 18mm f/1.0L

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
390
349
118
Williamsport, PA
Canon is doing it right. RF Lenses - especially high-end lenses before more RF cameras. I am impressed by the speed they are building op, an RF range of lenses.
Canon (and Nikon) might came late into mirrorless but especially Canon is showing their strength and muscles.

In the meanwhile I plan for staying with my 6D and EF-lenses for a while, and probably even investing in the upcoming 5DmkV.
So "R-series" and RF glass is 10+ years down the road for me.
What is most wonderful about Canon and no one else is all your old AF lenses of the EF and EFs persuasion are fully compatible with the RF mount. So even if you have a large stable of great lenses the work, and from what I hear work even better on the RF cameras.
I am in no hurry and am waiting as well to see what the RF mount line up fleshes out to be but will be definitely getting the RF system when I see what closely meets my needs and desires.
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
521
307
What is most wonderful about Canon and no one else is all your old AF lenses of the EF and EFs persuasion are fully compatible with the RF mount. So even if you have a large stable of great lenses the work, and from what I hear work even better on the RF cameras.
[..]
I especially enjoy the CPL adapter, finally a polarizer for all my lenses and no issues with flare and macro flashes! It does make me a bit apprehensive about a future MP-R65mm or 100mm macro, since those will likely lack the filter slot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Architect1776

RunAndGun

EOS RP
Dec 16, 2011
323
27
Hah, it'd be interesting to see how much a 100mm or even a 135 mm f/1.2 would end up going for. (And how much that heavy beast would bend light OUTSIDE of the optical pathway from its gravity.)
Sigma and Tokina both have 105 T1.5 Cine lenses, with Sigma having a 105 f/1.4 stills version that’s fairly affordable at $1599. And Tokina just joined Zeiss with having a 135 T1.5 Cine lens, but theirs is actually less than five figures, coming in at a surprising $8999 and almost 7lbs(Zeiss is almost $24K). So, based on that, if someone wanted to make a stills version, you could probably see a 135 f/1.4 for maybe ~$3K.
 

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,066
579
Turku, Finland
This means the mechanical length of the lens from front to rear element is: 115,44 mm (=129,01 mm -13,57 mm; at least, plus mechanical parts)
This would be the space needed in your bag, as the lens will protrude into the body by 6,43 mm (=20 mm - 13,57 mm; at least, plus mechanical parts)
The mechanical length from front element to flange is 109,01 mm (=129,01 mm -20 mm; at least, plus mechanical parts)
This would be the space in front of the camera when mounted.
I was thinking distance from camera mount to front of the lens, so I wouldn't say I was "incorrect", though I could've been clearer. Things that go inside the shutter box don't count ;)

Incidentally, there's a third reasonable definition for lens physical length: total length when the lens is at MFD, as opposed to infinity which is how backfocus distance is measured. If the rear group moves when focusing, it might protrude much less, or not at all, at MFD compared to infinity. That, of course, very much depends on the lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Maximilian

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,190
1,769
Canada
Oh great and wise sir, would you like to enlighten us poor fools as to how the R “sucks?” Especially since I doubt you’ve ever even used one.
it does not have cat tracking mode..... how can you take a picture of a sleeping cat without a specialized cat tracking mode? YAWN!
 

Attachments

BeenThere

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 4, 2012
859
187
Market? How many wold pay $6k for such a lens. Would be primarily for bragging rights, but that has some value in marketing the Canon brand. :cool:
 

Trey T

EOS 80D
Feb 6, 2019
110
56
I remember several optic physicists or engineers on here were disgusted that I proposed that with Canon RF platform they can create significantly faster lenses than EF. Very close-minded ppl
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,171
1,755
Irving, Texas
I remember several optic physicists or engineers on here were disgusted that I proposed that with Canon RF platform they can create significantly faster lenses than EF. Very close-minded ppl
Who was "disgusted"? It isn't as though Canon didn't have f/1.2 lenses before RF. Besides, you are not one of those engineers, so what would make your opinion worth listening to?

Anyway, I'll give you two brownie points and an atta-boy for your opinions. Feel better?

Was it this fantasy?

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:
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: RGB86

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,153
390
Yeah, I agree. They really need a set of f/4 zooms (the 24-105 being one), and some f/1.8-2.8 range small primes. I say 2.8 because getting into the 20 mm range, it will make a big difference in size/cost, I would think.

My thinking - a 15-35 f/4 IS and a 70-200 f/4 IS to go with the 24-105. And, a 20/2.8, a 24/2, a 50/1.8, 85/1.8, and 135/2 to go with the 35/1.8. IS on all or most of them.
Well, Canon has already rolled out the RF24-105, and the RF 35, along with the R and the RP. So, how these sell may help Canon make up its mind with how far it wants to go with f4 zooms and smallish primes. My guess is that no matter what Canon brings out, their biggest sellers in this part of the market will be the 24-105 and the 35mm. There is a reason why Canon started with those lenses.
 

Jethro

EOS R
Jul 14, 2018
252
126
it does not have cat tracking mode..... how can you take a picture of a sleeping cat without a specialized cat tracking mode? YAWN!
Well what with Sony's new(ish) Real-Time Animal Eye AF, maybe they'll actually ...

And with the miracle of firmware updates, they can add it without releasing a whole new model number body!
 
Dec 10, 2016
20
18
UK
So far I had no interest in RF lenses since the cameras suck,
The EOS R Sucks! Really!

Granted I pre-ordered the camera and so got one of the first bodies to arrive in the UK, I wasn’t at first blown away with it. Until the latest firmware update and then WOW! Now I love the camera, ignore any reviews of this camera pre the latest firmware update as this makes a massive difference to auto focus.

You only need to watch the YouTube movie by the extremely talented and mostly Sony shooter Manny Ortiz to see the capabilities of this camera


RF Lens wise Canon is going to soon dominate the market with more spectacular glass, personally I’d like to see some new smaller and lighter f4 zooms and one or two f2.8 pancakes but you can’t knock them for having the desire and innovation to create these crazy fast primes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimMatthews160

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,171
1,755
Irving, Texas
The EOS R Sucks! Really!

Granted I pre-ordered the camera and so got one of the first bodies to arrive in the UK, I wasn’t at first blown away with it. Until the latest firmware update and then WOW! Now I love the camera, ignore any reviews of this camera pre the latest firmware update as this makes a massive difference to auto focus.

You only need to watch the YouTube movie by the extremely talented and mostly Sony shooter Manny Ortiz to see the capabilities of this camera


RF Lens wise Canon is going to soon dominate the market with more spectacular glass, personally I’d like to see some new smaller and lighter f4 zooms and one or two f2.8 pancakes but you can’t knock them for having the desire and innovation to create these crazy fast primes.
You seem to have missed the memo: Canon doesn't innovate. Canon is doomed. ;) BTW: Love my R also. :)
 

uri.raz

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2016
158
113
Who was "disgusted"? It isn't as though Canon didn't have f/1.2 lenses before RF.
The 24mm f/1.2 is fractionally faster than the EF 24mm f/1.4L, and Canon made an EF 50mm f/1.0L as well.

One might claim Canon didn't make any ultra wide lenses as fast, both the 20mm & 14mm being f/2.8
 

Normalnorm

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 25, 2012
538
142
Perfect!
Now I can make my model's nose as large as possible without it being in focus.

I see the new bokeh fashion: Eyes sharp, faces looking like characters from "Freaks" (the movie, 1932) but fetchingly out of focus.

Just what will the aliens think when examining the ruins of our civilization? People using vast resources to develop technology to make images for amusement.
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
To be fair, as we mentioned, it's unlikely that 18mm gets made - it has a 5mm back focus distance which is pretty tight for the RF mount.
5mm should be fine. Why would that be a problem? 1mm would be fine as long as putting it in at an angle wouldn't scratch the lens or sensor.