RF 135mm

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
The short and handy RF70-200 game changer has me covered every time I consider anything in that range.
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,752
678
RF 135mm f/1.8 or faster would be a very quick purchase for me. For those who haven’t used the EF version, it’s one of those lenses who’s pictures just have something extra.
Yeah, that’s due to its unique rendition qualities.
I doubt this to be the case with the RF successor.

Personally, I would buy a nice used EF copy and be happy with that :)
 
Last edited:

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
RF 135mm f/1.8 or faster would be a very quick purchase for me. For those who haven’t used the EF version, it’s one of those lenses who’s pictures just have something extra.
There has never been an EF 135mm f1.8, there has been an EF 200 f1.8. and a PE 300mm f1.8 (which is an EF mount with AF), but never a 135mm f1.8 so nobody has used one.
 
Last edited:

richperson

EOS 80D
Sep 6, 2019
133
162
There has never been an EF 135mm f1.8, there has been an EF 200 f1.8. and an EF 300mm f1.8, but never a 135mm f1.8 so nobody has used one.
I didn't say there was one. Read my post please. Reports and patent publications indicated that the RF version would be f/1.8, and given the number f/1.2 RF primes I think an RF 135mm f/1.8 is realistic.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
8,250
1,601
120
I didn't say there was one. Read my post please. Reports and patent publications indicated that the RF version would be f/1.8, and given the number f/1.2 RF primes I think an RF 135mm f/1.8 is realistic.
"RF 135mm f/1.8 or faster would be a very quick purchase for me. For those who haven’t used the EF version..." Sure sounds like you saying you have used an EF 135mm f1.8, which are we supposed to ignore, the 135mm part, the f1.8 part or the 'you have used' part?

Sony and Sigma make 135mm f1.8's already, of course Canon could make an RF one!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,710
880
A lot of people would like it, but with sales dwindling, I don't expect to see a lot of new "L" RF primes in the near future. At some point, we will see some big whites in the RF format. Right now, Canon needs some consumer RF lenses. A lot of Canon's profit has come from massive sales of low cost lenses. I hear them saying that high end cameras and lenses will be their emphasis going forward because thats what's selling. Still, something that matches the price range of the RP is sorely needed.
 

richperson

EOS 80D
Sep 6, 2019
133
162
"RF 135mm f/1.8 or faster would be a very quick purchase for me. For those who haven’t used the EF version..." Sure sounds like you saying you have used an EF 135mm f1.8, which are we supposed to ignore, the 135mm part, the f1.8 part or the 'you have used' part?
Are you Drax???

Here I will spell it out for your in words more easily digested.

"RF 135mm f/1.8 or faster would be a very quick purchase for me. For those who haven’t used the EF version--which everyone knows has a max aperature of f/2..."

Is that easier to understand?
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
577
Hamburg, Germany
For those who haven’t used the EF version--which everyone knows has a max aperature of f/2..." [/I]
I think most people differentiate lenses based in the combination of focal length AND aperture.

If you read some one saying how much they love the RF 28-70mm 2.0 because it is so much more unique than the EF version - would that make sense to you? I would not call the EF 28-70mm 2.8 "the EF version". Different aperture = totally different lens.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: privatebydesign

richperson

EOS 80D
Sep 6, 2019
133
162
I think most people differentiate lenses based in the combination of focal length AND aperture.

If you read some one saying how much they love the RF 28-70mm 2.0 because it is so much more unique than the EF version - would that make sense to you? I would not call the EF 28-70mm 2.8 "the EF version". Different aperture = totally different lens.
No, because there is no 28-70mm EF lens. There is only one EF 135mm, and there will be only one RF 135mm lens. We are just speaking different language. I understand that my shortcutting on detail was confusing to you, but you are unlikely to convince me to express myself differently in the future. We should just leave it at that.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
577
Hamburg, Germany
No, because there is no 28-70mm EF lens.
Yes there is an EF 28-70mm:


We should just leave it at that.
I'm not trying to change how you express yourself. But you seemed irritated about the way your statement was interpreted and wanted to demonstrate why I feel that interpretation was perfectly valid.
 

richperson

EOS 80D
Sep 6, 2019
133
162
Yes there is an EF 28-70mm:



I'm not trying to change how you express yourself. But you seemed irritated about the way your statement was interpreted and wanted to demonstrate why I feel that interpretation was perfectly valid.
Okay, well I'm obviously not as old as you (at least in Canon years) to site a long discontinued lens. Again, I shorthanded my language. What I meant to say is "currently, Canon does not sell a new EF 28-70mm lens that could be confused with the RF 28-70 f/2 lens."

And yes, it bothers me when people dismiss the content of what I am trying to say, and instead focus on minutia of how I said it. I find that irritating. I try to see what people are saying over how they say it.

Regarding the current topic, the reality is that the RF 135mm lens that ends up being produced, is much more likely to be f/1.8 (which also appears in patents) than f/1.4 because the f/1.8 would be much more accessible to the average R shooter, will be much cheaper and much smaller. I do hope it is f/1.4 though as one of my current favorite lenses is the EF 200mm f/2 and an RF 135mm f/1.4 would probably be equally spectacular.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
577
Hamburg, Germany
the reality is that the RF 135mm lens that ends up being produced, is much more likely to be f/1.8 (which also appears in patents) than f/1.4 because the f/1.8 would be much more accessible to the average R shooter
I do wonder what the average R user looks like, and what Canon would like it to look like in the future. We saw a lot of lenses that are crazy fast in patents. It makes sense to push for lenses that were impossible to make at a reasonable size and cost in the EF Mount.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

richperson

EOS 80D
Sep 6, 2019
133
162
I do wonder what the average R user looks like, and what Canon would like it to look like in the future. We saw a lot of lenses that are crazy fast in patents. It makes sense to push for lenses that were impossible to make at a reasonable size and cost in the EF Mount.
I would hope eventually they make both. Maybe a 135mm f/1.8 at under $2000 and a 135mm f/1.4 at $3000-3500. That second lens would be amazing for portraits and for sports and theater applications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy