What’s a “realistic” lens that you’d like to see Canon make?

SwissFrank

from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
380
163
To the people asking for an RF 50mm f/1.4:

It's 50mm f/1.2 or 50mm f/1.8.
Take your pick.
I don't think so. There's totally room for a 50 1.2, 1.4, 1.8 in the lineup.

In fact the 1.4 could go one of two ways: compact double-gauss design with pedestrian image quality, or a new-style computer-designed formula like the Otus, RF50/1.2, etc. In fact if they made both types I could picture getting both: the sharp version for specific products or the compact one for daily grab shooting, holidays etc.

One of my old Leica buddies had a gag that he had finally settled on the ideal M outfit: 50/1.0, 1.4, 2.0, and 2.8. And he was only half-kidding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
181
150
Why should it be realistic? Nothing beautiful has ever been created without having been dreamed of in the first place... unrealistically(!)

200mm f/1.8 :love:
Not unrealistic. There already was one of those in EF mount released in 1988.
 

davidespinosa

EOS M50
Feb 12, 2020
25
24
The 50mm/1,2 is too heavy and expensive and the 50mm/1,8 is too poor. 50mm/1,4 is the perfect solution!
I doubt Canon agrees that the 50mm f/1.8 is too poor.
It's only 2/3 stop slower than f/1.4, and it has IS.
I don't think so. There's totally room for a 50 1.2, 1.4, 1.8 in the lineup.

In fact the 1.4 could go one of two ways: compact double-gauss design with pedestrian image quality, or a new-style computer-designed formula like the Otus, RF50/1.2, etc. In fact if they made both types I could picture getting both: the sharp version for specific products or the compact one for daily grab shooting, holidays etc.

One of my old Leica buddies had a gag that he had finally settled on the ideal M outfit: 50/1.0, 1.4, 2.0, and 2.8. And he was only half-kidding.
I think your Leica buddy was serious -- but that's a full-stop series.
And there is exactly one full stop between f/1.2 and f/1.8.
So IMO there's no room for another lens.
But you can certainly get both -- the f/1.2 is the high-IQ lens, and the f/1.8 is the compact lens.
 
Last edited:

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,932
861
I doubt Canon agrees that the 50mm f/1.8 is too poor.
It's only 2/3 stop slower than f/1.4, and it has IS.

I think your Leica buddy was serious -- but that's a full-stop series.
And there is exactly one full stop between f/1.2 and f/1.8.
So IMO there's no room for another lens.
But you can certainly get both -- the f/1.2 is the high-IQ lens, and the f/1.8 is the compact lens.
When looking at a $3000 f1.2 lens and then at a $400 F1.8, one can easily see how a mid range F1.4 option priced at around $1600-1800 fits in between. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974 and esglord

davidespinosa

EOS M50
Feb 12, 2020
25
24
When looking at a $3000 f1.2 lens and then at a $400 F1.8, one can easily see how a mid range F1.4 option priced at around $1600-1800 fits in between. :)
The RF 50mm f/1.2 is $2300, and the RF 35mm f/1.8 is $500.
But you're right -- there's room between those two prices.

Since the RF series seems to emphasize image quality,
I think the RF 50mm f/1.8 will be more like the EF f/1.4 ($350) than the EF f/1.8 ($125).
 
Last edited:

Antono Refa

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
960
195
A range of prime lenses for the R with prices under $500 so us "normal people" - enthusiasts, not professionals. No need for exotics, just available lens comparable to the existing EF lenses.
My impression, between fast high-IQ zooms taking sales from above, and smartphones takings sales from below, there aren't enough "normal people" to justify those lenses.
 

KirkD

EOS T7i
Nov 23, 2017
73
54
Canada
kirkdurston.wixsite.com
As Tony suggests, a RF 14mm f1.2L would be wonderful for astrophotography, although I fear the cost. To keep it within the "possibly affordable" range, I'd settle for a f1.4L. I might even relent and accept a f2L, but since I already own the RF 15-35 f2.8L, I'm not sure the f2 would be wide enough to make me buy it. An f1.4 would, provided it could be done for around $US 3,000.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Cariboucoach

EOS T7i
Dec 9, 2012
53
1
With the advances in lenses these days I would like a redo of the EF 28-300mm F/3.5-5.6L IS USM. I don't own one but It seems like it could be a great lens for sports.
 

SUNDOG04

EOS T7i
Mar 1, 2015
76
22
RF 50 f2 macro for nature and landscape. I don’t have a mirrorless body, but ifI did this would be what I would want. Time to retire the 50 compact macro from my lens arsenal. know this will never happen.
 

koenkooi

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
876
661
RF 50 f2 macro for nature and landscape. I don’t have a mirrorless body, but ifI did this would be what I would want. Time to retire the 50 compact macro from my lens arsenal. know this will never happen.
The rumoured RF 50 f/1.8 is supposed to be 1:2 macro, just like the tube full of angry hornets masquerading as lens called 'compact macro'.
 

TwinExotica

Eos 6D and hopefully R5 Soon!
Mar 31, 2020
5
0
Sweden
A set of well-constructed, weather-proof, affordable, light weight FF RF mount primes with IS from 24mm to 200mm. F stops as follows:

18 mm f/2.8
24 mm f/2
35mm f/1.8 (already available, sort of)
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
135mm f/2
200mm f/2.8

None of these would be exotic headline grabbing lenses, but with the new RF mount they could provide high IQ at a small size and weight.
Why would they make s 200 mm f/2.8 and the 135 mm when there is the 70-200 rf?
 

Etienne

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 19, 2010
1,409
217
Ottawa Ontario
But the 70-200 is already light, at 1070 g. For exampel the 85 mm f/1.2 weights 1195 g, so...
I didn't suggest the 85 f/1.2, but a 85 f/1.8 ... which would likely be around 300g and barely over 2" long ... that IS a big difference, both in aperture and in size over the 70-200. Those are the reasons some of us still prefer primes
 

Codebunny

EOS RP
Sep 5, 2018
300
233
I didn't suggest the 85 f/1.2, but a 85 f/1.8 ... which would likely be around 300g and barely over 2" long ... that IS a big difference, both in aperture and in size over the 70-200. Those are the reasons some of us still prefer primes
The latest 85mm 1.8 I know of is 466g, still a far cry from 1000g and lets in twice the light. Perfect little things to shove on these mirrorless cameras for sure. A 200mm 2.8 would be fantastic, I rarely use my 70-200 on anything but 200.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Etienne