Canon Patent Application: Canon RF 56mm F1.2

[Canon Rumors]

I recall back to the film days and using the glorious little 55 and 56mm primes. Hardly anyone makes them anymore which I think is a sad state of affairs. Needless to say, this patent application got me a bit intrigued for that very reason. While Canon certainly made 55mm back in the FD days,

See full article...

 

[GMCPhotographics]

If this lens does make it into production, lets hope Canon puts some floating elements in the formula to mitigate the Aperture retated focus shift seen with the EF 50mm f1.2 L.

 

[koenkooi]

The Sigma EF-M 56mm is very nice lens, not sure how big/heavy/expensive a FF version would be.

 

[davision]

Image hight seems very very likely to be an APS-C Lens, what makes a lot of sense since there are 56mm Lenses from Fuji, SIGMA and Viltrox for this Sensor-Type. It\'s a Medium Tele-Portrait Lens then and will be a very welcome addition to RF-S. Also F1.2 is far easier to achieve with the smaller Image Circle.

 

[scyrene]

Hardly anyone makes them anymore which I think is a sad state of affairs.

Genuine question: why? Is there something visually distinctive about that focal length, or do you mean from the perspective of nostalgia?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Image hight seems very very likely to be an APS-C Lens, what makes a lot of sense since there are 56mm Lenses from Fuji, SIGMA and Viltrox for this Sensor-Type. It\'s a Medium Tele-Portrait Lens then and will be a very welcome addition to RF-S. Also F1.2 is far easier to achieve with the smaller Image Circle.

Sorry, no. The image height is exactly that needed for a FF sensor. This is a patent for a FF lens.

In a patent, ‘image height’ is the radius of the image circle, i.e., half of the diagonal of the sensor. It’s not the vertical dimension of the sensor. 2 x 21.64 mm = 43.28 mm, and the diagonal of a FF sensor is 43.2 mm.

Some Canon patents for wide angle lenses have an image height of a bit less than FF coverage, because with distortion correction applied the image will fill the frame. CR or their source(s) have sometimes erroneously called those APS-C lenses.

 

[Walrus]

Image hight seems very very likely to be an APS-C Lens, what makes a lot of sense since there are 56mm Lenses from Fuji, SIGMA and Viltrox for this Sensor-Type. It\'s a Medium Tele-Portrait Lens then and will be a very welcome addition to RF-S. Also F1.2 is far easier to achieve with the smaller Image Circle.

I'll be happy if they'll disprove me, but I'll be really really REALLY astonished if Canon would release any f1.2 lens for Aps...doesn't seems to align with their past strategy on Aps.

 

[Richard CN]

Image hight seems very very likely to be an APS-C Lens, what makes a lot of sense since there are 56mm Lenses from Fuji, SIGMA and Viltrox for this Sensor-Type. It\'s a Medium Tele-Portrait Lens then and will be a very welcome addition to RF-S. Also F1.2 is far easier to achieve with the smaller Image Circle.

image height is actually from center to the outer image circle. 13.66 is APS-C and 21.64 is full frame. 16mm or something near that was super-35

 

[Richard CN]

Sorry, no. The image height is exactly that needed for a FF sensor. This is a patent for a FF lens.

In a patent, ‘image height’ is the radius of the image circle, i.e., half of the diagonal of the sensor. It’s not the vertical dimension of the sensor. 2 x 21.64 mm = 43.28 mm, and the diagonal of a FF sensor is 43.2 mm.

Some Canon patents for wide angle lenses have an image height of a bit less than FF coverage, because with distortion correction applied the image will fill the frame. CR or their source(s) have sometimes erroneously called those APS-C lenses.

Sorry I didn't see your reply before I did. Exactly correct - and the stretching on UWA's is a personal beef of mine. I'm not sure I ever labelled those as APS-C though. I usually just subject everyone to my personal views that those lenses shouldn't be made

 

[Maximilian]

Image hight seems very very likely to be an APS-C Lens, ...

As @neuroanatomist already stated, it is FF.
For a better explanation, see this graphic below.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Sorry I didn't see your reply before I did. Exactly correct - and the stretching on UWA's is a personal beef of mine. I'm not sure I ever labelled those as APS-C though. I usually just subject everyone to my personal views that those lenses shouldn't be made

Here's an example. The image heights for these 'RF-S' lenses are in the 18-20mm range, they're clearly for FF with intended distortion correction (with more of it needed the wider the AoV). The 'RF-S 24/1.8' lens mentioned in the post is actually the real RF 24/1.8 STM lens that launched a month before the blog post.

Patent: Optical formulas for a trio of wide f/1.8 prime lenses for the RF-S mount

A new patent showing off some lens element coating to help with ghosting and other anomalies has appeared alongside optical formulas for what appears to be RF-S

www.canonrumors.com

Here's another, in this case the one 'RF-S' lenses exemplified in the patent is actually the real RF 16/2.8 STM lens that had already been on the market for several months.

Patent: Canon RF APS-C pancake prime lens optical formulas

It looks like Canon will be bringing one or more RF-S prime lenses for the Canon EOS R7 and Canon EOS R10. One of the most requested RF-S lenses is unsurprising

www.canonrumors.com

Just to frustrate you, they're not just doing it for FF lenses. For example, the recent patent for an RF-S 15-70/4:

 

[Richard CN]

Here's an example. The image heights for these 'RF-S' lenses are in the 18-20mm range, they're clearly for FF with intended distortion correction (with more of it needed the wider the AoV). The 'RF-S 24/1.8' lens mentioned in the post is actually the real RF 24/1.8 STM lens that launched a month before the blog post.

Patent: Optical formulas for a trio of wide f/1.8 prime lenses for the RF-S mount

A new patent showing off some lens element coating to help with ghosting and other anomalies has appeared alongside optical formulas for what appears to be RF-S

www.canonrumors.com

Here's another, in this case the one 'RF-S' lenses exemplified in the patent is actually the real RF 16/2.8 STM lens that had already been on the market for several months.

Patent: Canon RF APS-C pancake prime lens optical formulas

It looks like Canon will be bringing one or more RF-S prime lenses for the Canon EOS R7 and Canon EOS R10. One of the most requested RF-S lenses is unsurprising

www.canonrumors.com

Just to frustrate you, they're not just doing it for FF lenses. For example, the recent patent for an RF-S 15-70/4:
View attachment 211626

Oh i see.
yeah wasn't me

Reading through translated patent applications is horrid stuff, especially when you are reading 20+ in one go, things can get missed like that.

With a 18mm to 20mm image circle that's certainly not APS-C. interesting designs, but I hate them personally.
and yes, Canon loves to troll me by stretching wide angles for APS-C and full frame in patent applications

But then again. m43's have made that into an art form, so i guess we should blame them for starting it all.

 

[sanj]

What. Why?

 

[nunataks]

This would compete with their own 50mm f/1.2 though?

 

[Sporgon]

This would compete with their own 50mm f/1.2 though?

Probably to a degree, but I can’t see how this lens could be anything like as sharp as the current 50/1.2 at 1.2. I’d assume it would be smaller, lighter and cheaper, with more of the traditional characteristics of a fast 50 prime, such as the Nikkor 58/1.4 for instance.

 

[mxwphoto]

It would make a lot of sense to come out with one of these lenses if Canon pairs it with a retro styling and a body to match. Imagine, a modern "classic" smallish lens (by today's standards) with big f1.2 performance on a full frame AE-1 mirrorless body. That would put all other retro mirrorless kits to shame!

 

[Skux]

It would make a lot of sense to come out with one of these lenses if Canon pairs it with a retro styling and a body to match. Imagine, a modern "classic" smallish lens (by today's standards) with big f1.2 performance on a full frame AE-1 mirrorless body. That would put all other retro mirrorless kits to shame!

Just what I was thinking! The 58mm is a classic vintage focal length and releasing a modern AF 56mm f/1.2 doesn't make any sense when the 50mm exists.

That can only mean... it's retro time!

 

[neuroanatomist]

Probably to a degree, but I can’t see how this lens could be anything like as sharp as the current 50/1.2 at 1.2.

Yeah, but it will be Dreamy.

 

[DhlcadR6]

If this lens is out and price lower than RF50L....It will become everyone's new favorite.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

After re-reading the roumour announcement...my initial reaction is oh...gausian optics! Canon hasn't fared too well with this type of optical formula on their previous 50mm lenses. However, the EF 50mm f1.2 (with all of it's fiobles) produces images that have a lot of charector.