Canon Announces First Lens in Series of Fixed Focal Length RF Hybrid Lenses – RF35mm F1.4L VCM

[sanj]

Gimbal...Really?? ....How do you use a Gimbal for taking Stills???

Gimbal is a very different tool... for particular video use case scenarios.

Because IS ( in camera or in Lens) is such a game changer..That SONY has included the IBIS in the BURANO.
Canon has a lot of catch up to do in terms of innovation and Features.

But you are talking about video. Read your comment...

 

[Anon]

Why not use a clicky / non-clicky switch for the aperture ring? Plenty lenses use it already and it works very well. It would make it very usable for stills photographers.

 

[Loswr]

Why not use a clicky / non-clicky switch for the aperture ring? Plenty lenses use it already and it works very well. It would make it very usable for stills photographers.

The control ring is already 'clicky' and can be used to control aperture.

 

[blackcoffee17]

The control ring is already 'clicky' and can be used to control aperture.

Sure, but this new aperture ring could free up the control ring for other purposes. Just feels like a waste not being able to use it.

 

[blackcoffee17]

The MFT charts say otherwise. They are very close in real world shooting. It’s sharp, it’s new, it’s light, it’s native and it focuses a lot closer and it’s $1600 bucks for a premium L. Nice one Canon!

Sure, there is copy variations but I rather trust real life images than theoretical MTF charts.

 

[Loswr]

Why not use a clicky / non-clicky switch for the aperture ring? Plenty lenses use it already and it works very well. It would make it very usable for stills photographers.

Question: what lenses allow you to change a ring on the lens from clicked to clickless with a switch? Not Canon, AFAIK. They do offer click removal for the control ring as a paid hardware service.

 

[Loswr]

Sure, but this new aperture ring could free up the control ring for other purposes. Just feels like a waste not being able to use it.

More controls are generally not a bad thing, as long as they can be disabled. But I still struggle to see any benefit to a clickless aperture control for stills shooting. That is a personal opinion, I prefer to look at my subject and rely on tactical input to change settings (3 clicks = 1 stop), rather than needing to look at the value on the EVF/LCD which would be needed with a clickless control.

 

[Anon]

Question: what lenses allow you to change a ring on the lens from clicked to clickless with a switch? Not Canon, AFAIK. They do offer click removal for the control ring as a paid hardware service.

I also don't know any Canon lens with this feature, but there are some from other manufacturers. I am sure Canon could have implemented a good solution if they wanted to. Maybe they did not want to mess with the already established control scheme, who knows.

 

[Loswr]

I also don't know any Canon lens with this feature, but there are some from other manufacturers. I am sure Canon could have implemented a good solution if they wanted to. Maybe they did not want to mess with the already established control scheme, who knows.

My curiosity is piqued. Lots of info about people taking apart lenses to declick the aperture ring. What other manufacturers offer a switchable click/clickless lens ring?

 

[sanj]

what F1.4 under 85mm prime has Canon ever made with IS?

IS benefits longer focal lengths more than shorter ones, and it's considerably more difficult to put IS into a small lens - especially the L grade IS. Not to mention I dont' think any of Canon's cini primes have IS either. It adds quite a bit of weight, and depending on the focusing groups (which this lens has 2), it could be damned well near impossible because you need a optical group to shift around that isn't tied to focus AND there's enough room around it for the IS mechanics. Oh and add more money for the creation of the pocket universe to shove all that weight and additional size into.

But you can always get the Sony 35mm F1.4 GM with IS... oh wait.

Mostly agree. Long lenses are heavy and the slightest shake is magnified. Wide lenses shake is not magnified because the subject is far and the relative camera movement is less. BUT, when wide lenses are used with a subject close to the camera, in the foreground, that is where the shake is visible. So IS or IBIS is nice to have.

 

[sanj]

Sorry...but You sound too much like a 'Canon Spokesperson' - Just highlighting "this is the best 35 canon ever made!'

My point is:

IS would have made a lot of sense for this lens;
& omitting IS has not been a wise decision by Canon for this lens at least.

because this lens is directed towards the wedding,photo journalism,run and gun, documentary market..for Hybrid shooters for both stills and video; where IS would have been a worthy upgrade to the already existing 35L II. Question is : Why would one be tempted to buy this 35L if he already has the older 35 L II ?? We all know that the image quality improvements are marginally incremental at the higher end of the curve.

When canon launched this excellent 24-105 L IS Z USM lens ( pricey buy worthy) ..They could have had a great follow up prime in this 35 lens by including a basic feature set for hybrid shooters.

Would I have preferred this lens with IS? Yes, certainly. I currently have R5c and R8 and neither have IBIS. So I would have liked IS. But I will buy this lens, it will work fine. I have a real need for this lens. The earlier EF lens has missed focus for me in video a few times..

 

[melgross]

So sad

Seriously, or are you just venting about something you wouldn’t buy if it were available? So how much more would you be willing to pay for that extra half stop? $500, $1,000? How much bigger and heavier could it be before you thought it was too much?

 

[sanj]

Seriously, or are you just venting about something you wouldn’t buy if it were available? So how much more would you be willing to pay for that extra half stop? $500, $1,000? How much bigger and heavier could it be before you thought it was too much?

For me, $600 more would be fine. And Canon would have made it the lightest it could and I would go with that.

 

[Loswr]

Seriously, or are you just venting about something you wouldn’t buy if it were available? So how much more would you be willing to pay for that extra half stop? $500, $1,000? How much bigger and heavier could it be before you thought it was too much?

Seriously, I think that @roby17269 has made it abundantly clear that he would buy a 35/1.2. As clear as @ahsanford made it that he would buy a 50/1.4 IS, if that reference has meaning to you (if not, click on the tag and check his avatar, and regardless the takeaway is that it was clear enough to become something of a running gag on this forum, and I mean that in a friendly way with no disrespect to @roby17269).

 

[P-visie]

My curiosity is piqued. Lots of info about people taking apart lenses to declick the aperture ring. What other manufacturers offer a switchable click/clickless lens ring?

Sigma does that for aperture/iris , a.o. the 85mm f1.4 lens. See: https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/a020_85_14/feature.html

 

[Loswr]

Sigma does that for aperture/iris , a.o. the 85mm f1.4 lens. See: https://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/a020_85_14/feature.html

Cool, thanks! That would have been a great feature for Canon to incorporate on these hybrid lenses.

 

[roby17269]

Seriously, I think that @roby17269 has made it abundantly clear that he would buy a 35/1.2. As clear as @ahsanford made it that he would buy a 50/1.4 IS, if that reference has meaning to you (if not, click on the tag and check his avatar, and regardless the takeaway is that it was clear enough to become something of a running gag on this forum, and I mean that in a friendly way with no disrespect to @roby17269).

No offense taken mate

 

[frankchn]

Cool, thanks! That would have been a great feature for Canon to incorporate on these hybrid lenses.

Hasselblad has it on their control ring for their latest XCD 25V and 90V lenses as well. What is weird is that Hasselblad doesn't even have video on the X2D, so maybe it is for a future medium format video camera they have planned.

 

[AJ]

More controls are generally not a bad thing, as long as they can be disabled. But I still struggle to see any benefit to a clickless aperture control for stills shooting. That is a personal opinion, I prefer to look at my subject and rely on tactical input to change settings (3 clicks = 1 stop), rather than needing to look at the value on the EVF/LCD which would be needed with a clickless control.

I remember futzing around with reversing lenses for macro, back in the day. This is easier when the lens has a mechanical aperture ring so that the lens can be stopped down without an electronic connection. But I imagine the aperture ring on the 35/1.4 VCM isn't mechanically coupled - it's probably fly-by-wire, right? Other than that, I cannot think of a reason for this feature, for stills. Even for video, why not just map a control ring for aperture control?

 

[roby17269]

Seriously, or are you just venting about something you wouldn’t buy if it were available? So how much more would you be willing to pay for that extra half stop? $500, $1,000? How much bigger and heavier could it be before you thought it was too much?

Seriously indeed.
I wanted it and would have bought it if Canon had seen fit to release one. Price-wise I would have expected around $2500.
I have the RF 50 1.2 and 85 1.2 and love and use both of them. So the size and weight of the 85 do not bother me.

You can have a look at my signature here and see the gear I own and judge whether I would have been worthy of a 35 1.2