Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM Confirmed for 2024 [CR3]

[Canon Rumors Guy]

We have finally confirmed that the Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM is indeed coming in the first half of 2024. There have been some false positives over the years, but we’re as sure about this as we are about anything. There were conflicting reports as to whether or not it would be an f/1.2 or

See full article...

 

[Kjsheldo]

Unless they somehow got this down to 600-grams or less, I would have MUCH rather had a 500-gram f1.4 like Sony is doing with the GM lenses. Don't need another 1kg prime for an extra half-stop.

 

[Maximilian]

All that FF WA prime fans will be pleased if it comes sooner than later.
Once again, with RF lenses, Canon pushed the technical data coming from EF, setting the aperture to f/1.2.
Therefore, no IS.

Back Focus: 0.29mm

@Canon Rumors Guy or @Richard CR, could you please check and/or link the patents you are referring to.
It's hard to imagine to have a BF of less than 1mm, meaning the last element almost touching the sensor.
Thanks in advance.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Paging @roby17269, report to this thread.

 

[SwissFrank]

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

 

[SwissFrank]

> Back Focus: 0.29mm

It's technically possible, I suppose, but quite unlikely that it'd be that close to the sensor. That's less than 1/64 inch, for our addlebrained American brethren.

 

[Berowne]

No need to replace my EF 35L II.

 

[P-visie]

All that FF WA prime fans will be pleased if it comes sooner than later.
Once again, with RF lenses, Canon pushed the technical data coming from EF, setting the aperture to f/1.2.
Therefore, no IS.

@Canon Rumors Guy or @Richard CR, could you please check and/or link the patents you are referring to.
It's hard to imagine to have a BF of less than 1mm, meaning the last element almost touching the sensor.
Thanks in advance.

The patent application with the 0,29 mm BF is for a 35mm f1.3 lens: Canon patent application 2023077336 (Japan, published 6/5/23).

 

[Exploreshootshare]

So happy for all those wishing and hoping for a 35mm F1.2

 

[SwissFrank]

If they had hired me to design their lens lineup, I wouldn't have had an 35/1.2. I'd have had a professional-spec 35/1.4, and a halo/fine art 35/1.0.

My concept for lens lineups would have been:

Halo: priority is spec only. Get camera nerds everywhere wishing they were shooting Canon. Specs that look like misprints. Lenses might be in fact rental-only or by-invitation-only but at least exist in theory. 35/1.0, 50/0.7 (like Kubrick had in the 1970s, not impossible at all), 135/1.0DS. Could also be TS lenses, the old fisheye zoom or 1200/5.6 or even 200/1.8. The current 28-70/2.0 also fits this line, as do the DS lenses.

Pro: priority is durability, image quality, then spec. the lenses most pros would shoot with most of the time. 50/1.2 or a 50/1.4 totally redesigned to be far sharper, even if it's bigger and more expensive. The full range of f/2.8 and f/4 trinity lenses.

Street: priority is durability, image quality, portability. Spec may be moderate. Something to tempt the Leica shooters. Like current 50/1.8 but higher quality; target would be Leica APO ASPH 50/2.

Amateur: priorities are interesting features and price. It might be 28-200mm zoom, or have IS and 0.5x macro, and other interesting doodads. This could be like the EF 50/1.4: relatively exciting f-stop for a very low price.

So in summary we might have a huge fragile 50/0.7, a sturdy and sharp 50/1.2 or 50/1.4, a cheap and cheerful 50/1.4, and a super-high IQ 50/1.8 or 50/2.

Back to 35mm, we'd have a 35/1.0 the price of a car, a 35/1.4 for pros, the 35/1.8 for amateurs, then a 35/2.0 designed with perfect bokeh and super sharpness.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The patent application with the 0,29 mm BF is for a 35mm f1.3 lens: Canon patent application 2023077336 (Japan, published 6/5/23).

And that patent example is of a lens that's ~40mm (1.5") long, i.e. much smaller than the RF 35/1.8. That's not the sort of design that becomes a production lens. OTOH, the first design example listed (34mm, f/1.24) is ~135mm (5.3") long, which is longer than the RF 24-70/2.8 so I'm not sure that's representative of the production lens, either.

 

[neuroanatomist]

If they had hired me to design their lens lineup

Yet they didn't. Shocking.

 

[Dragon]

If they had hired me to design their lens lineup, I wouldn't have had an 35/1.2. I'd have had a professional-spec 35/1.4, and a halo/fine art 35/1.0.

My concept for lens lineups would have been:

Halo: priority is spec only. Get camera nerds everywhere wishing they were shooting Canon. Specs that look like misprints. Lenses might be in fact rental-only or by-invitation-only but at least exist in theory. 35/1.0, 50/0.7 (like Kubrick had in the 1970s, not impossible at all), 135/1.0DS. Could also be TS lenses, the old fisheye zoom or 1200/5.6 or even 200/1.8. The current 28-70/2.0 also fits this line, as do the DS lenses.

Pro: priority is durability, image quality, then spec. the lenses most pros would shoot with most of the time. 50/1.2 or a 50/1.4 totally redesigned to be far sharper, even if it's bigger and more expensive. The full range of f/2.8 and f/4 trinity lenses.

Street: priority is durability, image quality, portability. Spec may be moderate. Something to tempt the Leica shooters. Like current 50/1.8 but higher quality; target would be Leica APO ASPH 50/2.

Amateur: priorities are interesting features and price. It might be 28-200mm zoom, or have IS and 0.5x macro, and other interesting doodads. This could be like the EF 50/1.4: relatively exciting f-stop for a very low price.

So in summary we might have a huge fragile 50/0.7, a sturdy and sharp 50/1.2 or 50/1.4, a cheap and cheerful 50/1.4, and a super-high IQ 50/1.8 or 50/2.

Back to 35mm, we'd have a 35/1.0 the price of a car, a 35/1.4 for pros, the 35/1.8 for amateurs, then a 35/2.0 designed with perfect bokeh and super sharpness.

For the market size and prognosis 15 years ago, maybe. For the market in 2024, not the remotest chance.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

All that FF WA prime fans will be pleased if it comes sooner than later.
Once again, with RF lenses, Canon pushed the technical data coming from EF, setting the aperture to f/1.2.
Therefore, no IS.

@Canon Rumors Guy or @Richard CR, could you please check and/or link the patents you are referring to.
It's hard to imagine to have a BF of less than 1mm, meaning the last element almost touching the sensor.
Thanks in advance.

I am not sure you could even call that back focus at that point.
Just call it focus.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

> Back Focus: 0.29mm

It's technically possible, I suppose, but quite unlikely that it'd be that close to the sensor. That's less than 1/64 inch, for our addlebrained American brethren.

It does not seem possible with a mechanical shutter but we are in a new age.
R100 II with a global shutter still seems unlikely unless Canon brings CCD back.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

If they had hired me to design their lens lineup... Lenses might be in fact rental-only or by-invitation-only but at least exist in theory.

Reading your post, I'm actually glad your not in charge because I'd guess Canon might be bankrupt by now...
how do "by-invitation-only..." or rental only create enough revenue in a struggling market? They simply don´t...

Furthermore, extreme lens design only sell in very few numbers such as the Nikon 50mm NOCT 0.95. And you want to create how many of those kind of lenses?

The only lenses I´m on board with your theory is the F2 zoom which is actually appealing. But I think Canon came up with that one on their own.

Get camera nerds everywhere wishing they were shooting Canon.

How many people wish they´d own a Ferrari or a McLaren F1 and don't buy it? "Wishing" doesn't help selling lenses and cameras.

The only thing Canon has to do is to convince people that some (not all) of their offerings are better for the customers needs than the competition.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The patent application with the 0,29 mm BF is for a 35mm f1.3 lens: Canon patent application 2023077336 (Japan, published 6/5/23).

Looking at the patent, it seems like the examples are more of the limits of what they can design than what would be practical,

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Reading your post, I'm actually glad your not in charge because I'd guess Canon might be bankrupt by now...
how do "by-invitation-only..." or rental only create enough revenue in a struggling market? They simply don´t.

It works for ARRI.
Just expect stuff to cost a lot more.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

If they had hired me to design their lens lineup, I wouldn't have had an 35/1.2. I'd have had a professional-spec 35/1.4, and a halo/fine art 35/1.0.

My concept for lens lineups would have been:

Halo: priority is spec only. Get camera nerds everywhere wishing they were shooting Canon. Specs that look like misprints. Lenses might be in fact rental-only or by-invitation-only but at least exist in theory. 35/1.0, 50/0.7 (like Kubrick had in the 1970s, not impossible at all), 135/1.0DS. Could also be TS lenses, the old fisheye zoom or 1200/5.6 or even 200/1.8. The current 28-70/2.0 also fits this line, as do the DS lenses.

Pro: priority is durability, image quality, then spec. the lenses most pros would shoot with most of the time. 50/1.2 or a 50/1.4 totally redesigned to be far sharper, even if it's bigger and more expensive. The full range of f/2.8 and f/4 trinity lenses.

Street: priority is durability, image quality, portability. Spec may be moderate. Something to tempt the Leica shooters. Like current 50/1.8 but higher quality; target would be Leica APO ASPH 50/2.

Amateur: priorities are interesting features and price. It might be 28-200mm zoom, or have IS and 0.5x macro, and other interesting doodads. This could be like the EF 50/1.4: relatively exciting f-stop for a very low price.

So in summary we might have a huge fragile 50/0.7, a sturdy and sharp 50/1.2 or 50/1.4, a cheap and cheerful 50/1.4, and a super-high IQ 50/1.8 or 50/2.

Back to 35mm, we'd have a 35/1.0 the price of a car, a 35/1.4 for pros, the 35/1.8 for amateurs, then a 35/2.0 designed with perfect bokeh and super sharpness.

I agree with most of it except for tempting Leica users.
They are style over substance.
Canon would need to start making stylish cameras and lenses again.
Those were just Leica clones back then anyway.

 

[Del Paso]

Roby, where are thou?