Canon to announce the EOS R100 and RF 28mm f/2.8 STM

[neuroanatomist]

Either that, or they'll make a 24/1.2 L and a 35/1.2 L and be done with it. No 28mm L at any aperture.

I think that’s far more likely.

 

[Michael Clark]

I think that’s far more likely.

I tend to also think that.

Canon has never made a 28mm L nor any 28mm faster than f/1.8.

There was the 1987 EF 28mm f/2.8, the 1995 EF 28mm f/1.8, and the 2012 EF 28mm f/2.8 IS. Those are the only 28mm Canon lenses since the EOS system was rolled out in 1987. In contrast, there were 24mm f/1.4 L lenses in 1997 and 2008, and 35mm f/1.4 L lenses in 1998 and 2015. The 24mm L and 35mm L lenses sold for about three times the 28mm f/1.8 and about six times the other 28mm EF lenses.

Canon released 28mm f/2 and 28mm f/2.8 'New' FD lenses in 1978, an FD 28mm f/2.8 S.S.C. in 1975, an FD 28mm f/3.5 S.C. in 1973, and an FD 28mm f/2.5 in 1973. They were all about 1/5 to 1/6 the price in yen of the 1975 FD 24mm f/1.4 S.S.C. Aspherical.

The only FL mount 28mm was f/3.5 in 1966. There were no R mount 28mm lenses between 1959-1963 when all other R mount lenses were introduced.

Among Canon S lenses, there was the 28mm f/3.5 II of 1957, released the same year as the premium Canon 28mm f/2.8.

You have to go all the way back to 1957 and 1951 to find Canon 28mm lenses that were cutting edge. The 1951 Serenar 28mm f/3.5 I was the fastest wide angle lens in the world at the time, besting the Carl Zeiss Tessar 28mm f/8 by over two stops. It was a simple double Gauss design with 6 elements in 4 groups, with the doublets on the interior of each side of the symmetric design. The 1957 Canon 28mm f/2.8 was a similar design, but slightly less exotic for its time as Zeiss and others had caught up.

 

[Zeissyman]

Either that, or they'll make a 24/1.2 L and a 35/1.2 L and be done with it. No 28mm L at any aperture.

I think you are right, in the Sony world no one but Sigma made a native 28mm AF F/1.4 lens, the brands seem to be allergic to it. I think they see it as possibly canabalizing their 35mm and 24mm fast prime sales. They may have a point there, I would buy just a 28mm in place of those two, but that would free up funds to buy other lenses, while getting rid of a lens in my bag.

 

[koenkooi]

I just received stock notification for the lens hood, normally it takes more than 2 months after I receive the lens for the hood to be available. Let's hope the same happens for future non-L lenses. Or better: Canon starts including hoods.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I just received stock notification for the lens hood, normally it takes more than 2 months after I receive the lens for the hood to be available. Let's hope the same happens for future non-L lenses. Or better: Canon starts including hoods.

The hood for the RF 28/2.8? I almost always buy the hood for non-L lenses, the exceptions are lenses like the EF 40/2.8 and M22/2. I skip the clear filter for those lenses as well. The flat, screw-on hoods do not seem like they'd be very effective at reducing flare and they don't offer significant protection, either. What the clear filter and/or hood do accomplish is to increase the thickness of what is supposed to be a thin lens. I will be ordering the RF 28/2.8 at some point, but I don't plan on getting the hood. I didn't preorder because I'll be away when it starts shipping, and for this lens I don't think there will be a backorder situation after it launches.

 

[Czardoom]

I just received stock notification for the lens hood, normally it takes more than 2 months after I receive the lens for the hood to be available. Let's hope the same happens for future non-L lenses. Or better: Canon starts including hoods.

If Canon included hoods on non-L lenses, then the price would no doubt be higher, maybe by 20-30 dollars. Since I almost never use a hood, I'm fine with no hoods being included on non-L lenses.

 

[koenkooi]

The hood for the RF 28/2.8? I almost always buy the hood for non-L lenses, the exceptions are lenses like the EF 40/2.8 and M22/2. I skip the clear filter for those lenses as well. The flat, screw-on hoods do not seem like they'd be very effective at reducing flare and they don't offer significant protection, either. What the clear filter and/or hood do accomplish is to increase the thickness of what is supposed to be a thin lens. I will be ordering the RF 28/2.8 at some point, but I don't plan on getting the hood. I didn't preorder because I'll be away when it starts shipping, and for this lens I don't think there will be a backorder situation after it launches.

Pretty much the same here, I don’t plan on getting the hood, I never use one on the 22/2.