Here is the Canon RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro

What about "Static Aperture" ...
My idea is that you can decide
  • to have a classical 2.8 macro with fixed focal length where the effective aperture is f/5.6 at 1:1 or
  • to have a zoom like 2.8 macro where you change the focal length to get 1:1 and keep the f/2.8
Would be a great thing to tune the lens to maximize working distance if needed or to maximize aperture if you need low light compatibility in the macro range ...

But ... just an idea ...
 
Upvote 0
Aug 26, 2015
1,380
1,042
A great lens, I am sure. But again. The RF lenses are almost bigger than the Fuji GFX medium format system. Never understood the need of that RF mount, if it means bigger and heavier.
The primes are much faster and the zooms have a much more useful range (And both 70-200 lenses are small as well) and the USM motors inside these L lenses focus way faster.
 
Upvote 0
I’m hoping it’s for “Slider Adjustment” or “Slider Advance”. The major missing feature in macro work is the ability to focus stack using just the lens. When you’re shooting magnified subjects, you often need to rely on a focus rail to incrementally slide the lens in and out to capture the narrow range in focus to stack. Simply moving the internal components in and out would achieve this control without the need of a rail and tripod. What a revolutionary idea this would be for macro shooting!!

EDIT:
Having looked at the patent, I’m gonna guess it does move the entire internal assembly in and out. SA could also be “Scale Adjustment” where you could change the magnification from 1:1 to 1.4:1 etc.

In terms of macro and stacking, Is the use of a slider preferable to focus bracketing (automation of which is built in to some Canon bodies.)?
 
Upvote 0
Aug 12, 2010
169
172
EDIT:
Having looked at the patent, I’m gonna guess it does move the entire internal assembly in and out. SA could also be “Scale Adjustment” where you could change the magnification from 1:1 to 1.4:1 etc.

That's what I first thought too but other posts point out that the reason for the movement is to manage spherical abberation (according to translations of the patent.)
 
Upvote 0
A great lens, I am sure. But again. The RF lenses are almost bigger than the Fuji GFX medium format system. Never understood the need of that RF mount, if it means bigger and heavier.
RF mount is the same diameter as EF, they just moved it closer to the sensor. Canon has gone all out on big lenses in the pursuit of the perfection that the short flange distance now affords. Nikon went a different direction with a series of small f/1.8 lenses even though the Z mount (55mm) is 1mm wider than RF (54mm).
 
Upvote 0

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
721
971
USA
This RF100mm on an EOS R6 (20Mpx) or on an R5 (45 Mpx): would that be a huge difference in image quality? (Or on an EOS Rp 26 Mpx?) My question is: is sensor resolution very important for Macro?
Not any more important than on other photography pursuits. How big do you want to print, and how much do you want to crop? I did a lot of macro with my digital rebel and the non L 100mm macro. The biggest print I did was I think 13x19" of a praying mantis. 6.3mp. It looked great, even though the internet would tell you that it couldn't exist because there weren't enough pixels to produce it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0