Is the ultimate astro lens coming? Another RF 14-21mm f/1.4L USM mention [CR2]

max

EOS M6 Mark II
Jul 20, 2010
82
19
does it have to be so large now with RF mirrorless??
I though the huge lenses were because of retrofocal design needed because of the flange distance of 44mm in EFs an EF but shouldn't have to be so large in a 20mm flange distance of the RF. Simillar to the Sony E mount.

Again some heavy weight lifting champion needed, too? :ROFLMAO:
 

kten

EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 3, 2015
77
72
with well controlled coma and astigmatism I can see this being very popular regardless of price and weight. Astro is doable with smaller aperatures of course but wider is better in many cases especially not on a tracking mount like some widefield images which oft include a lot of landscape features/foreground. Also indoor when not on tripod and so on it could be handy. I don't need such a fast uwa myself but I can see many who'd kill for this.
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
CR Pro
Nov 7, 2013
3,629
2,793
Germany
does it have to be so large now with RF mirrorless??
I though the huge lenses were because of retrofocal design ...
Of course I don't know. And I did a pure guess. But...

The RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM weights 840 g and has a filter diameter of 82 mm and is a f/2.8 lens.
The EF 11-24mm f/4L USM weights 1180 g has a diameter of 108 mm and is a f/4 lens.
The patent shows a quite long lens (formula 191,1 mm minus flange 20 mm) with 16 elements.
The front element is quite big and thick and surely not made out of plastic.

So even if you don't need a retrofocal design for that f/1.4 you still need a big enough front element to let enough light in without too much dissortion.
If I did read the patent right the first element has an effective diameter of 85.87 mm (bottom of page 5) meaning the glass must be bigger for edge losses and framing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TominNJ and max

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
817
1,111
www.instagram.com
If you don't use that today, you don't need that tomorrow ;) Get the superb 15 - 35 f/2.8 or adapt one of the EF options.
To be fair, no-one uses that today because it doesn't exist today. Today I use a 16-35 and a 14mm prime; but since I've been planning on replacing both for a while now, consolidating to one lens and getting a faster aperture in the process definitely has me interested. If this comes to market I'll definitely be cross shopping this with the 15-35.
 

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,676
588
S Florida
and then there's the cost of accessories...

forklift.jpg
 

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
946
791
www.flickr.com
Coma, coma, coma (a play on words from the Brady Bunch's Marcia, Marcia, Marcia)
Poor coma will sink this lens so it would need to be well controlled
Did the patent have AF or manual focus? Are there use cases for AF for this lens? MF should be acceptable with IBIS (eg windy conditions on tripod)
100mm front glass/entrance pupil will put it in the same league/price bracket between the EF200 f2 and the EF300 f2.8 + new release surcharge
Personally, a RF 14mm f1.4 prime would be amazing enough for my wide angle astro-landscapes with f1.8 being more affordable (relatively!)
 

addola

Sold my soul for a flippy screen
Nov 16, 2015
152
144
Canon has the EOS Ra, a camera dedicated to astrophotography. It is reasonable to assume that they'll make lenses intended for that use.

I have no experience with astro, but I think a 14/1.4 prime is more reasonable for size/weight consideration.

I'd use such lens in night life/concert setting, but I can also see it being used for Basketball (under the ring shots). I think a 14-24 f/2, or 14-28 f/2 would appeal to more people as part of an "f/2" trinity.
 

samh004

I'm New Here
CR Pro
Sep 5, 2020
13
6
Gold Coast, Australia
I’m still waiting for a cheaper wide angle RF lens, bring us the 16-35mm f/4! =)
Indeed, I’d be more likely to swap my EF version of this lens for that, than consider ever increasingly priced crazy lenses! Nice as they’ll be.

I wonder if there’s much hope of the EF 100 f2.8L Macro being reproduced and how they will supercharge that out of my price range. The new RF 85 unfortunately doesn’t have as much magnification as I need want.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,502
5,745
Canon has the EOS Ra, a camera dedicated to astrophotography. It is reasonable to assume that they'll make lenses intended for that use.

I have no experience with astro, but I think a 14/1.4 prime is more reasonable for size/weight consideration.

I'd use such lens in night life/concert setting, but I can also see it being used for Basketball (under the ring shots). I think a 14-24 f/2, or 14-28 f/2 would appeal to more people as part of an "f/2" trinity.
That reasoning falls down when you consider Canon have made Astro versions of their cameras since 2005 with the 20Da yet never felt they needed to make specific Astro lenses. Don’t forget the vast majority of those Astro cameras are attached to telescopes not EF or RF lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules