Patent: Canon RF 135mm f/1.4L USM

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
  • Jul 20, 2010
    9,724
    2,395
    Canada
    www.canonrumors.com
    Well here’s a fun optical formula from Canon discovered by Canon News, a Canon RF 135mm f/1.4L USM.  The Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM is an all-time classic, and this would certainly be an amazing offering worth of the new lens mount.
    I think there is a higher than normal probability that such a lens design will make it into a consumer product.
    Canon RF  135mm f/1.4L USM:

    Focal length: 131.00mm
    F-Number: 1.41
    Half angle of view: 9.38°
    Image height: 21.64mm
    Total lens length:  182.28mm
    BF: 13.87mm

    Continue reading...
     
    Last edited:

    Besisika

    How can you stand out, if you do like evrybdy else
    Mar 25, 2014
    762
    189
    Montreal
    Be still my beating heart! If this comes to fruition I will be one very happy guy! Please Canon. Please! A native f/2 would be fine, f/1.4 would be sublime.
    That would peak the chatter high. With eye focus on the EOS-R lineup, I would shoot 135 at 1.4 more often than needed. The image will be one of a kind. RF lenses seem to be smaller than the EF anyway.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 2 users
    Upvote 0

    Ozarker

    Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
    CR Pro
    Jan 28, 2015
    5,813
    4,235
    The Ozarks
    That would peak the chatter high. With eye focus on the EOS-R lineup, I would shoot 135 at 1.4 more often than needed. The image will be one of a kind. RF lenses seem to be smaller than the EF anyway.
    I don't know which RF lenses you are talking about being smaller (70-200?), but every RF lens I have is a monster compared to EF. However, I like that. ;)
     
    • Like
    • Haha
    Reactions: 3 users
    Upvote 0

    StoicalEtcher

    EOS RP
    CR Pro
    Jan 3, 2018
    417
    358
    Yorkshire
    Hmmn, I expect this would be an amazing lens - and probably render some amazing shots.

    However..... what I like about the existing (EF)135/2 is that it is also a pretty unobtrusive little tool, which gives great results but doesn't draw any attention at all. I can't help feeling that at 135/1.4, it will be a different kettle of fish - "great", but you won't be going around subtly with it.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0

    privatebydesign

    I post too Much on Here!!
    CR Pro
    Jan 29, 2011
    10,673
    6,114
    The difference between this lens and a 1.8 or 2.0 will be $5,000 and triple the weight. Assuming we only get 1 L lens at this focal length, I would be happy to see this lens never get made, because I would really like a compact and fast 135 L lens
    I disagree, a 135mm f1.4 need only have a 95mm front element, it’s not crazy like the larger than 100mm front elements on all the big whites. A 135mm f1.8 need only have a 75mm front element, or a 77mm filter thread.

    Indeed the RF 28-70mm f2 has a 95mm front thread and is $3,000, I’d expect a 135mm f1.4 to be mechanically simpler, a similar size, lighter, and less costly. I’d guesstimate the $2,499 prince point. A 135mm f1.8 should be considerably cheaper than that, probably sub $2,000.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 4 users
    Upvote 0

    privatebydesign

    I post too Much on Here!!
    CR Pro
    Jan 29, 2011
    10,673
    6,114
    This plus a sports worthy R-series body would likely be enough to bring me back to Canon. I would fully expect this lens to be in the $6-8K range though.
    Why? That doesn’t make any sense or correlate with similar sized glass Canon already make.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 users
    Upvote 0

    Ozarker

    Love, joy, and peace to all of good will.
    CR Pro
    Jan 28, 2015
    5,813
    4,235
    The Ozarks
    I disagree, a 135mm f1.4 need only have a 95mm front element, it’s not crazy like the larger than 100mm front elements on all the big whites. A 135mm f1.8 need only have a 75mm front element, or a 77mm filter thread.

    Indeed the RF 28-70mm f2 has a 95mm front thread and is $3,000, I’d expect a 135mm f1.4 to be mechanically simpler, a similar size, lighter, and less costly. I’d guesstimate the $2,499 prince point. A 135mm f1.8 should be considerably cheaper than that, probably sub $2,000.
    You only make my heart pump harder. ;) People seem to forget the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 and the price isn't out of line at $1,599. For a Canon? Anywhere from $2,699 - $4,000 would be fine with me. Can't take it with me. ;)
     
    Last edited:
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0