Patent: Canon RF 14-21mm f/1.4L, yes…. f/1.4

[simeyesky]

Seriously though, an f4.0 version of exactly this range would be perfect for my work, which is all on tripod and none of it 'subject isolating'—so that blinding fast aperture is wasted on me. Trade the f1.4 for perfect distortion control in a slower, sub-6-pound lens!

Arg, did you notice the 14-30mm f/4 on Nikon's roadmap (2019) ? I must admit that I am personally waiting for this lens to be released/tested before jumping to FF mirrorless. (Maybe Canon wil announce something similar by then...)

 

[Antono Refa]

The lens actually has to come out. Canon makes like a million patents and like 1% opf the stuff actually comes out then even that takes years.

Which companies have delivered a...

A) 11-24mm f/4 zoom lens
B) 17mm f/4 tilt shift lens
C) 8-15mm f/4 fisheye zoom lens
D) 28-70mm f/2 zoom lens

On the way, could you also check how often do other companies' patents actually come out, and after how long? IIRC, it took Nikon ~7 years to come out with an ultra wide perspective control lens, and it isn't as wide as Canon's.

 

[xps]

I would love to use it on the 5DSR with the coming built in polarizer-adapter . I would be , to use it on an R with huge filtersystems

 

[tron]

Which companies have delivered a...

A) 11-24mm f/4 zoom lens
B) 17mm f/4 tilt shift lens
C) 8-15mm f/4 fisheye zoom lens
D) 24-70mm f/2 zoom lens

On the way, could you also check how often do other companies' patents actually come out, and after how long? IIRC, it took Nikon ~7 years to come out with an ultra wide perspective control lens, and it isn't as wide as Canon's.

D)28-70 f/2 zoom lens not 24-70 and it works only on the 30Mp EOS R (for now).

 

[mirage]

what? only f/1.4? why not f/1.2? I'll wait for the Nikon manual focus version with f/0.95.

 

[mirage]

Isn't the Canon RF 1.8 35mm IS Macro for lousy 500 bucks a practical lens?

no. 2:1 "macro" on a 35mm FF lens is not practical. And 500 is way too much. 299 would be more like it. For around 500 I'd rather get "a real macro lens", eg. EF 100/2.8 L IS.

 

[Antono Refa]

D)28-70 f/2 zoom lens not 24-70 and it works only on the 30Mp EOS R (for now).

Miriam Webster should quote that response under "nitpicking".

 

[mb66energy]

no. 2:1 "macro" on a 35mm FF lens is not practical. And 500 is way too much. 299 would be more like it. For around 500 I'd rather get "a real macro lens", eg. EF 100/2.8 L IS.

Me too but it is 800 $ / EUR ... and 35 is not 100

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I suspect that both Canon and Nikon lens designers are pressing to come out with lenses they could not do before, but they also would be slow sellers, so Canon knows they need mainstream lenses for mirrorless. look for those next.

 

[KirkD]

I love that Canon is really pushing the frontier with RF lens design, however, when I use ultra-wide angle, it's mainly for landscapes where I want all the depth of field I can get .... typically at least f5.6. I would be perfectly happy with a f2.8 BUT with outstanding optics (resolution, contrast, very low vignetting, etc.)

 

[mirage]

Miriam Webster should quote that response under "nitpicking".

no. 24 vs 28 makes more difference in real life than f/2.0 vs f/2.8 in most use cases.

 

[JBSF]

...I think right now Nikon is much more appealing. Practical lenses, and a Fuji style lens roadmap. In comparison, Canon seems to be sort of in left field, with large heavy expensive show-off lenses, no lens roadmap...

I believe there are more than 100 million "practical lenses" out there which can be adapted readily to the R. And why do you think Canon has no roadmap? They don't have to share it with you.

 

[mirage]

And why do you think Canon has no roadmap? They don't have to share it with you.

no. Canon does not HAVE to. But they SHOULD. In their own best interest.

It would be smart to give existing and potential new customers a clear outlook on things to come. Folks could take better, more informed decisions. Especially, whether they should switch to/buy from another brand now or hang in for some time until Canon is able to deliver what they are waiting for.

 

[Del Paso]

Which companies have delivered a...

A) 11-24mm f/4 zoom lens
B) 17mm f/4 tilt shift lens
C) 8-15mm f/4 fisheye zoom lens
D) 24-70mm f/2 zoom lens

On the way, could you also check how often do other companies' patents actually come out, and after how long? IIRC, it took Nikon ~7 years to come out with an ultra wide perspective control lens, and it isn't as wide as Canon's.

Absolutely right.We could also mention the 135mm TSE, the world's first 200-400 zoom with integrated extender. Sony, Nikon, where are you?

 

[tron]

Miriam Webster should quote that response under "nitpicking".

Except there is no 24-70 f/2 up to now and in many cases the difference between 24mm and 28mm matters. Just as the difference between f/2 and f/2.8 does matter for other people.

 

[aceflibble]

Absolutely vital reminder:
Patents do not automatically equal products which will actually be made.
Patents like this are essentially a company 'bookmarking' a theory so they get first dibs on making it if they later wish to.
Patents are for the business, not for the consumer.

Sometimes companies file patents purely to stop someone else from making something, even if they have no intention of making it themselves.

The vast majority of the time, patents for lens designs simply mean one or two designers sat down with a piece of paper and did the math, with absolutely no concern over whether or not such a thing can actually be produced, let alone will. Canon's designers could draw a 12-800mm f/0.95 Macro IS with built-in 1.4x extender and file a patent with that drawing; that lens still wouldn't get made.

Patents do not mean a product is definitely going to be made.
Patents do not mean a product is already being made.
Patents do not mean a product is anywhere near release.
Products which do get made rarely match their patents 100%.
When a patented lens design does get made there are typically at least a couple of years—but it can be many more—between when the patent is first drawn up and filed and when working prototypes start being seriously tested, and at least another year before a successful version can be mass-produced and sold to the public.

Faster zooms are great and the 28-70 f/2 is already the thing which is selling me on the R system over any other mirrorless system; a 28-105mm f/2 has been my dream lens since as long as I can remember and the idea that f/1.4 zooms may exist within the foreseeable future is extremely exciting. However, a patent is a patent; a patent is not a product. Canon have filed hundreds of lens design patents over the years for lenses which never even had prototypes made. (The 28mm f/1.4L being my personal favourite never-to-be Canon patent.)

 

[Treyarnon]

14-21mm F1.4 - Wow! I guess the 4K crop in the R won't be an issue now!

 

[LSXPhotog]

This is the first time I've read a title and verbally said "Holy Sh!t" haha Not that I believe i have any use for a lens like this, it could be the astro photographer's dream glass.

 

[AJ]

First of all, does the patent say L? L implies full-frame.
The image height of all three lenses is 21.64 mm. Are these lenses APSC? Could these be lenses for an R-mount APSC camera?

 

[Aaron D]

Arg, did you notice the 14-30mm f/4 on Nikon's roadmap (2019) ? I must admit that I am personally waiting for this lens to be released/tested before jumping to FF mirrorless. (Maybe Canon wil announce something similar by then...)

I sure did, so buying an R was a leap of faith. Gotta admit I'm a little nervous. I needed a backup for my 5Div and it was either get another one of those or take a chance….