Patent: Canon RF 28-70mm f/2.2-f/2.8

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
10,779
3,158
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
We’re likely going to see a flurry of RF mount lens patents over the next few years. EF lens development generally builds off previous designs, RF lens development, for the most part, is going to be all new. I think we’re likely to see some crazy and cool concepts over the next few years from Canon.
This patent application is for a different 28-70mm, which doesn’t resemble the RF 28-70mm f/2L USM at all. This patent shows a 28-70mm lens that is much smaller at 155mm compared to the RF 28-70mm f/2L USM at just shy of 200mm.

Japan Patent Application 2018-197774:
Focal distance          28.84  44.14  67.90
F number                    2.25   2.62   2.91
a half field angle     36.88  26.11  17.67
Image height            21.64  21.64  21.64
length of the lens   146.94 157.60 175.00
BF                                   20.75  28.77  34.64
Focal distance        28.82  44.24  67.90...

Continue reading...
 
Last edited:

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,246
1,939
Canada
I'm sorry but I don't see the point of this lens. 28-70 is a comprimise on the wide end, but if you get 2.0 all the way through then I think many can live with that. I mean...that lens is sexy.

But 2.2 - 2.8? Nah... then I would prefer 24mm wide and 2.8
Where I live the 28-70F2 lens is $3900..... that makes it a hard sell to all but the most fanatic. A slower version of the lens means it will be a lot more affordable. Perhaps the "new way" with the R mount will be F4 for economical/physically smaller, F2.8 for those who want faster and can afford it, and F2 for theones where money and size is no object.

Lets see what happens with the 70-200 series, and lets see what is to come for wide.....
 
Upvote 0

Sharlin

CR Pro
Dec 26, 2015
1,415
1,433
Turku, Finland
I'm sorry but I don't see the point of this lens.

This is not a lens. It is a patent for an optical formula. Most patents never become products and are simply exploratory engineering or byproducts of a design that actually ends up on the shelves. CR guy himself said that it’s doubtful that this is ever productized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Where I live the 28-70F2 lens is $3900..... that makes it a hard sell to all but the most fanatic. A slower version of the lens means it will be a lot more affordable. Perhaps the "new way" with the R mount will be F4 for economical/physically smaller, F2.8 for those who want faster and can afford it, and F2 for theones where money and size is no object.

Lets see what happens with the 70-200 series, and lets see what is to come for wide.....

right, but my point was the 28mm at the wide end and how far one is willing to go to sacrifice the conventional 24mm
 
Upvote 0

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,246
1,939
Canada
right, but my point was the 28mm at the wide end and how far one is willing to go to sacrifice the conventional 24mm
I am fairly sure that the vast majority will go for the 24-70 F2.8 or F4, but for the few who REALLY want that F2, I am equally sure they will give up those 4mm to get it.

It’s like the people shooting Astro..... they get a F 1.4 lens. That 1.4 is useless for almost everything else, but if you need it for that one task, then you need it.
 
Upvote 0
I am fairly sure that the vast majority will go for the 24-70 F2.8 or F4, but for the few who REALLY want that F2, I am equally sure they will give up those 4mm to get it.

It’s like the people shooting Astro..... they get a F 1.4 lens. That 1.4 is useless for almost everything else, but if you need it for that one task, then you need it.

2.0 yes. I was referring to the patent of a 28-70/2.2-2.8
 
Upvote 0
Mar 20, 2015
428
372
I'm sorry but I don't see the point of this lens

Conversely I don't see the point of the 24-70 f2.8 EF. If it can open to f2.8 at 70mm then it can also theoretically open to MUCH brighter than f2.8 at 24mm, but Canon cripple it to f2.8. All that extra glass is wasted at the wide end.

This new formula looks like a sensible kick in the pants for decades of fixed-at-2.8 thinking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Conversely I don't see the point of the 24-70 f2.8 EF. If it can open to f2.8 at 70mm then it can also theoretically open to MUCH brighter than f2.8 at 24mm, but Canon cripple it to f2.8. All that extra glass is wasted at the wide end.

This new formula looks like a sensible kick in the pants for decades of fixed-at-2.8 thinking.
This could be a very compact lens, about the size of a 24-70/4. Notice how little the lens extends for the tele end. Notice how short it is relative to width. Back in the day, I owned the 28-80/2.8-4 L. Quality was spectacular and so was the size. With the change in lens design parameters RF vs. EF, perhaps a similarly spectacular lens could be made now but much more compactly.
 
Upvote 0
Wider is better than the 70mm reach. I would rather see a 24-58 honestly. But I do love the variable aperture logic. 20-50 f/2-2.8, 20-35mm f/2.0, or even 24-50 f/2-2.8 would be cool. Or 24-50/2.0. I shoot at the wider end almost the whole time when using a 24-70mm and would rather have the stop than the longer range. I hope that 28-X lenses don't become the trend.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I wish they would come up with a better pair of lenses for event shooting -- where it would make more sense to break the zoom ranges at 35 instead of 24 (or even 28). Like I said above, a 20-35mm f/2.0 would be amazing. But it would need to be paired with something like a 35-100mm lens for event shooters using two lenses. The 35-100mm could be variable aperture, moderately fast, and get the job done. I also like maves' idea of a 35-85/2.0-2.8. A 35-105mm f/2.8 would obviously be great. But even a 35-105/2.5-3.5 or f/2.8-4.0 would work well for me. But I do feel like you would need f/2.8 at 50mm.

The zoom ranges should "break" at where a person no longer considers images to be wide angle. I would say 35mm would be appropriate for that.

Obviously a Sigma 24-35/2.0 already exists. I would be happy even if there were a 35-100mm or fast 35-85mm lens somewhere on the market to complement it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0