Patent: Canon RF 28mm f/1.4L USM and Canon RF 35 f/1.4L USM

[Kiton]

I'd love a 28 mm fixed lens, though I'd prefer a compact f/2. With IS, doesn't have to be an L. It will always be a street/travel lens for me, on an R body.

And an f/1.4 50 mm with IS!

I am with you on the 28 being an F2. I feel like a broken record harping on Sigma and Canon to follow Nikon with a 1.8 or F2 lens. That is all we need in the street, I get them wanting the 35 and the 85 that is big and bright and comes with an optional sherpa, but the 28 is a lens that should slip in to a pocket!

 

[sanj]

I wish for a 25mm 1.2

 

[Kiton]

I wish for a 25mm 1.2 https://shop.camtecphoto.com/en/Zeiss/Zeiss-Milvus-25mm-F1.4-?cat_id=62

 

[GMCPhotographics]

9mm difference. 9mm makes absolutely no difference to me. I find it very hard to believe that 9mm is a deal breaker for anyone. It certainly isn’t a reason to switch brands. 9mm? Nothing to sweat about.

I totally agree. If I was in the market for a fast 35mm prime then 9mm wouldn't make any difference to me at all. However, I've been a long term user of a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1. Sure the newer mk2 is superior in every regard (including price). However, all that extra sharpness and faster AF and built quality caused the lens to be a lot heavier and physically larger. Comparing a rf 35mm f1.4L to a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1 is like a night and day handling experience.
On a different note, the new rf 100mm IS L Macro...geeze..sure it's got a few interesting new features...but the size of that thing compared to the EF version!

 

[koenkooi]

I totally agree. If I was in the market for a fast 35mm prime then 9mm wouldn't make any difference to me at all. However, I've been a long term user of a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1. Sure the newer mk2 is superior in every regard (including price). However, all that extra sharpness and faster AF and built quality caused the lens to be a lot heavier and physically larger. Comparing a rf 35mm f1.4L to a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1 is like a night and day handling experience.
On a different note, the new rf 100mm IS L Macro...geeze..sure it's got a few interesting new features...but the size of that thing compared to the EF version!

It's slightly wider, but seems to be the same length as the EF100L + RF adapter.

 

[Del Paso]

I'd rather have larger EOS R bodies with smaller, lighter lenses.
Nevertheless, I believe the current lens philosophy is a better choice for Canon, to get ahead of competition, appealing to pro users demanding f 1,2 and more.
And smaller Canon lenses are doubtlessly under development.

 

[Etienne]

A 28mm f/1.4 would be very interesting IF they can keep the size and weight down.
Canon seems to be going for giant headline grabbing lenses instead of making small and light practical primes.

 

[Aaron D]

OK, I'm just this week thinking of adding 'people' to my assignment photography offerings. I'm looking for a 35mm and an 85.

For an 85, there is the phenominal pair of f/1.2 choices, neither of which I can afford--or necessarily want--to buy. Such extremes for that last 1/3 of a stop! A 1.4 L with IS, smaller, and priced at like $1200-1800 would have been way more tempting. So I get the f/2. That's certainly fine, but underwhelming. I'd like an L because it'll be used A LOT with any luck.

This rumored fast 35 will likely be another $2800 f/1.2 despite this 1.4 patent. So I'll have the f/1.8 as an only option. Meh. Sure it's OK, but look how much sharper the butt-ugly Nikon 1.8 is in comparisons. I'm not going to dump all my stuff to go Nikon, but I'll likely wait another 3 years for a trio of 1.4 lenses.....

<rant/>

 

[Kiton]

If I wash it in a HOT water cycle, will it shrink to a F2.0 ??

asking for a friend