Patent: Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM as well as an RF 24mm f/1.2L USM and RF 28mm f/1.2L USM

GMAX

moments that matters
Jan 26, 2021
14
39
Hard to beat, but also heavy! I wonder how large of a market there is for a fast L prime at 28mm. Other systems have more options/history at that focal length than Canon does. EF 28mm f/2.8 IS was solid but was overpriced for years, and there's the even older EF 28mm f/1.8...
Mhh, there seem to be a market for a ZEISS Otus 1.4/28 (EF only). Why not for a 1.2/28 L? Own the EF1.4/24 and EF1.4/35 II (both lightweight); this new guy would perfectly fit into the middle as a good compromise of both :)
 

Peter Bergh

EOS M50
CR Pro
Sep 16, 2020
32
20
we do get 5 year canon australia warranty though
Two thoughts:

1) you stated in an earlier post that Canon Australia cannot provide product. What good is a warranty on a product that cannot be obtained and thus, for practical purposes, does not exist?

2) A warranty, or any insurance, always costs more than the expected costs of covering claims. Thus, if you can afford the maximum loss, any insurance will, statistically speaking, cost you more than you can expect to get back. In fact, modern cameras and lenses are reliable enough that they are very likely not to fail at all during the time of warranty coverage. IMHO, this is a strong argument for buying grey-market merchandise.
 

canonmike

EOS R6
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
446
385
Would be cool to get an APS-C camera with IBIS for less than $1000 or so. Then I would ad the 800mm f/11 and effectively have a 1280mm lens that is stabilized in the lens AND in the body.
I do hope those of you rooting for an APS-C R body get your wish. Always nice to have more choices.
 
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
Of course I would prefer a full frame body, but they might not offer a real cheap full frame body in the future. However a really cheap APS-C body could be used just for a single long lens for situations where my DSLR reaches its limits. Unfortunately there is no cheap 800mm lens for DSLRs :-(
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,441
5,658
I said this in the RF 35mm rumor before, but I'll remind people again that Canon explained that larger aperture primes give IBIS more room to work, which allows the RF 85mm F/1.2 to have 8 stops of IBIS without having IS in the lens.

So I wouldn't expect any fast primes with IS, considering Canon can save money, make lenses more durable without IS, and reduce optical complexity by relying on the large apertures to boost IBIS. 8 stops is far better than what the EF lens IS systems could get.
But that is self defeating, if the lens is >2lbs to get that aperture it takes more energy to keep it steady over long periods versus a lighter lens that is easier to handhold for hour after hour.

Personally, and I'm sure I'm not alone, I don't need 8 stops of IBIS because subject movement comes into play long before I run out of ISO performance. When you are light limited IBIS only lengthens shutter speed, it doesn't gain you aperture or ISO.
 

Aaron D

Hey!
Jul 21, 2016
273
265
Kansas City
www.aarondougherty.com
Continuous or servo? Those are different things, it took me a while to figure out and for what I'm shooting, continuous is actively detrimental, while servo does what I need.
Good question--both, I think. I was going to check but I've changed all my 'C' setings away from 'people' for an architectural shoot I had this week, all manual focusing. The 'save settings to card' is a fantastic feature, btw.

I've never felt confident with my understanding of auto-focus and need to study/practice more. Though this R5 is a dream compared to older technology, I'm actually nailing most shots even without know what I'm doing!

Thanks!
 

Juangrande

EOS 90D
Mar 6, 2017
169
222
I think the typical user of these lenses are those that demand the highest IQ over stabilization. And if a large part of that is portraiture/controlled lighting scenarios, IS is not a big advantage at shorter focal lengths. These f/1.2 lenses will not be small nor light. I can't see many people carrying a bagful of f/1.2 lenses over a single f/2.8 zoom. I can see people carrying smaller f/2 primes for that purpose, so those would probably be better candidates for IS.
I carry a 35 1.4 m, 50 1.2, (getting the 85 1.2 soon) and a 135 1.8 in my portrait bag. I could care less about convenience. I plan to replace then35 with the RF 1.2 version or maybe the RF 28 1.2 Pretty happy with the 135 1.8 and use it the least but I would rent the 135 1.4 to see what it like. Still have both kidneys. But I do spend all my profits on gear.
 

Juangrande

EOS 90D
Mar 6, 2017
169
222
Two thoughts:

1) you stated in an earlier post that Canon Australia cannot provide product. What good is a warranty on a product that cannot be obtained and thus, for practical purposes, does not exist?

2) A warranty, or any insurance, always costs more than the expected costs of covering claims. Thus, if you can afford the maximum loss, any insurance will, statistically speaking, cost you more than you can expect to get back. In fact, modern cameras and lenses are reliable enough that they are very likely not to fail at all during the time of warranty coverage. IMHO, this is a strong argument for buying grey-market merchandise.
I bought the 4 year extended protection coverage for my RF 50 1.2 and it covers accidents like dropping it down a flight of stairs or in a tide pool/surf. Full lens replacement for 4 years is worth $189 to me.
 

jd7

EOS R
CR Pro
Feb 3, 2013
914
275
I'm 100% sure. Canon spoke about this extensively when the R5 got announced. They explained both the rf 85mm 1.2 and 28-70 were capable of 8 stops of IBIS without IS due to their wide apertures projecting a bigger image circle to stabilize from on the sensor. They were speaking specifically about fast lenses, not the mount. That's why the 85mm 1.2 has better IBIS than some of the IS lenses for the RF mount.
I don't suppose you recall where Canon has said that wider apertures are required to get a larger image circle? I know Canon said that they could get 8 stops out of IBIS with lenses like the RF 85L because it has a relatively large image circle, and I agree with you that Canon may go with that approach for its wide aperture lenses in future (those lenses tend to be relatively large IS units so putting IS in them doesn't seem easy). However, what isn't obvious to me is why Canon couldn't go with the same approach even with narrower aperture lenses, if they wanted to. I'd be interested to read what Canon has said about it.
 
Last edited:

Peter Bergh

EOS M50
CR Pro
Sep 16, 2020
32
20
I bought the 4 year extended protection coverage for my RF 50 1.2 and it covers accidents like dropping it down a flight of stairs or in a tide pool/surf. Full lens replacement for 4 years is worth $189 to me.
The peace of mind certainly is worth something. However, adding the lens as an item on your homeowner's insurance might have been much cheaper and would insure the lens for, typically, much longer than four years. It was cheaper for me.

BTW, I remember reading an article in Consumer Reports some years ago. The article said that extended warranties, in general, are not a good deal.
 

FrenchFry

Wildlife enthusiast!
Jun 14, 2020
442
553
Canon certainly remains fully committed to the "Big and Heavy" approach to photography. So much for the promise of mirrorless.
It's almost as though Canon is artificially creating a need for APS-C lenses by making the full frame RF lenses so big and heavy!
Nikon and Sony have recently been releasing excellent quality lenses that are fairly small and light. I hope that Canon follows suit at some point so I can buy more lenses. Hiring a sherpa is out of my budget.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Etienne

jd7

EOS R
CR Pro
Feb 3, 2013
914
275
It's almost as though Canon is artificially creating a need for APS-C lenses by making the full frame RF lenses so big and heavy!
Nikon and Sony have recently been releasing excellent quality lenses that are fairly small and light. I hope that Canon follows suit at some point so I can buy more lenses. Hiring a sherpa is out of my budget.
If you can afford Canon's RF lenses, you can afford a Sherpa ;)
 
Last edited:
Aug 7, 2018
347
294
I don't suppose you recall where Canon has said that wider apertures are required to get a larger image circle? I know Canon said that they could get 8 stops out of IBIS with lenses like the RF 85L because it has a relatively large image circle, and I agree with you that Canon may go with that approach for its wide aperture lenses in future (those lenses tend to be relatively large IS units so putting IS in them doesn't seem easy). However, what isn't obvious to me is why Canon couldn't go with the same approach even with narrower aperture lenses, if they wanted to. I'd be interested to read what Canon has said about it.
If wide aperture lenses really had a large image circle, they would waste quite a lot of light, because it does not hit the sensor. Even on a wide sparture lens most of the light is direted to the sensor. The difference is just that it comes from a wider range of different angles. If one point of your subject is in focus, all light from that point will meet at a single point on the sensor. And that is independent of the aparture. Only light from out of focus areas will spread to a larger area and create the bokeh. I don't know how that could help to achieve a better IBIS though.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,882
1,029
UK
www.flickr.com
Would be cool to get an APS-C camera with IBIS for less than $1000 or so. Then I would ad the 800mm f/11 and effectively have a 1280mm lens that is stabilized in the lens AND in the body.

I believe Canon said there was no extra gain in stabilisation with IBIS for the 600mm and 800mm f/11 lenses, sadly. Perhaps an APS-C sensor could be stabilised more as it's smaller, but I wouldn't get your hopes up.
 

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,807
1,728
I believe Canon said there was no extra gain in stabilisation with IBIS for the 600mm and 800mm f/11 lenses, sadly. [..]
The wording used by Rudy leaves things muddy, is was consistently along the lines of "Not as much as an improvement as with other RF lenses", which I take the same as you did, no extra gain, but it does leave wiggle room for e.g. roll correction being active.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene

David - Sydney

EOS R
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
915
768
www.flickr.com
Two thoughts:

1) you stated in an earlier post that Canon Australia cannot provide product. What good is a warranty on a product that cannot be obtained and thus, for practical purposes, does not exist?

2) A warranty, or any insurance, always costs more than the expected costs of covering claims. Thus, if you can afford the maximum loss, any insurance will, statistically speaking, cost you more than you can expect to get back. In fact, modern cameras and lenses are reliable enough that they are very likely not to fail at all during the time of warranty coverage. IMHO, this is a strong argument for buying grey-market merchandise.
I managed to find a RF24-105mm in one reseller on the weekend! Only one I could find in Australia though and got a 15% discount. With the 10% GST refund because I am (hopefully) traveling to New Zealand this week, it is roughly 25% off including the 5 year warranty. Grey market don't seem to be similarly priced yet and warranty is limited to 1 year and it needs to be returned to the country where the grey market reseller sourced it.

The 5 year warranty is a Canon ie OEM warranty. I agree that buying 3rd party extended warranties are generally not worthwhile.

Yes, the lenses are reliable. Yes, the cost of Canon warranty is built into the local recommended retail price. Yes, I could afford the maximum loss on an individual lens basis but the replacement cost of what I normally travel/use would be very painful. I still insure my kit at about 4% of total replacement cost/year. Peace of mind especially when I am shooting underwater with normal kit about USD8k.

The warranty starts from whenever you buy it so it is still a benefit to the buyer and still a point of difference to buying in other countries. From the R5 Shooters facebook group, there have been questions on issues with the R5 that point to warranty repairs already. Thankfully my R5 has performed to specifications for the last 12 months now and has 4 years of warranty to go :)
 

Random Orbits

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 14, 2012
2,445
329
What is the connection between IQ and Stabilization? IS is a huge advantage even at shorter focal lengths.
Stabilization imposes additional design constraints. Canon claimed that the EF 85mm f/1.4 IS had one of the larger IS units (similar in size to a supertele), but the IS element is not the largest in the optical formula. The character/sharpness of the EF 85mm f/1.4 IS is also different from the EF 85mm f/1.2 II. Some would say that the RF 85mm f/1.2L is the true successor of the EF 85mm f/1.2 II, not the EF 85mm f/1.4 IS.

For portraits, IS is not a big advantage at shorter focal length because higher shutter speeds are required to freeze subject motion. If you're using shutter speeds from 1/60 to 1/250s or faster with strobes, IS is not a factor. The RF f/2.8 zooms all have IS and better suited for general purpose work. Sometimes I can get something close to 1/2s with IS, but it's far from 100%.