Patent: Lots of fast RF prime lens optical formulas
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Still hoping for:
A 135 f/1.8 (like the Sigma & Sonys!)
A lightweight 120-300 f/2.8 (+ 2x of this zoomrange) etc...
And some new DO lenses! (A newer 400 4.0 II...with less then 3,3m focus distance!)
A 135 f/1.8 (like the Sigma & Sonys!)
A lightweight 120-300 f/2.8 (+ 2x of this zoomrange) etc...
And some new DO lenses! (A newer 400 4.0 II...with less then 3,3m focus distance!)
Upvote
0
Doomed unless that 300mm is f/1.4 and only weighs 64g. It also needs to be smaller than the 40mm pancake. I've seen a few YouTube videos about The Bridge over the River Kwai, so I know a thing or too about engineering. If Canon don't do this, then it's clear they are simply trying to protect the feelings sales of their bigger white lenses....
Upvote
0
Reminder before the complaints roll in...
The examples in the patent just cover potential designs that fit a certain design principle - they are just optical desigs, not full lens designs.
There are lenses I want too, but they don't fit the examples n the patent application ;-)
The examples in the patent just cover potential designs that fit a certain design principle - they are just optical desigs, not full lens designs.
There are lenses I want too, but they don't fit the examples n the patent application ;-)
Upvote
0
That depends...perhaps they're aimed at a much lower tier similar to the EF non L lenses.
Upvote
0
One may argue that a $1800 85/1.4 L lens could sell a tad better than a much larger and heavier $3000 85/1.2?
I'd preorder a 85mm f/1.4 on day one if it was smaller and cheaper than the 85 1.2. I love the EF 85 F/1.4, and was so close to buying one when the RF mount was announced and decided against it to start moving towards RF lenses.
I am half tempted to get the 85 1.2, but I think I would get more use out of a 1.4. A lot of my portraits with flash are stopped down anyway, but I'd still like something a little faster than the F/2 for lowlight. Portraits aren't my main source of income and I often use a 70-200 or 24-70, so it'd hard to justify the 1.2.
Upvote
0
In terms of which of these might actually become products in the near(ish) future I'll say:
Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 - Obviously yes
Canon RF 80mm f/1.4 - Nope
Canon RF 85mm f/1.4 - Nope
Canon RF 85mm f/1.8 - More Nope
Canon RF 100mm f/2 - I'm going to say no
Canon RF 135mm f/2 - Maybe
Canon RF 300mm f/2.8 - Yes
I know some people want a 135mm f/1.8 or 1.4 but the EF 135 2.0 has always been a spectacular lens, and part of this is due to the relatively small size and low weight. Not sure I'd want a more expensive and heavier version.
Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 - Obviously yes
Canon RF 80mm f/1.4 - Nope
Canon RF 85mm f/1.4 - Nope
Canon RF 85mm f/1.8 - More Nope
Canon RF 100mm f/2 - I'm going to say no
Canon RF 135mm f/2 - Maybe
Canon RF 300mm f/2.8 - Yes
I know some people want a 135mm f/1.8 or 1.4 but the EF 135 2.0 has always been a spectacular lens, and part of this is due to the relatively small size and low weight. Not sure I'd want a more expensive and heavier version.
Upvote
0
My first thought was, wait a minute, I have one of those, it can't be uncommon.
Then I realized I was thinking of my 50 mm f/1.4, which of course is distinctly NOT an 85mm. And it's certainly not like my 85mm f/1.8; similar logic. (See "A is A" for further explanation.
) Yes, an 85mm f/1.4 is probably too close to the f/1.2 to make much sense...unless it really is some sort of new mid-range option (oh, say about $1000-1200); even then, it might not be distinct enough.So yeah, never mind what I said.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
