Patent: Lots of optical formula lens patents for the RF mount

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,479
1,009
It will be interesting what Canon picks in the end. Will it just be 16-35 F4 and F2.8 and 17-40 F4.
Going wider tends to make the lens big and bulky.
I think the RP will be popular as a travel camera so F4 lens are suited to that. A 16-70 F4 and 70-200 F4 would be ideal companions.
16-70 must be very difficult to achieve
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Antono Refa

EOS R
Mar 26, 2014
1,413
507
It will be interesting what Canon picks in the end. Will it just be 16-35 F4 and F2.8 and 17-40 F4.
Going wider tends to make the lens big and bulky.

I think Canon will make an RF 16-35mm f/4, so as not to make owners of the existing EF 16-35mm f/4L go longer when moving to RF, and it probably will be smaller than the EF version. I doubt photographers would upgrade the EF 16-35mm f/4L to an RF 16-35mm f/2.8 due to price, size, and weight.
 
Upvote 0

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,864
7,922
So I think f/4 trinity zooms are the way forward, and more-so for the wide-angle than the rest. The reason I'm cheering a 14-40mm f/4 isn't because I hate f/2.8 at all (or even f/1.4, which was bandied about in some rumors). It's because in this focal range, I'd rather have 1) extended range, 2) sharpness, 3) portability and price and only dead last 4) big aperture.
Agreed, and that’s why I have a 16-35mm f/4L IS and someone else now has my 16-35mm f/2.8L II. But at the longer end, I still prefer my 70-200/2.8 for portraits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

navastronia

EOS RP + 5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
820
1,026
Agreed, the 70-200/2.8 still makes total sense as 70mm f/2.8 really lets your subject pop out from the background, and you soon get into a lot of bokeh. I have the EF135/2 and it's been my fav lens since, gosh, 1996. Portraiture is contrived enough that you can walk around to get your shot in a way you can't in other genres.

Ultimately I think I'd rather have a lighter f/4 zoom, or a 75-300/4, and have the 135/2 in my mothership, same way I have the 24-105/4 but also the 50/1.2.

While we're posting requests, my "someday" setup is a pro (1DX level) R body, an RF 85/1.2 (for portraits), an RF 75-300/4 (for weddings/events/sports) and an RF 35/1.2 or 1.4 (for me ;))
 
  • Love
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

SUNDOG04

EOS 90D
Mar 1, 2015
135
96
Ha, I thought the same! Thats an incredible usefull focal lense! For weddings and travel this would be the shit! I love the Tamron 15-30, especialy for travel. But I always miss a little bit more focal lenght for some "normal" portraits or something. 14-40 sounds awesome. f2,8 would be even more awesome, but I guess that would have increased the weight and size to much. =)
The Nikon 14-30 f4S is compact, although shorter range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L
  • Focal distance 15.30mm 24.20mm 34.00mm
  • F number 2.91 2.91 2.91
  • Field angle 54.73° 41.80° 32.47°
  • Image height 21.64mm 21.64mm 21.64mm
  • Whole length of the lens 135.05mm 125.84mm 125.33mm
  • BF 13.00mm 22.20mm 32.26mm

What do the different "Whole length of the lens" mean? There are three different lengths.
 
Upvote 0

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
27,864
7,922
What do the different "Whole length of the lens" mean? There are three different lengths.
The length changes as you zoom the lens. In the case of the 15-35, the front element will move slightly behind the plane of the filter threads, as current UWA zooms do.
 
Upvote 0