Patent: Lower cost RF mount prime and zoom lenses, including an RF 16-35mm f/4

[Joules]

Subtract or not, how do you explain that the 35/2.8 is a centimeter longer than the 35/2.0?

At 63 mm past the mount, the RF 35 mm 1
8 Is is still 23 mm longer than this 35 mm 2.8. I don't think macro capabilities are only adding a cm to such a lens. I would simply guess that the longer lens has more corrective elements? In any case, it is still small.

 

[Kit.]

At 63 mm past the mount, the RF 35 mm 1
8 Is is still 23 mm longer than this 35 mm 2.8.

But it's an /1.8 macro lens. /2.0 non-macro lens from the patent is expectedly shorter. Why is /2.8 longer than /2.0 if it's not a macro lens?

 

[Sharlin]

Not quite at 50mm but still a good size. I'd snap up an RF pancake ...

I’d like you to pay special attention to the part of my message that says ”when you subtract the flange distance”. 50 mm – 20 mm = 30 mm.

 

[Architect1776]

Continue reading...

This is great news. Canon is innovating again and looking to support all levels of users.
Now where is IBIS please.

 

[Antono Refa]

This is great news. Canon is innovating again and looking to support all levels of users.

You mean Canon wasn't innovating with such lenses as EF 11-24mm (where is Nikon's equivalent?), EF 8-15mm (Nikon's was released 7 years after the Canon), tilt shift lenses (Nikon's PC-E 19mm came out 7 years after Canon's TS-E 17mm), etc?

Now where is IBIS please.

Fair question.

 

[Andy Westwood]

Some lovely patients appearing for the RF mount, we know most wont ever see the light of day however it looks like lots of new RF glass is on the horizon for Canon R series shooters.

I’m enjoying shooting with the RF 24-70 IS, the AF is noticeably quicker than adapted older EF lenses and the effective IS allows a lower shutter speed in darker conditions using off camera flash again allowing the camera to see better and so aid quicker AF, but it’s just such a heavy combination. I knew I had to go for the 24-70 over the lighter 24-105 but a better choice of lighter lenses for certain shoots would be welcomed.

The RF 20mm f/2 and the RF 16-35mm f/4 from this batch sound appealing to me I’d love an RF pancake too.

 

[davidcl0nel]

That 35mm f/2 is practically a pancake when you subtract the flange distance.

Great news, i love the 22mm on EOS-M because its very tiny.
This as a equivalent might be a little bit bigger than a tiny EOS-M+22, but maybe is even better.

 

[analoggrotto]

That 35mm f/2 is practically a pancake when you subtract the flange distance.

Let's hope so! Hungry for some pancakes! A pancake will allow my fullframe canon to go where ever I do.

 

[Aaron D]

KrisK has said it already--how about a 28 mm?! An old 28 f/2.8 was my best ever single lens. An RF f/2 IS would be fantastic. Doesn't need to be tiny or macro or super cheap. Excellent optics and good build is all.

And for what it's worth--I really like my R. It's a fantastic camera just as it is. Sure it could be improved, but for 1800, what the hell?

 

[victorshikhman]

Oh come on, Canon. Refresh that old EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 with better IQ, weather sealing, five stops of IS and start moving 90D's by the truckload. It's the camera you have now, not the camera you promise to give us in 2022. Just do it! How can this not be a thing when you're making all sorts of niche nonsense.

 

[jjesp]

But still no 28mm?? Come on Canon. Make one now!

 

[Architect1776]

You mean Canon wasn't innovating with such lenses as EF 11-24mm (where is Nikon's equivalent?), EF 8-15mm (Nikon's was released 7 years after the Canon), tilt shift lenses (Nikon's PC-E 19mm came out 7 years after Canon's TS-E 17mm), etc?



Fair question.

Those are great lenses but are evolutionary. Not major innovation like the EF mount.

 

[Antono Refa]

Those are great lenses but are evolutionary. Not major innovation like the EF mount.

While IBIS is innovative?

Yeah, sure.

 

[Jaysheldon]

Interesting there's an 85 mm f1.8 on the list. I just bought the EF version for CDN$350. Regular price CDN$620. While it's on the Canon Canada Store web site, that lens is no longer listed as available for purchase (which I assume means only stock left in stores is avail for purchase). I wonder if Canon is clearing older EF non-L lenses out. I noticed a few months ago the EF 100mm f2 was no longer listed by Canon Canada. Nor, suddenly is the EF 50mm f1.4. A salesman told me Saturday the recent Black Friday sale price of that lens cleared out all the stock in his store. Now if only there was a good sale on the EF 35 mm f2 (which now in Canadian dollars lists at $880. BFriday sale $750)

 

[analoggrotto]

Oh come on, Canon. Refresh that old EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 with better IQ, weather sealing, five stops of IS and start moving 90D's by the truckload. It's the camera you have now, not the camera you promise to give us in 2022. Just do it! How can this not be a thing when you're making all sorts of niche nonsense.

Between their 2 APS-C lines, Canon does seem to have every sub $1500 segment and sub segment covered.

 

[mpeeps]

If the RF 16-35 f/4 has IS, it is likely to be a very interesting alternative to the RF 15-35 f/2.8.

The 15-35 also has IS.