Patent: Multiple small RF prime lens optical formulas

[Del Paso]

Sadly I just sold my EF20 2.8 -- what great lens! I found it big with the adapter and I usually shoot it manually.
Now I shoot a Voigtlander 21/4 Skopar until I find a good Leica 21mm that is not over-priced.

DON'T !!!!
I have the 21 Leica M lens (non-aspherical).
Mounted on the EOS R, it generates a reddish hue on the sides of the pictures, like all M lenses below 35 mm, you can even see it in the viewfinder!
The Leica sensors have therefore specifically oriented microlenses against this phenomenon.
Maybe (?) the asph. type behaves differently, even though I doubt it.
PS: the Leica R 21 mm is not really good...

 

[PureClassA]

Non L Primes!! Happy Day!!! Been waiting for this. I hope we see them announced at least by year end.

 

[Random Orbits]

I passed on the 24mm & 28mm f/2.8 because I have the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L on my camera as default, and the 24mm f/2.8's IQ is mediocre.

If things changed on the RF mount, e.g. the f/4 trinity of zooms is small or the 24mm prime is f/2.0, I might very well buy it.

+1. The only way I see a f/2.8 prime would sell in this focal length range is if it is a pancake like the EF 40 f/2.8. With the RF 24-70 having IS, what would the RF f/2.8 primes offer? You carry a couple primes to cover the focal length range, and if Canon launches them near 800 again, I'd rather pay more for the zoom.

With the camera market contracting as it has been the last few years, manufacturers will have to stick to the more popular focal lengths. I can't see them launching $800 f/2.8 lenses like Canon had with the f/2.8 IS primes.

 

[Deleted member 378875]

Same here. I thought it was pretty clear he was referring to prime lenses at smaller apertures than f2.8 and was thinking of it in relation to the wide angle lenses mentioned in this thread. This is a good example of why people should not shoot first and aim later. To be fair he was responding to someone who mentioned an f4 "trinity." For many of us older photographers this would be referencing a wide angle, a normal and a short telephoto – all primes.

I never use the term because I think it is stupid and smacks of jargon. Most jargon is used by people who want to feel superior to others by speaking in coded phrases, when simple language would be much more suitable and precise.

In my younger days, I routinely carried three lenses: 24mm, 50 mm and 135 mm. They covered most situations. Other photographers preferred a 28 mm or a 35 mm and a few stuck to an 85mm at the long end. I guess you could call these a "trinity," but I never knew a professional photographer who used the term and only learned of the term when I started participating in this gearhead forum.

Ironically, I think Mel probably misunderstood the post he was reacting to, which referenced f4 lenses but didn't make clear whether the poster was thinking of primes or zooms. I don't know anyone who has suggested f4 primes, so I doubt that is what the person was thinking of.

So, to recap: Mel made a comment that was probably based on a misreading of another person's post. Then Neuro jumped down his throat based on a misreading of Mel's comment.

Another glorious day at the Canon Rumors outhouse.

Thanks - I like what you say about only carrying 24,50 and 135 primes ... It sounds like a great combination

Im trying to wean myself off zooms and travel light .. I have the Canon 135 f/2 and 85 f1.4 which are not exactly super-light but I love both

I can see carrying something like an RP with new RF 24, 50 and 135 lenses would be incredibly light and hopefully excellent IQ

Hopefully eventually they will release a camera as light as the RP but with a stunning viewfinder such as the a7r4 .. that would be wonderful

Basically Canon - if you are reading this - I'd like a small light camera for small primes and a chunky big camera for big white lenses - could you arrange that please ?

 

[unfocused]

View attachment 186596

Those lenses were announced in 2012 during the height of the yen.

Canon Japan exports to Canon USA, so currency exchange plays a huge factor.

I don't believe it is as simple as that. Canon has never let prices fluctuate with currency exchange rates.

A strong Yen is not going to make the manufacturing of a Japanese product more costly if the product is manufactured in Japan. The company still pays the same wages to its workers. If the product or parts are manufactured in another country, a strong yen might lower the net cost, as a strong Yen would mean that they would be able to "buy" more labor in another Asian country with the same amount of money.

In addition, in-country costs such as marketing and distribution, which can be as large or larger than manufacturing costs are huge inputs into the final price. Canon USA pays marketing costs and distribution costs in the U.S. and thus is paying in dollars. Rudy Winston and all of the other Canon USA employees get paid in U.S. dollars and their wages don't change with the Yen. The warehousing and distribution of products in the U.S. are paid in dollars.

In addition, we don't know how Canon reconciles their costs between divisions. Are they charging Canon USA the value of the product in Yen, or are they charging them in dollars? And, is this just a paper transaction to reconcile costs between the regions? This is not anything at all like,. for example, Amazon importing Chinese made products for sale in the U.S.

Finally, in this specific instance, the price cuts were not consistent across the board. There was actually quite a bit of discussion about these price cuts at the time and it was pretty clear from industry sources that it was an intentional reduction because the introduced prices were too high for the market.

 

[BillB]

I don't believe it is as simple as that. Canon has never let prices fluctuate with currency exchange rates.

A strong Yen is not going to make the manufacturing of a Japanese product more costly if the product is manufactured in Japan. The company still pays the same wages to its workers. If the product or parts are manufactured in another country, a strong yen might lower the net cost, as a strong Yen would mean that they would be able to "buy" more labor in another Asian country with the same amount of money.

In addition, in-country costs such as marketing and distribution, which can be as large or larger than manufacturing costs are huge inputs into the final price. Canon USA pays marketing costs and distribution costs in the U.S. and thus is paying in dollars. Rudy Winston and all of the other Canon USA employees get paid in U.S. dollars and their wages don't change with the Yen. The warehousing and distribution of products in the U.S. are paid in dollars.

In addition, we don't know how Canon reconciles their costs between divisions. Are they charging Canon USA the value of the product in Yen, or are they charging them in dollars? And, is this just a paper transaction to reconcile costs between the regions? This is not anything at all like,. for example, Amazon importing Chinese made products for sale in the U.S.

Finally, in this specific instance, the price cuts were not consistent across the board. There was actually quite a bit of discussion about these price cuts at the time and it was pretty clear from industry sources that it was an intentional reduction because the introduced prices were too high for the market.

So , what lessons might Canon have learned about trying to make money selling small, moderate priced primes?

 

[melgross]

Im just not go8ng to bother with this thread. You guys are going crazy over something that hardly is important. I guess you do post here too much.

 

[hmatthes]

DON'T !!!!
I have the 21 Leica M lens (non-aspherical).
Mounted on the EOS R, it generates a reddish hue on the sides of the pictures, like all M lenses below 35 mm, you can even see it in the viewfinder!
The Leica sensors have therefore specifically oriented microlenses against this phenomenon.
Maybe (?) the asph. type behaves differently, even though I doubt it.
PS: the Leica R 21 mm is not really good...

Thank you Del Paso... As soon as I really used the Voigtlander Skopar 21 -- I returned it to the dealer. Terrible magenta in all corners and Adobe RAW could not remove it by profile. Then I went to eBay and bought another Canon 20mm f2.8 -- a treasure of a lens!