The upcoming RF mount wide angle f/2.8L zoom will be wider than 16mm [CR2]

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
8,336
1,066
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Canon has already mentioned that a trio of f/2.8L zoom lenses is coming in 2019 for the RF mount. It’s pretty obvious that we should expect some kind of “holy trinity” of lenses such as an RF 16-35mm f/2.8L. RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS and an RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS.
We’re being told that the wide angle lens for the RF “holy trinity” will be wider than 16mm. Both an RF 12-35mm f/2.8L and an RF 14-35mm f/2.8L have been developed for testing.

We have seen a patent for an RF 14-21mm f/1.4L, but don’t expect such a lens to surface in 2019. Included in the same patent is an RF 16-35mm f/2.8L and an RF 12-20mm f/2L. So we think it’s possible that a 12-35mm f/2.8L will what wins out.
Nikon will be coming with a 14-30mm f/4 S and we think Canon will definitely want to keep its lenses the most impressing in the full frame mirrorless world. As such, we expect them to a bit faster and a bit more extreme on the wide end...
Continue reading...
 
Last edited:

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,063
341
Vancouver, BC
Well, depending on price, and whether it comes out in an f/4 flavor later on, that could be exciting. I just don't use wide angle enough to buy a $3,000 or more flagship wide zoom.
 

twoheadedboy

EOS R5
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
175
227
Kenosha, WI
Well, depending on price, and whether it comes out in an f/4 flavor later on, that could be exciting. I just don't use wide angle enough to buy a $3,000 or more flagship wide zoom.
Yes, for sure. f/4 and can use normal 77mm filters. I would actually take a 16-35mm f/4 on the RF mount because I'm assuming it would be much smaller, but a 12 or 14mm on the ultra-wide end would be intriguing (also assuming the quality is as good or better than what we have now).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom W and jd7

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
858
897
It certainly will be easier for Canon to develop a higher quality wide angle zoom due to the shorter distance bayonet to lens , no need for retrofocus design. This has often been demonstrated by Leica with their superb M rangefinder lenses.
So, I expect some very exciting new wide angle lenses (zooms or primes). This being in my opinion the main advantage of mirrorless, no gains with tele lenses.
 

The Fat Fish

VFX Artist
Jul 29, 2017
102
60
27
Exeter, UK
I really hope it's a sensible wide angle lens. The 28-70mm F2 is very fancy and all that but impractical (based on size, weight and cost) when compared to a standard 24-70mm F2.8. I'd have much preferred that at launch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrFotoFool
As awesome as these lenses sound, I think it's pretty safe to assume that they'll wind up being roughly the same size and weight as the 28-70 f/2 RF, (or bigger!) so...

OK who am I kidding, if it's ultra-sharp even in the corners, I'd totally buy an f/2 or f/1.4 ultra-wide zoom, no matter how big and heavy it is. I might not take it on every wilderness backpacking trip, but it'd still be an epic lens whenever it's possible to bring it.
 

boiseblake

I'm New Here
Feb 27, 2015
11
15
If it can match or beat the legendary Nikon 14-24 for astro landscape photography I'll buy one instantly. The coma on the current 16-35 has been less than impressive.
 

tiggy@mac.com

R5
CR Pro
Jan 20, 2014
617
438
Thetford, VT
www.camnostic.com
I suspect coma won't be the highest priority for this set in the eyes of Canon. F/2.8 isn't the fastest aperture for astro. The priority is likely to be general use and sharpness. The f/1.4 and f/2 development projects would likely have coma as a higher relative priority. Man, that 1.4 makes me giddy with anticipation. Except it's Canon, so it'll be 3 years of anticipation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boiseblake

Steve Balcombe

Too much gear
Aug 1, 2014
250
168
Yes, for sure. f/4 and can use normal 77mm filters. I would actually take a 16-35mm f/4 on the RF mount because I'm assuming it would be much smaller, but a 12 or 14mm on the ultra-wide end would be intriguing (also assuming the quality is as good or better than what we have now).
The original 16-35/2.8L takes 77 mm filters, and one of the characteristics Canon has talked about for wide/normal RF lenses is smaller front elements and larger rear elements. This is because they are not so strongly retrofocal so they don't need such extreme negative elements in the front group which are large and inclined to be bulbous in a DSLR lens.

So maybe an RF 14-35/2.8L could have a 77 mm filter thread?
 
  • Like
Reactions: nchoh and Aaron D

peterzuehlke

EOS 90D
Oct 1, 2015
107
21
It certainly will be easier for Canon to develop a higher quality wide angle zoom due to the shorter distance bayonet to lens , no need for retrofocus design. This has often been demonstrated by Leica with their superb M rangefinder lenses.

This brings up a question: in the days of film the Leica M lenses could be excellent and small due to non-retrofocus (non reverse telephoto) designs. But I think when they went to the M digital there was a problem with angle of incidence with the M lenses interacting with the microlenses, that had to be corrected out in firmware. Wonder if Canikon will need this kind of fix.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,637
855
I can’t really complain about the current 16-35mm f/4 EF lens; plus with the adapters, we get drop in filters. So, not excited by an R version.
+1 Especially since there are also the excellent EF16-35 f/2.8L III and EF11-24 f/4L.
Emphasis on the ... EF ;)
 

Tom W

EOS R5
Sep 5, 2012
286
248
Canon's going to entice people me, content with our 5D Mk IV and lenses, using new, fast, sharp wide-angle R lenses. That's exactly what's going to happen here.
 
Jul 12, 2013
267
134
I have held off on purchasing the EF 11-24 in anticipation of something like what is rumored: a 12-35mm f/2.8L that fits the R mount!?

Oh my.

Oh my.

Oh my.
 
Jul 11, 2017
5
3
Although both would be interesting to shoot in my real estate photography business, my guess is that my most used focal lengths (16-20) would remain the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Normalnorm

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,035
679
The original 16-35/2.8L takes 77 mm filters, and one of the characteristics Canon has talked about for wide/normal RF lenses is smaller front elements and larger rear elements. This is because they are not so strongly retrofocal so they don't need such extreme negative elements in the front group which are large and inclined to be bulbous in a DSLR lens.

So maybe an RF 14-35/2.8L could have a 77 mm filter thread?
Maybe I've missed something, but so far we haven't seen anything wider than 16mm and an aperture of at least f/2.8 with an actual filter thread. If I saw it right, all three RF wide-angle lens design patents showed a bulbous front element. Also, maybe the zoom range has be narrower, like 14-28mm f/2.8 or 15-30mm f/2.8, that sounds much more realistic.
Or it has to be reduced to f/4 like with the Nikon.