The upcoming RF mount wide angle f/2.8L zoom will be wider than 16mm [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Yes, but RF allows designs which were not possible for the EF mount. The whole point of what I was saying was that a 14-35/2.8 with a less bulbous front element and a 77 mm filter thread might now become possible.
Upvote
0
Yes, they do make it possible, but that does not mean that the lens is going to be that much smaller with that angle and maximum aperture at least compared to the EF 16-35/2.8 III it's just not going to be as big as the Tamron 15-30/2.8 or it will have a narrower range, the first patent that was leaked was this one:
https://www.dailycameranews.com/201...lens-patent-for-full-frame-mirrorless-camera/
And it might be pushed a bit wider but as you can see, it is unlikely to come with a front filter thread (it might still have one at the rear).
Upvote
0
The strange thing is, that has a much more bulbous front element than any version of the EF16-35/2.8. <shrug> It's just a patent, maybe a different design will be the basis for the actual RF ultrawide zoom, when it comes.
Upvote
0
Just a thought....... A lot of the current ultra wide angle EF lenses have the large bulbous front element making it a pain to use graduated NDs. With the R system and availability of adapters it would be possible for some enterprising company to offer a line of drop in graduated filters with the line (blend region) at say 1/2 and 1/3 the way down on the filter. These blends would pretty well cover my needs. Because of the small diameters they could be made inexpensively. This approach would double the number of filters needed, but would take up less room in the bag because of size and would be applicable to all your lenses, so no need for multiple filter holders. Thoughts?
Upvote
0
hmatthes
EOS-R, RF and EF Lenses of all types.
Ultrawide RF lenses would be even greater if Canon built the filter adapters into their base, just like the EF filter adapter uses. That way you could use your 11-24 EF today, then buy a RF replacement using the same filters.
Just received my RF 35/1.8 and am comparing it to my EF 35/1.4 -- these new designs have much smaller front elements and half the bulk. Yes, front elements on 1.4 are bigger than 1.8 but wowza this is a great new small lens with IS and macro as well!
Just received my RF 35/1.8 and am comparing it to my EF 35/1.4 -- these new designs have much smaller front elements and half the bulk. Yes, front elements on 1.4 are bigger than 1.8 but wowza this is a great new small lens with IS and macro as well!
Upvote
0
I agree. I was with a friend who is a Nikon shooter the other day, and she is considering an EOS R specifically to use the RF filter adapter + wide angle EF lens, specifically to be able to use rear filters. As a Z7 owner, she was very jealous at how well EOS R worked with EF16-35L4.
It also got me thinking, why make native RF wide angle lens smaller? I mean, who complains that their 16-35 is too big a lens, right? So just take an EF lens, add a control ring, build the adapter into it with the ability to put in a rear filter, and call it a day.
For that matter... I wish they would do it with some of the other lenses too. It would just so great to invest once in a full set of rear filters instead of endlessly buying front ones. I wouldn't hesitate to spend $300 each on the best quality of a few of my favorite rear filters, if I knew I could use them on every lens I bought in the future.
Upvote
0
Yes f/4 is plenty fast enough for me, if a RF 12-35mm f/4 L or RF 14-35mm f/4 L is released for a similar price as the EF 16-35mm f/4 it would be the first lens i'd purchase after switching to mirrorless.
Upvote
0
Sorry to ruin your day, but this new mount means newer, better, but also more expensive lenses, even at the same aperture (let alone shorter starter focal lengths or ones with a faster aperture, which are at a higher priority it seems).
And it also looks like that we won't be seeing native RF lenses from other manufacturers either.
Their design priority is to make 'better' lenses. That means taking full advantage of the shorter flange with the wide mount diameter (especially for wide-angle lenses), so there is actual glass where the filter could go, it would be way too big of a compromise to the optical formula (while also adding even more to the costs and potential problems).
So again, it is just a non-feasible option unlike with the super telephotos. And the option to use the older EF lenses will always remain if one really cares about these adapters with the rear filters. Re-modeling old EF glass makes the least amount of sense(they are not designed to be focus by wire like these newest ones), and while not ideal, step-down rings also do exist for the front ones as well.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Time and market forces will tell, the fact that a f/4 lens (Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM) has already been launched at a similar release price as it's EF equivalent here in the UK gives me hope. As does the fact that Canon are heavily discounting a large proportion of their L range on this side of the pond. I never thought I'd ever see an affordable L lens with £350 ($450) cash back, £439 ($565) from reputable retailers in the UK for the 24-70mm f/4 is an amazing deal.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Hopefully there will be more reasonably priced lenses as well, I just don't think we will see it at the wide-angle front, especially if they do manage to set new standards in optical quality, the "cheap" option will be to stick with using an EF version with an adapter (it's actually pretty hard to top this in terms of price/performance)
So they might not even bother making a cheaper RF 16-35mm f/4 version any time soon, something like a 15-30mm f/2.8 is more likely and another more similar to an 12-24mm f/4 or so and neither of these is going to be cheap.
Upvote
0
Since the R mount has a registration distance of 20mm, anything wider than 20mm (more practically, around 24mm or so) would still need to use a retrofocus design.
Upvote
0
Not necessarily, as there is no moving mirror there is nothing to stop the lens rear element protruding well behind the mount, as in the Leica designs. The shutter in the R is probably no more the a couple of mm forward of the sensor so potentially 15mm of recess is possible, this would mean even a 10mm focal length design could be made that wasn't a retrofocus. That is probably too much but I can see a focal length of 14mm non retro focal being very possible.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
