Canon Lens Rumors

Nifty Fifty and/or a Pancake lens are coming to the RF mount in 2020 [CR3]

We have been told that Canon will introduce at least one inexpensive prime lens for the RF mount in 2020, and they could actually bring two. One of which would come later in 2020.

First up, an f/2.8 pancake is definitely in the works and should be announced sometime in the first half of 2020.

Secondly, the source claims that an RF 50mm f/1.8 has been shown on a roadmap which didn’t include a date for an announcement.

I suspect that we’ll definitely see at least one of these lenses this year.

Note: The image used for this post is the Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 pancake.

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,615
1,627
Remains to be seen how quickly Canon will flesh out the cheaper end of the RF platform.

Why it might be a cheapo plastic fantastic:
  • There is a $1k FF body now, some folks are absolutely looking to start an FF setup on the cheap.
  • It's only f/1.8 and historically a simple DG design for 50mm is bone cheap to make -- folks may balk at a pricey f/1.8 fifty when they've been cheap from Canon for decades.
  • They want to keep it very small
Why it might be a nice but not L $500-ish lens
  • They are trolling me
  • They make this a 1:2 macro as well (that would be something)
  • They change their lens tier strategy to:
    • Best = buy the L RF lens
    • Middle = buy a pricier RF version of the EF middle price point (EF 50 f/1.4 USM)
    • Lowest = adapt the nifty fifty EF because the RF mount will never get that crap -- this may let them claim that there are three price points while only having to offer two new RF lenses.
Hard to say.

But it will probably be the trolling me reason.

- A
 

David

I'm New Here
Sep 28, 2013
24
16
I repeatedly post in this forum: A RF 40mm f2.0L would become one of Canons most successful prime lenses IMHO. Why the 'L' should be reserved for HQ, large and fast lenses and the other choice is small, cheap and low IQ is not comprehensible. A fine small 'L' prime for the new mirrorless R would provide a small, light and easily portable do-everything-FF-combo with excellent IQ. Canon could call it LS, if they want, for Lsmall and open a new lens line for small f2.0 HQ primes around 28/40/75mm. This surely would come closer to the 'mirrorless should be smaller' wish-list than todays impractical huge f1.2 RF L-prime lenses for those very rare use cases.
 

Mark3794

EOS 90D
Sep 4, 2018
148
433
Remains to be seen how quickly Canon will flesh out the cheaper end of the RF platform.

Why it might be a cheapo plastic fantastic:
  • There is a $1k FF body now, some folks are absolutely looking to start an FF setup on the cheap.
  • It's only f/1.8 and historically a simple DG design for 50mm is bone cheap to make -- folks may balk at a pricey f/1.8 fifty when they've been cheap from Canon for decades.
  • They want to keep it very small
Why it might be a nice but not L $500-ish lens
  • They are trolling me
  • They make this a 1:2 macro as well (that would be something)
  • They change their lens tier strategy to:
    • Best = buy the L RF lens
    • Middle = buy a pricier RF version of the EF middle price point (EF 50 f/1.4 USM)
    • Lowest = adapt the nifty fifty EF because the RF mount will never get that crap -- this may let them claim that there are three price points while only having to offer two new RF lenses.
Hard to say.

But it will probably be the trolling me reason.

- A
You know it's gonna be a RF 50mm 1.4 IS USM just to troll you and everyone that really needs a good EF 50mm 1.4
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,615
1,627
I repeatedly post in this forum: A RF 40mm f2.0L would become one of Canons most successful prime lenses IMHO. Why the 'L' should be reserved for HQ, large and fast lenses and the other choice is small, cheap and low IQ is not comprehensible. A fine small 'L' prime for the new mirrorless R would provide a small, light and easily portable do-everything-FF-combo with excellent IQ. Canon could call it LS, if they want, for Lsmall and open a new lens line for small f2.0 HQ primes around 28/40/75mm. This surely would come closer to the 'mirrorless should be smaller' wish-list than todays impractical huge f1.2 RF L-prime lenses for those very rare use cases.

I'm down with f/2 and keeping it small, but calling it L (of any sort) will doom this idea. L = $$$ and no one in their right mind will part with bigger dollars for an f/2 standard prime when heretofore EF had small, faster than f/2 lenses and both were under $500.

Love the idea personally, but the market will laugh and turn these into overpriced problem children, like the EF non-L 24/28/35 IS refreshes.

Now, yanking the L, I'd be down with a $500 'small line' of non-L RF primes, but haven't they somewhat already started that line with the RF 35 f/1.8 STM 1:2 Macro? Why not just make more of those to build a simple non-L prime roster of 24 / 35 / 50 / 85? (Bonus points if all of them are 1:2 macro)

- A
 
  • Like
Reactions: trulandphoto

privatebydesign

Garfield is back...
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,051
3,161
120
I repeatedly post in this forum: A RF 40mm f2.0L would become one of Canons most successful prime lenses IMHO.
I strongly disagree with that. The 40mm length would not be considered the classic 35mm or the ubiquitous 50mm that tradition has drummed into people are the 'right' focal lengths. Further, how many people choose the 35mm f2 IS over the 35mm f1.4 L if they could buy either? I'd guess very very few (apart from me), f2 just isn't considered a premium/serious aperture.
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,657
881
Remains to be seen how quickly Canon will flesh out the cheaper end of the RF platform.

Why it might be a cheapo plastic fantastic:
  • There is a $1k FF body now, some folks are absolutely looking to start an FF setup on the cheap.
  • It's only f/1.8 and historically a simple DG design for 50mm is bone cheap to make -- folks may balk at a pricey f/1.8 fifty when they've been cheap from Canon for decades.
  • They want to keep it very small
Why it might be a nice but not L $500-ish lens
  • They are trolling me
  • They make this a 1:2 macro as well (that would be something)
  • They change their lens tier strategy to:
    • Best = buy the L RF lens
    • Middle = buy a pricier RF version of the EF middle price point (EF 50 f/1.4 USM)
    • Lowest = adapt the nifty fifty EF because the RF mount will never get that crap -- this may let them claim that there are three price points while only having to offer two new RF lenses.
Hard to say.

But it will probably be the trolling me reason.

- A
For now:
You can have RF 50 1.2L (but no IS) and/or RF 35 1.8 IS (but no 50mm).
So they may troll you. But just a little if that helps :ROFLMAO:
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,615
1,627
Further, how many people choose the 35mm f2 IS over the 35mm f1.4 L if they could buy either? I'd guess very very few (apart from me), f2 just isn't considered a premium/serious aperture.

Agree with PBD. I personally love a compact FF setup with f/2 primes and f/4 zooms, but neither are considered premium and trying to do so will result in lower demand.
  • EF 24-70 f/4L IS was a wonderful design IMHO -- compact, 0.7x macro, hybrid IS, etc. Dropped from initial asking of $1499 down to ~ $900 pretty quickly. There was a rather loud user backlash to that initial asking, if I recall.
  • The 24/28/35 IS refreshes are wonderful lenses that in some case outperformed the last-gen L primes of the same FLs. Initial asking price was $749-849 if memory serves, and (we presume) they tanked commercially because the prices plummeted -- and within the first year.
As much as there absolutely is a push to make things smaller, it appears that Canon is trying to do that organically / across the board without it being a spec takeaway from the EF version. They dramatically reduced the size of the 70-200 2.8, but giving up a stop was never on the table -- so they switched it to an externally zooming design. The 24-105L was lovingly tweaked to reduce its size, but they didn't drop it down to a 24-70 or make it f/5.6 to do it.

I just don't think that Canon wants to gamble on small and premium. They may leave that business to the two fixed lens premium FF offerings (Leica Q, Sony RX1R, etc.).

- A
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aaron D

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,615
1,627
For now:
You can have RF 50 1.2L (but no IS) and/or RF 35 1.8 IS (but no 50mm).
So they may troll you. But just a little if that helps :ROFLMAO:

As brilliant as the RF 50L is (tried one out with a CPS loaner), it's still a pickle jar. I'd prefer smaller and pitching whatever retrofocus paperweight nonsense is in there.

Lack of IS does not kill me so much as disappoint me, and we all presume that IBIS has to eventually surface on RF. As I've spec wishlisted before, I'd take a proper new optical design EF 50 f/1.4 sans IS if the AF was fire-and-forget money at f/1.4.

I don't need an L with this, I just a basically competent 50 prime that every other manufacturer offers -- focuses consistently and reliably and delivers useful content wider than f/2. No EF lens does that today. The RF does (and I would likely get one if I convert from EF), but I don't need face splitting sharpness and all that heft.

- A
 

David

I'm New Here
Sep 28, 2013
24
16
I strongly disagree with that. The 40mm length would not be considered the classic 35mm or the ubiquitous 50mm that tradition has drummed into people are the 'right' focal lengths. Further, how many people choose the 35mm f2 IS over the 35mm f1.4 L if they could buy either? I'd guess very very few (apart from me), f2 just isn't considered a premium/serious aperture.
If there will ever come a RF 35mm f1.4L. It is more likely a giant f1.2L even larger than the RF50L since those 35mm' always are bigger than the 50mm'. Many shake their heads in lack of understanding Canon's decision to create those very big lenses. But if you ever used the fine Zeiss Batis 2/40 you'd understand my intention. Canon needs such a lens... :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Groundhog

slclick

Cyclist, photog, drummer & sardonic haiku writer
Dec 17, 2013
4,164
2,154
I hope it's a $500 lens like RF 35mm/1.8 and not a $100 cheapo lens like EF 50/1.8. We've been waiting for a moderately priced decent 50mm prime for years, Canon!
However the 40 2.8 is by far the best bang for your buck lens in the EF lineup. Now, If I was in the R ecosystem I'd rather have something like the Voigtlander Ultron but with better corners. With that flange, this might be amazingly small and well controlled.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rule556

slclick

Cyclist, photog, drummer & sardonic haiku writer
Dec 17, 2013
4,164
2,154
As brilliant as the RF 50L is (tried one out with a CPS loaner), it's still a pickle jar. I'd prefer smaller and pitching whatever retrofocus paperweight nonsense is in there.

Lack of IS does not kill me so much as disappoint me, and we all presume that IBIS has to eventually surface on RF. As I've spec wishlisted before, I'd take a proper new optical design EF 50 f/1.4 sans IS if the AF was fire-and-forget money at f/1.4.

I don't need an L with this, I just a basically competent 50 prime that every other manufacturer offers -- focuses consistently and reliably and delivers useful content wider than f/2. No EF lens does that today. The RF does (and I would likely get one if I convert from EF), but I don't need face splitting sharpness and all that heft.

- A
He's back!
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,615
1,627
If there will ever come a RF 35mm f1.4L. It is more likely a giant f1.2L even larger than the RF50L since those 35mm' always are bigger than the 50mm'. Many shake their heads in lack of understanding Canon's decision to create those very big lenses. But if you ever used the fine Zeiss Batis 2/40 you'd understand my intention. Canon needs such a lens... :)

100% yes an RF 35L will happen -- f/1.4 vs. f/1.2 remains to be seen. I'd be pretty surprised if Canon shot 1.2 all the way up and down the (not too long) prime spectrum. Some would get bonkers huge.

But I'd expect RF L lenses for what we have in EF, but surely they'll start with the staples:

24L = coming, lower priority​
35L = coming​
50L = done​
85L = done (twice!)​
100L Macro = coming, higher priority (no native 1:1 macro in the system yet)​
135L mondo pickle jar of destiny = eventually, no idea when (it's a prestige lens they might have led with, but it's not a 'must' so much as a bug zapper to draw folks to the brand)​

There will be more lenses of course, but above are the staples one would expect.

- A
 

amorse

EOS RP
Jan 26, 2017
704
869
www.instagram.com
....
Why it might be a cheapo plastic fantastic:
  • There is a $1k FF body now, some folks are absolutely looking to start an FF setup on the cheap.
  • It's only f/1.8 and historically a simple DG design for 50mm is bone cheap to make -- folks may balk at a pricey f/1.8 fifty when they've been cheap from Canon for decades.
  • They want to keep it very small
...
My money is on cheaper 50mm. I was kind of surprised in talking with friends and colleagues who are looking at photography as a new hobby - more than I would have expected were cross-shopping the m50 and the RP as a starting point for getting into photography. The deciding factor was the lenses - they weren't ready to pony up for more of the RF glass, while the M glass was more reasonable and included at a better price point. Yes, very small sample size, but surprising never the less.

If consumers are choosing between the M series and R series bodes, anything that encourages conversion up to full frame creates some more opportunity for Canon in the long run for sales of other lenses - they just need something to get them into the ecosystem. I guess we'll see soon!