Close Menu

    Third Party Lenses for the RF mount

    By Updated:102 Comments6 Mins Read Third Party Lenses
    third party RF lenses

    Here is a listing of all of the available third-party lenses for the RF mount. Canon has been coming down on third-party lenses with autofocus for patent violations, so most lenses out there are manual focus only. We assume that we will see third-party autofocus lenses for the RF mount in the future.

    If we're missing any RF mount lenses, please let us know.

    7artisans | AstrHori | Brightin Star | Cheecar | Fujinon | Funleader | IRIX | KamLan | Kipon | Lensbaby | Meike | Meyer-Optik Görlitz | Mitakon Zhongyi | NiSi | Rokinon | Samyang | SIGMA | Sirui | Tamron | Tokina | TTArtisan | Venus Optics/Laowa | Vazen | Viltrox | Yasuhara | Yongnuo

    7artisans

    Cinema Lenses

    AstrHori

    Brightin Star

    Cheecar

    • Cheecar RF 14mm f/2.8

    Fujinon

    Cinema Lenses

    Funleader

    IRIX

    Cinema Lenses

    KamLan

    • KamLan RF 55mm f/1.4 (unknown price)

    Kipon

    Lensbaby

    Lomography

    Meike

    Cinema Lenses

    Meyer-Optik Görlitz

    Mitakon Zhongyi

    Cinema Lenses

    NiSi

    Rokinon

    Cinema Lenses

    Samyang

    Samyang no longer manufactures RF mount lenses in most of the world. Samyang still makes RF mount lenses under the Rokinon brand.

    Cinema Lenses

    SIGMA

    SIGMA does not currently offer any RF mount lenses, and there is no word on when we can expect SIGMA to enter the market.

    Sirui

    Cinema Lenses

    Tamron

    As with SIGMA, Tamron does not have any RF mount lenses, and there is no timeline for them to enter the market.

    Tokina

    TTArtisan

    Vazen

    Cinema Lenses

    Venus Optics

    Cinema Lenses

    Viltrox

    Autofocus Lenses

    • Viltrox AF 85 / 1.8 STM ED IF

    Yasuhara

    Yongnuo

    Autofocus Lenses

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    102 comments

    3. While only Samyang/Rokinon offers them right now, I think that with MILC largely eliminating the difference in autofocus accuracy between native and 3rd party glass, there's never been a stronger reason to invest in these cheaper lenses.
    6. Basically all 3rd party lenses ready for Sony E can easily come for RF.
      Samyang 45 1.8 and 75 1.8 for example.
      Or the compact Tamron 2.8 zoom lenses.

      P.S. + Sigma 85 1.4 DN
    7. I think we may end up needing a different term to describe RF mounts from third parties if they're not *true* RF (using high speed protocols, with control ring)

      Because, as we all know, it's a lot easier just to use the mechanical mount of the RF system but send the 1987 vintage EF protocols to the camera - which Sigma and the other third parties finally understand after quite a long time of getting it almost but not quite right.

      I'd call them EF-R lenses, for lenses using the RF mount with EF protocols..

      Does it really matter?

      I doubt that an 'EF-R' lens would focus as fast as a native RF lens could. They still could be very good lenses, maybe the difference won't be that much in real world use. But I would hesitate to call them true 'RF' lenses.
    8. I think we may end up needing a different term to describe RF mounts from third parties if they're not *true* RF (using high speed protocols, with control ring)

      Because, as we all know, it's a lot easier just to use the mechanical mount of the RF system but send the 1987 vintage EF protocols to the camera - which Sigma and the other third parties finally understand after quite a long time of getting it almost but not quite right.

      I'd call them EF-R lenses, for lenses using the RF mount with EF protocols..

      Does it really matter?

      I doubt that an 'EF-R' lens would focus as fast as a native RF lens could. They still could be very good lenses, maybe the difference won't be that much in real world use. But I would hesitate to call them true 'RF' lenses.

      I don't think so, they are lenses with native RF mounts, I don't care too much about what optical design they use or if they use the EF or RF protocols. Canon's RF 50 f/1.8 is basically a 50-year-old optical design with a few tweaks and updated element types and the control ring. Whether or not they're manual focus or autofocus doesn't really change that. Making up a name like "EF-R" would confuse everyone.
    10. From https://alikgriffin.com/list-of-canon-rf-lenses/ I also found:

      alikgriffin.com

      Yasuhara Anthy 35mm f1.8 Review & Sample Photos | Alik Griffin

      The Yasuhara Anthy 35mm f1.8 is a compact full manual full-frame mirrorless lens. With a bright f1.8 aperture the lens is a fantastic choice for low light shooters or portrait shooters that love that…
      alikgriffin.com alikgriffin.com
      List of Yasuhara LensesElementsFilterCheck Price
      Anthy 35mm f1.8 Review9/752mmAvailable

      Plus he/they expect more LAOWA / Venus Optics coming soon:
      9mm f5.614/10—coming soon
      11mm f4.514/10 Ø62mmcoming soon

      Viltrox ?:
      Lens NameElementsFilter SizeCheck Price
      Viltrox 20mm f1.812/9——
    11. I think we may end up needing a different term to describe RF mounts from third parties if they're not *true* RF (using high speed protocols, with control ring)

      Because, as we all know, it's a lot easier just to use the mechanical mount of the RF system but send the 1987 vintage EF protocols to the camera - which Sigma and the other third parties finally understand after quite a long time of getting it almost but not quite right.

      I'd call them EF-R lenses, for lenses using the RF mount with EF protocols..

      Does it really matter?

      I doubt that an 'EF-R' lens would focus as fast as a native RF lens could. They still could be very good lenses, maybe the difference won't be that much in real world use. But I would hesitate to call them true 'RF' lenses.

      I have the Sigma EF 70-200mm F2.8 DG OS HSM on my R6, and I don't know if it's physically possible to focus faster than that lens does.
    12. I have the Sigma EF 70-200mm F2.8 DG OS HSM on my R6, and I don't know if it's physically possible to focus faster than that lens does.

      Yeah, I wonder if the supposedly faster RF protocols aren't a whole lot of marketing smoke.
    14. I'm really interested in getting a third-party lense for astro shots as soon as movement restrictions allow me to go to dark sky places. Does anybody have any experience on the following lenses:

      Laowa Venus 12mm F2.8 Zero-D
      Laowa 15mm F2 FE Zero-D
      Samyang RF 14mm F2.8

      I'd really appreciate every feedback on either one of these lenses.

      I use to own the Sigma EF 20 F1.4 but I wasn't entirely happy with it (not wide enough/ RF Lenses seem to be way sharper & less coma etc.) so I sold and I've searching ever since.
    15. Does not paint a good picture for aftermarket RF lenses with AF, they will need constant updates.

      But I am fine with using adapted EF or Canon RF lenses, they work just fine, I don't see the point of buying into the RF system to use aftermarket glass when the whole point is to have that wider mount diameter with lenses specifically designed for it.
    16. Does not paint a good picture for aftermarket RF lenses with AF, they will need constant updates.

      But I am fine with using adapted EF or Canon RF lenses, they work just fine, I don't see the point of buying into the RF system to use aftermarket glass when the whole point is to have that wider mount diameter with lenses specifically designed for it.

      3rd parties design glass specifically for RF mount cameras, too.

      I have had no issues with my EF Sigma 35/1.4 mounted on an EOS RP with the RF adapter.

      I wonder if Alex Barrera's problems with the Samyang AF 85/1.4 have more to do with his R5 than they do the lens, and I have read previously that once the R5 updated to the latest firmware, problems with the Samyang were eliminated. I cannot confirm this with my own experience just yet.

      EDIT: many commenters on the video are saying that with version 3 camera firmware, the lens works just fine. It may not be a lens firmware issue at all.
    17. I can highly reccomend the Kipon offerings. I have the 75/2.4 and its fantastic. A friend of mine has the 35/2.4 and has used it in nationally published commercial architectural photo shoots. I plan on picking up one of them soon too!

      They are small and light, yet feel solid. Full metal construction. Styling is very Leica-esque. Image quality is great, and the rendering sharp, but with a nice sense of depth. The only trade off is full manual control and relatively slow max aperture.
    18. In his interview, didn't SIGMA CEO Kazuto Yamaki indicate that they are already operating at max capacity? That would suggest they can't introduce a new lens until they either expand capacity - which didn't sound like 'the plan' in the interview; or discontinue a less popular product to free up production capacity.

      So it might be a little while. I'm looking forward to a SIGMA ART in RF.
    19. In his interview, didn't SIGMA CEO Kazuto Yamaki indicate that they are already operating at max capacity? That would suggest they can't introduce a new lens until they either expand capacity - which didn't sound like 'the plan' in the interview; or discontinue a less popular product to free up production capacity.

      So it might be a little while. I'm looking forward to a SIGMA ART in RF.

      It'll probably be the latter, there is always dead weight in a lineup.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment