Pushing Boundaries: Canon to Announce First-Ever Fast Wide Prime Lens

[DhlcadR6]

A RF 14mm f1.4 that will be same size as Sony\'s 14GM will be amazing

 

[AJ]

My second guess is that this will be the L lens which gets announced alongside the R6mkiii. In terms of highlighting the low light capabilities, this would make perfect sense(to me).

Yes.
If so, I wonder if there will be a R6 mk3 a. It's been a long time since Canon has released an astro-specific camera.

 

[Hickup]

There is no 14 f/1.4. Sigma has the 14 f/1.8 ART which worked great on the 5D4. I really hope this lens is a 14mm or wider f/1.4. Just picked up the 24 VCM so I can sell my 24 STM.

Sigma has the 14mm F1,4 DG DN | Art for Full Frame L Mount or E-Mount. I'm not aware of another lens with those specs either. If there is one for EF or RF, it would end up in my shopping cart fast, hints are welcome. Right now I still use 2 Sigma 14mm F1.8 for EF mount, one Cine, one normal Art. They are great, but an even faster lens or wider lens would be very welcome by me. I'm waiting for a few astro focused reports on the Canon RF 20mm F1.4 L VCM.

 

[Besisika]

I am quite happy with the 20/1.4 VCM that came yesterday (my mini review here, including coma/astigmatism).

Lucky you! I am still waiting for my bank account to get the 20 VCM. My dream lens. I would pair it with a 12mm 1.4 any time.

 

[josephandrews222]

I enjoy reading this sort of news...it is why I stop by CR daily.

No snark intended here:

How many of these 'fast wide prime lenses' will be manufactured and sold?

Now (and with a bit of snark...):

How many of those sold will be purchased by CR readers?

 

[roby17269]

I enjoy reading this sort of news...it is why I stop by CR daily.

No snark intended here:

How many of these 'fast wide prime lenses' will be manufactured and sold?

Now (and with a bit of snark...):

How many of those sold will be purchased by CR readers?

in relative % terms.... more than the ones purchased by the general populace

 

[mxwphoto]

If 12mm 1.4 I would definitely love it! The DOF at 1.4 is still so deep:

Subject distance​	12 ft​
Depth of field​
Near limit	5.79 ft​
Far limit	Infinity​
Total	Infinite​
In front of subject	6.2 ft​
Behind subject	Infinite​
Hyperfocal distance	11.2 ft​
Circle of confusion	0.03 mm​

 

[Ph0t0]

Technically, the 20/1.4 is already an ultrawide, fast prime since it's <24mm. But probably you're correct, but "A World’s First Fast Ultra-Wide" with the qualifier as 'for the RF mount' would be pretty lame. I hope they really do come out with a world's first. A 10mm f/1.8, 12mm f/1.4, a TS-E 14mm f/2, or something like that.

I would love to see a ultra wide lens with a shift function. I personally don't really use tilt much with wide lenses. But a 16mm f1.8 (or similar) lens with shift function would be crazy good for night time landscapes.
But I have no idea if this is even possible ... I mean ... how big would a lense like that have to be?

 

[David - Sydney]

Yes.
If so, I wonder if there will be a R6 mk3 a. It's been a long time since Canon has released an astro-specific camera.

Indeed. Very much a niche but Canon has done it before.... unless they don't want to compete with Spencers/Kolari who offer much more detailed options.
Should be a relatively simple new SKU.

 

[David - Sydney]

A RF 14mm f1.4 that will be same size as Sony\'s 14GM will be amazing

A RF14/1.4 will have a front element of 100mm bigger than the Sony's 14/1.8 element. Bulbous for sure.
Optical vs profile correction (or probably both) is a good question. Severe vignetting/ coma etc performance will be very interesting.

 

[EricN]

A RF14/1.4 will have a front element of 100mm bigger than the Sony's 14/1.8 element. Bulbous for sure.
Optical vs profile correction (or probably both) is a good question. Severe vignetting/ coma etc performance will be very interesting.

Is there a formula to calculate this?

 

[koenkooi]

A RF14/1.4 will have a front element of 100mm bigger than the Sony's 14/1.8 element. Bulbous for sure.
Optical vs profile correction (or probably both) is a good question. Severe vignetting/ coma etc performance will be very interesting.

14mm divided by 1.4 is 10mm, not 100mm. Of course it doesn't come out to that for UWAs usally, but 100mm seems a bit extreme.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Yes.
If so, I wonder if there will be a R6 mk3 a. It's been a long time since Canon has released an astro-specific camera.

The last astro specific camera was the EOS Ra (released in 2019?"). It was officially discontinued by Canon. At mpb.com it is selling at higher price point then its original suggested retail price. So, I guess there seems to be some kind of demand there.

 

[David - Sydney]

14mm divided by 1.4 is 10mm, not 100mm. Of course it doesn't come out to that for UWAs usally, but 100mm seems a bit extreme.

I wonder when the calculation for the front element diameter changes from a simple focal length/max aperture to something different.
Maybe when the front element changes to bulbous but I agree that UWA aren't 100mm diameter.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I wonder when the calculation for the front element diameter changes from a simple focal length/max aperture to something different.
Maybe when the front element changes to bulbous but I agree that UWA aren't 100mm diameter.

The focal length / aperture approximation for front element diameter really only applies to telephoto lens designs.

FWIW, here are the values for FL/A (in parentheses) and measured front element diameters for several of my prime lenses.

RF 20/1.4 (14.3 mm) - 44 mm
RF 24/1.4 (17.1 mm) - 41 mm
RF 24/1.8 (13.3 mm) - 34 mm
RF 28/2.8 (10 mm) - 11 mm
RF 85/1.2 (70.8 mm) - 73 mm
RF 100/2.8 (35.7 mm) - 36 mm
EF 600/4 (150 mm) - 143 mm

(The 600/4 measurement is smaller than the nominal lens spec values but consistent with the real, pre-rounding values (i.e., it’s really a 588mm f/4.12 lens.)

 

[whomst]

The focal length / aperture approximation for front element diameter really only applies to telephoto lens designs.

FWIW, here are the values for FL/A (in parentheses) and measured front element diameters for several of my prime lenses.

RF 20/1.4 (14.3 mm) - 44 mm
RF 24/1.4 (17.1 mm) - 41 mm
RF 24/1.8 (13.3 mm) - 34 mm
RF 28/2.8 (10 mm) - 11 mm
RF 85/1.2 (70.8 mm) - 73 mm
RF 100/2.8 (35.7 mm) - 36 mm
EF 600/4 (150 mm) - 143 mm

(The 600/4 measurement is smaller than the nominal lens spec values but consistent with the real, pre-rounding values (i.e., it’s really a 588mm f/4.12 lens.)

Yeah I think it should be roughly correct until the lens is retrofocal, so anything shorter than the 28 pancake would most likely have a much larger front element than the fl/a number would suggest and as they get longer they should match more closely

 

[David - Sydney]

Yeah I think it should be roughly correct until the lens is retrofocal, so anything shorter than the 28 pancake would most likely have a much larger front element than the fl/a number would suggest and as they get longer they should match more closely

It seems that any front element ~>100mm seems to push the prices skyhigh - I assume because they are made with a lot of labour.
I wonder how much labour is involved with the larger wide angle/bulbous elements. The RF10-20/4 seems to be a reasonable price considering how extreme it is.

 

[Zadak]

It seems that any front element ~>100mm seems to push the prices skyhigh - I assume because they are made with a lot of labour.
I wonder how much labour is involved with the larger wide angle/bulbous elements. The RF10-20/4 seems to be a reasonable price considering how extreme it is.

It's labor as in the tools required, the yield of the glass, etc.
But yeah overall the total cost to make probably goes up exponentially the bigger they are

 

[EricN]

The focal length / aperture approximation for front element diameter really only applies to telephoto lens designs.

FWIW, here are the values for FL/A (in parentheses) and measured front element diameters for several of my prime lenses.

RF 20/1.4 (14.3 mm) - 44 mm
RF 24/1.4 (17.1 mm) - 41 mm
RF 24/1.8 (13.3 mm) - 34 mm
RF 28/2.8 (10 mm) - 11 mm
RF 85/1.2 (70.8 mm) - 73 mm
RF 100/2.8 (35.7 mm) - 36 mm
EF 600/4 (150 mm) - 143 mm

(The 600/4 measurement is smaller than the nominal lens spec values but consistent with the real, pre-rounding values (i.e., it’s really a 588mm f/4.12 lens.)

I had noticed that all the f/1.4 lenses use a 67mm filter thread. So your comment makes me suspect they chose 67mm because it's large enough for 60.7mm needed for 85mm f/1.4. Is that reasonable?

 

[davidespinosa]

Sounds like Canon hasn't made a serious astro lens for a long time.
What was the last serious one ?