Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM Confirmed for 2024 [CR3]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
The Leica M 35/1.4 before the 35/1.4 ASPH was super short too: I recall it stuck out of the body only about 30mm. I had the ASPH though. (It worked fine on the R but I sold it to buy the R5! My photo hobby has to sort of self-cannibalize.)
Upvote
0
Finally, but I think it’s clear from the patent specs why this lens has taken so long to arrive.
Sure, the f1.2 aperture makes a nice statement. However! This lens is substantially larger / longer than the current (and rather excellent) EF 35mm f1.4iiL. Even with the EF to Rf adapter, the EF version is shorter. 155mm long is very large for a 35mm prime.
I thought mirrorless mounts would make shorter wide angle lenses!
I’m guessing that Canon management have sent this optical formula back to engineering several times to bring some kind of benefit over the existing EF version…only to find that at f1.2, this lens becomes very portly and there’s no way around this simple fact. To build the best AF 35mm lens also means building the biggest 35mm lens! Even if this new lens proves to be optically stellar, it’s going to be a tough sell against the current EF version.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
The patent for the EF35L f/1.4 II for 2015 shows 129.16mm as the total length, if the elements protrude the same amount, it is only (155 - 129 lens length) - (44 - 20 flange distance) = 2mm longer than its EF predecessor.
That is still surprising to me, since 35mm is
Or they let Sigma design it
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Yes I was eluding to the suprising retro focus design on a dedicated RF mount lens. I'm pretty certain if Canon could make this new lens smaller they would.The patent for the EF35L f/1.4 II for 2015 shows 129.16mm as the total length, if the elements protrude the same amount, it is only (155 - 129 lens length) - (44 - 20 flange distance) = 2mm longer than its EF predecessor.
That is still surprising to me, since 35mm is less than the 20mm flange distance, so it wouldn't need to be retrofocus anymore. Maybe Canon designed it with fragile photographer egos in mind, bigger is better, no?
Or they let Sigma design it
I'm sure there's a bunch of photographers who will buy this lens "because". It's new and shiney and they want bragging rites. To prove to everyone they are true Canon belivers. But for many who already have a fine example of the EF version...one has to question the side grade.
I doubt that it'll be much sharper wide open than the current EF mkII. It's going to have a 1/3rd of a stop brighter aperture which might add some minor creative aspects. But it's going to be big, heavy and REALLY expensive.
Professional Wedding photographers who make their living out of their work need to be wise with every piece of gear investment and will probably wait until they have 10-15 years of use out of their current EF 35mm f1.4 IIL before they side grade. A lot of wedding photographers are female and they really will not welcome the additonal bulk.
Upvote
0
Looking forward to seeing this in the flesh as I use a 10 year old Sigma Art version - which is perfectly fine / the last of my EF mounts...
I do hope it's not too heavy, carrying that with the 85mm F1.2 and I'll soon look like Arnold Schwarzenegger from back in the day!
I do hope it's not too heavy, carrying that with the 85mm F1.2 and I'll soon look like Arnold Schwarzenegger from back in the day!
Upvote
0
It's more likely they understood optical physics before they graduated from university and simply were directed to in what order to produce which lenses based on what their research suggests will be most profitable first.
Upvote
0
I had a wonderful 1963 Leica M 35mm f2 lens. My favourite lens in the Kodachrome years.
That is, before I tried to use it on a digital Leica M. In order to get a picture sharp from edge to edge, f11 was needed. Quickly, I traded this "character" lens for a Summilux 35 Aspherical. If character means unsharp, I happily pass...
And it's absolutely true, pictures can be unsharpened, but not the opposite.
Meyer Trioplan soap bubble bokeh? Some like it, others don't. Just a matter of personal preferences...
Most new lenses from the same brand are simply better than their predecessors (EF vs. RF).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
One of the best combos is 35 on one camera and 85 on the other camera. Canon has now made both of these 1.2 massive hulks, with no L version option that is lighter or smaller. I am not sure what they are thinking, or how they can't see that they would sell way more of these at ~$500 and 8oz lighter in a 1.4 version. At this point I would even take a decently made f1.8, but we only get either one extreme or the other. The clearest and best option for most will be to just hold on to the wonderful EF 35 II.
Upvote
0
Probably someone complaining about Canon's RF narrow aperture lenses bought your 1963 lens and promptly attached it to an adapter for their apsc camera
Upvote
0
Maybe, since the centre was quite sharp and contrasty. Or, more probable, a lover of "character" lenses...
But certainly not a collector, my lenses are well-used (more silver than black...).
Upvote
0
Yes, it’s almost as if someone doesn’t really understand what lenses would best serve the current market and yield the greatest profit. I wonder who that is? The company that has led the ILC market for 20 years…or you.
Hmmmm, that’s a real head-scratcher…
Upvote
0
Similar threads
