Canon to finally announce a fast RF 35mm lens by Q3 of 2022

[SHAMwow]

I would be perfectly happy with an f1.4 but I don’t mind a big heavy prime lens. And already know it won’t be as light and compact as the Sony GM so the gear head in me is hoping for an f1.2.

I would love a 1.4, at an L level quality. I love my RF 85 1.2 and 50 1.2, but their size really is a downer sometimes. It didn't dissuade me from buying them, but if 1.4 gave me a slight smaller size I'd go for it.

 

[InchMetric]

I'll order on release day, and likely sell the RF50 f1.2, because this will be better for an all-around family indoor "street" lens with its added width and croppability. The 85 f1.2 is the complement, and the 50 probably wouldn't get much use.

 

[esglord]

i want

 

[jdavidse]

Frankly, the EF 35 1.4L II is basically perfect. The only thing an RF could offer is reduced size and weight. But if it's a 1.2, that's out the window. I'm all for switching EF to RF, and I find it nice to be rid of the adapter, but I cannot see myself being tempted by a RF 35 1.2.

 

[SNJ Ops]

S be

Frankly, the EF 35 1.4L II is basically perfect. The only thing an RF could offer is reduced size and weight. But if it's a 1.2, that's out the window. I'm all for switching EF to RF, and I find it nice to be rid of the adapter, but I cannot see myself being tempted by a RF 35 1.2.

Canon will be more than capable of making the lens even better optically and give it a more attractive price. The EF II still goes for £1800 here in the UK which is too much considering the options available from Sigma and Tamron.

 

[danfaz]

I've literally been visiting this site once a week for the last 18 months waiting for this post. Wonderful news.

Me, too!

 

[danfaz]

Frankly, the EF 35 1.4L II is basically perfect. The only thing an RF could offer is reduced size and weight. But if it's a 1.2, that's out the window. I'm all for switching EF to RF, and I find it nice to be rid of the adapter, but I cannot see myself being tempted by a RF 35 1.2.

I think there's more they can do.
I actually found the Mark II to be a bit more clinical in its rendering vs. the Mark I. Perhaps they can tweak the rendering in some different way.

 

[lnz]

Is the website is dead or canon is doing nothing at all?

 

[tron]

S be

Canon will be more than capable of making the lens even better optically and give it a more attractive price. The EF II still goes for £1800 here in the UK which is too much considering the options available from Sigma and Tamron.

Sorry I could not resist. The only way price will be more attractive is when compared from Canon's point of view (i.e more expensive than expensive!)

 

[sanj]

S be

Canon will be more than capable of making the lens even better optically and give it a more attractive price. The EF II still goes for £1800 here in the UK which is too much considering the options available from Sigma and Tamron.

It will be expensive.

 

[Rafał]

With R5 eye tracking my Sigma Art 35mm 1.4 got new life. I would love to see 1.2 from Canon, as autofocusing capabilities would make1.2 an amazing treat. On the other hand I would actually prefer to get 24mm 1.2 first.

 

[mxwphoto]

With R5 eye tracking my Sigma Art 35mm 1.4 got new life. I would love to see 1.2 from Canon, as autofocusing capabilities would make1.2 an amazing treat. On the other hand I would actually prefer to get 24mm 1.2 first.

The Eye AF on these mirrorless bodies are indeed awesome. I don't have much of a problem nailing focus even with EF 85 f1.2 ii and 135 f2, so 1.2 at 35mm is easily doable. And since we are lusting after lenses, how about a 14mm f1.4?

 

[Ozarker]

Please be f/1.2

 

[SNJ Ops]

Sorry I could not resist. The only way price will be more attractive is when compared from Canon's point of view (i.e more expensive than expensive!)

While I fully understand the need for any business to maximise profits there comes a point where a product/service is perceived to be overpriced by some. Especially when a competing product that many believe to be as good or better are much cheaper. In this case Tamron SP and Sigma Art on DSLR and across platforms again both DG DN Sigma Arts and Sony’s GM are all less expensive.

 

[vjlex]

Looking forward to this announcement, although I don't know if/when I would be able to afford it. I already bought 2 of the 3 RF lenses I have at the beginning of the year, and prices have gone up since then. Not to mention the USDJPY exchange rate is absolutely ridiculous right now, so putting off big purchases for a good while. I'm hoping it's a 1.2, and I'm betting it will be about $2700 like the 85mm. $2500 or lower, and I would definitely consider picking it up by next summer.

(Btw, is this rumor post by the actual Canon Rumors (And Information) Guy, or one of the new mods?)

 

[tron]

While I fully understand the need for any business to maximise profits there comes a point where a product/service is perceived to be overpriced by some. Especially when a competing product that many believe to be as good or better are much cheaper. In this case Tamron SP and Sigma Art on DSLR and across platforms again both DG DN Sigma Arts and Sony’s GM are all less expensive.

Even so why do you believe Canon would care? Haven't you seen the prices of the other RF lenses? Much more expensive than their EF counterparts. Just compare the EF 70-200 and RF 70-200 lenses or the 85 1.2L ones. Add 1.2L instead of 1.4 L for the 35mm version and you have an even more expensive lens.

 

[SNJ Ops]

Even so why do you believe Canon would care? Haven't you seen the prices of the other RF lenses? Much more expensive than their EF counterparts. Just compare the EF 70-200 and RF 70-200 lenses or the 85 1.2L ones. Add 1.2L instead of 1.4 L for the 35mm version and you have an even more expensive lens.

The fact that Sigma and Tamron haven’t supported the RF mount and the rumours heavily imply that this is Canon’s doing shows they care very much. I highly doubt Canon would be charging £2900 for the 100-500 if the below were available natively on RF with AF performance close to OEM glass.
Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 Sport - £1199
Tamron 100-500 f5-6.7 - £1199

By locking out Sigma and Tamron from the RF mount sure more profits for Canon but less money in Canon shooter’s pockets.

 

[YuengLinger]

I am FULLY in favor of corporations maximizing their profits! Just not at my expense.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Exactly. All interchangeable lens cameras are a niche market today. Full frame bodies are a niche within a niche. People who buy fast lenses are a niche within a niche within a niche and people who shoot with more than one brand and buy these fast high-end lenses are a niche, within a niche, within a niche, within a niche. Are we talking about a few dozen people worldwide?

You forgot to mention niche

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The fact that Sigma and Tamron haven’t supported the RF mount and the rumours heavily imply that this is Canon’s doing shows they care very much. I highly doubt Canon would be charging £2900 for the 100-500 if the below were available natively on RF with AF performance close to OEM glass.
Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 Sport - £1199
Tamron 100-500 f5-6.7 - £1199

By locking out Sigma and Tamron from the RF mount sure more profits for Canon but less money in Canon shooter’s pockets.

The RF 100-500 L does not cost much more than a new EF 100-400 L which directly competes with those lenses.
The Canon L lenses are on a different level.