# Patent: Canon RF 18-45mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM for APS-C sensor



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 12, 2021)

> A Canon RF 18-45mm lens has been on the Canon Rumors RF lens roadmap for quite some time, and I have always thought it was a weird choice for full-frame cameras, I have thought in the past that the lens would work well for both full-frame and APS-C image sensors.
> A new patent from Canon shows an RF 18-45mm f/4.5-6.3 for what appears to be an APS-C sensor.  I say RF because I don’t believe there will be any new EF-M lenses, though this patent may just be to protect design ideas and won’t come to market.
> The image height of 12.44mm-13.66mm lines up with an APS-C application.
> Canon RF 18-45mm f/4.5-6.3
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## BBarn (Oct 12, 2021)

Encouraging news for those wishing for an APS-C R body. OTOH, it leaves me wondering if there'll ever be a truly compact FF RF series zoom lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 12, 2021)

Certainly consistent with APS-C. Even if there are more EF-M lenses, since there's already an EF-M 15-45mm, would Canon make an 18-45mm for that mount? Maybe – it could be for EF-M and designed to be super cheap. Both the M18-55 and M15-45 were f/3.5-5.6, this patent is f/4.5-6.3, and slower is cheaper. Canon updated the EF-S 18-55mm several times, including several 'updates' that were mainly to lower production costs. 

This forum focuses strongly on FF and higher-end gear, but Canon's best-selling ILCs are the EOS M series and the low-end DSLRs still sell very well, mainly because they're cheap. So bringing the cost of entry down for the EOS M line with a cheaper standard zoom may be a more Canon wants to make.


----------



## victorshikhman (Oct 12, 2021)

Every time I think about investing in Canon's full frame lineup, I start doing a quick calculation of what it would take to replace the focal length of all my Canon APS-C/EF-S glass, and come up with some crazy number, like $10k with an RF body, easily. It makes any decision to hold my 80D and wait so much easier. If there was an RF-C body that could mount EF-S lenses, it would probably get me to spend money.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 12, 2021)

BBarn said:


> Encouraging news for those wishing for an APS-C R body. OTOH, it leaves me wondering if there'll ever be a truly compact FF RF series zoom lens.


But, not so encouraging for those hoping that an APS-C R body will be a high end replacement for the 7D. 

Best news though is that we can now start 20+ pages of debating the likelihood of an APS-C body, reach, equivalence and depth of field. Oh boy!


----------



## AJ (Oct 12, 2021)

Slower and more limited range than the EF 18-55/3.5-5.6? Seriously?? You'd be better off adapting old EF-S glass. Wake me up when there's a new 15-85/3.5-5.6 that outperforms the original.


----------



## bbasiaga (Oct 12, 2021)

victorshikhman said:


> Every time I think about investing in Canon's full frame lineup, I start doing a quick calculation of what it would take to replace the focal length of all my Canon APS-C/EF-S glass, and come up with some crazy number, like $10k with an RF body, easily. It makes any decision to hold my 80D and wait so much easier. If there was an RF-C body that could mount EF-S lenses, it would probably get me to spend money.


What you say is true. The upgrade to R from EF full frame was just the cost of a body and adapter. From EF-s glass could be adapted the same way - both the R5 and R6 will automatically go to crop mode when an EF-s lens is attached. And on the R5 that's still 18mp or so, but a lot of folks will want more than that. 

Brian


----------



## vangelismm (Oct 12, 2021)

AJ said:


> Slower and more limited range than the EF 18-55/3.5-5.6? Seriously?? You'd be better off adapting old EF-S glass. Wake me up when there's a new 15-85/3.5-5.6 that outperforms the original.


And not wide as the EF-m 15-45.


----------



## takesome1 (Oct 12, 2021)

victorshikhman said:


> Every time I think about investing in Canon's full frame lineup, I start doing a quick calculation of what it would take to replace the focal length of all my Canon APS-C/EF-S glass, and come up with some crazy number, like $10k with an RF body, easily. It makes any decision to hold my 80D and wait so much easier. If there was an RF-C body that could mount EF-S lenses, it would probably get me to spend money.



It was one of the first rules of digital photography that I learned, for a small incremental boost in IQ and equipment ability you have to pay about 3x as much.


----------



## takesome1 (Oct 12, 2021)

bbasiaga said:


> What you say is true. The upgrade to R from EF full frame was just the cost of a body and adapter. From EF-s glass could be adapted the same way - both the R5 and R6 will automatically go to crop mode when an EF-s lens is attached. And on the R5 that's still 18mp or so, but a lot of folks will want more than that.
> 
> Brian



Yes, but he needs to go with the R5 for pixel density to keep the uhhh....same "reach". That would cost $2,500 more than a 80d and accomplish very little.


----------



## wsmith96 (Oct 12, 2021)

Maybe aps-c isn't where this is going. Maybe their crop option could be aps-h?


----------



## koenkooi (Oct 12, 2021)

neuroanatomist said:


> [..]This forum focuses strongly on FF and higher-end gear, but Canon's best-selling ILCs are the EOS M series and the low-end DSLRs still sell very well, mainly because they're cheap. So bringing the cost of entry down for the EOS M line with a cheaper standard zoom may be a more Canon wants to make.


I really wish Canon would release an M200 sized model that supports eye-AF in servo mode. I still use the original M when I want to bring a small camera, the M6II is quite big compared to that. 
OTOH, it's fall in my region now and all my insulated jackets and parkas have big enough pockets for the M6II+32mm


----------



## victorshikhman (Oct 12, 2021)

wsmith96 said:


> Maybe aps-c isn't where this is going. Maybe their crop option could be aps-h?


That would be awkward, no? Yet another lens/sensor format, a new 1.3x crop in the consumer/pro photo/video space? Would negate the cost and reach advantages of a smaller APS-C sensor. Canon did announce a 250MP APS-H sensor 6 years ago, but it was for industrial applications.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 12, 2021)

koenkooi said:


> I really wish Canon would release an M200 sized model that supports eye-AF in servo mode. I still use the original M when I want to bring a small camera, the M6II is quite big compared to that.
> OTOH, it's fall in my region now and all my insulated jackets and parkas have big enough pockets for the M6II+32mm


Yep – I really like the M6 for portability, and the EF-M lenses are very good (and very small).


----------



## adigoks (Oct 12, 2021)

why the original content get deleted?


----------



## Rocky (Oct 12, 2021)

"Back focus: 30.20mm 51.20mm" That is very strange. Too short for DSLR, Too long to show that it is not taking adventage of the short fringe distance of either M or R. May be it is really a cheapo lens for either M or R and with simple optics.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 12, 2021)

adigoks said:


> why the original content get deleted?


What original content? If you’re getting a 404 error from the Continue Reading link, that’s an issue with the forum and iOS/MacOS devices. The content is there, but Apple doesn’t like geospecific links.


----------



## MythPlayer (Oct 12, 2021)

vangelismm said:


> And not wide as the EF-m 15-45.


Image height is not enough cover entire frame for wide angle (Too small for canon aps-c，require 13.4mm image height)


----------



## MythPlayer (Oct 12, 2021)

Rocky said:


> "Back focus: 30.20mm 51.20mm" That is very strange. Too short for DSLR, Too long to show that it is not taking adventage of the short fringe distance of either M or R. May be it is really a cheapo lens for either M or R and with simple optics.


Maybe for EF-s Mount Lens, Check every EF-s lens mount side


----------



## vangelismm (Oct 13, 2021)

adigoks said:


> why the original content get deleted?


He is so obsessed with R apsc to read the details.


----------



## victorshikhman (Oct 19, 2021)

As a PS, I just picked up an 18-135 nano USM for $200, including taxes and shipping. I gave away the STM version to a friend who needed it for wedding photography, and three months later just kept missing this focal range versatility. Was really trying to get rid of my EFS optics and prepare for an RF future, but... I mean, come on. Think about the utility of this 18-135, with excellent stabilization, probably 3-4 stops, completely silent operation for video/mic work, for $200! I'd have to spend ten times this to get anything even close in RF world. And I've got the 10-18, 55-250 STM's, and the 24, 40, 50, 85 and 100 macro. The value proposition here, if you don't need eye-tracking, is just unbelievable. Replacing this range with RF glass would probably cost $20k. The 80D sensor is just fine. Even 4k video is not all the rage everyone thought, because we're watching almost everything on tiny screens, and unless someone is a pixel peeper, they'll never know the diff. And if canon makes even a single APS-C body with all the fancy IBIS/BSI/Eye-Animal-etc tracking, and these lenses are compatible, we're talking another decade or more of utility at minimal cost. Am I wrong?


----------

