# Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM specifications



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 3, 2020)

> Here are the full specifications for the Canon RF 50mm f/1.8, I expect this lens to be announced later tonight.
> *Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM:*
> 
> 6 elements in 5 groups
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Nov 3, 2020)




----------



## AE-1Burnham (Nov 3, 2020)

Interesting stuff. Let me complain, but still be happy (i.e. price): filter thread is odd size, # of apeture blades is lacking but 7 is better than 5 (...), and cool they have moved away from double gauss lens design (right, or is it just -- different..?). It will likely be my first RF lens for my EOS R (still anxious about selling my EF lenses..!).


----------



## Chaitanya (Nov 3, 2020)

So this is not part of .5x macro lenses previously announced but still a welcome improvement over EF version.


----------



## Traveler (Nov 3, 2020)

This is really a good news. I was hoping for such a small and cheap lens. If it had IS or 1:2 macro it wouldn't be that small and cheap. But 1:4 magnification is still fine (the 1:6 magnification with my EF 50mm 1.4 bothered me so much). The optical quality won't be the best in the market I guess but it's fine to me.


----------



## mb66energy (Nov 3, 2020)

1:4 max. reproduction ratio converts to 95 x 144 mm image field which is a post card sized object: Fine!
I expect a quality similar to the EF 2.8 40mm (both have one aspherical element which helps a lot wide open and in the 50mm range) and great flare resistance/contrast in contralight due to the low lens element/group count: Fine!

I will use the RF 35 due to its better 1:2 macro and the built in IS but if I wouldn't own it I would buy it without hesitation!
EDIT: And if I find out that this lens is better suited to film lessons from a tripod than 35mm I will buy this one which will well perform AF with DPAF and STM.


----------



## ritholtz (Nov 3, 2020)

We got affordable Kit lens (24-105 mm) and prime (50mm). We just need affordable telephone (70-300mm).


----------



## mb66energy (Nov 3, 2020)

AE-1Burnham said:


> Interesting stuff. Let me complain, but still be happy (i.e. price): *filter thread is odd size*, [...]



Same filter thread size like EF-M 32 and EF-M 22 - is there any chance for a convergence between RF and M camera line (with a dual flange distance mount however this will be realized)?


----------



## Dmcavoy (Nov 3, 2020)

Any word on official UK pricing? 
Hoping it's isn't just the usual swap the $ for £. 

£200 ($260) for the 50mm wouldn't be that much of a bargain when the previous Nifty Fifty's have been nearer £100.


----------



## jolyonralph (Nov 3, 2020)

AE-1Burnham said:


> Interesting stuff. Let me complain, but still be happy (i.e. price): filter thread is odd size, # of apeture blades is lacking but 7 is better than 5 (...), and cool they have moved away from double gauss lens design (right, or is it just -- different..?). It will likely be my first RF lens for my EOS R (still anxious about selling my EF lenses..!).




No it's a pure simple double-gauss design. So it's pretty much identical in capabilities to the EF 50mm STM. Slightly better macro (0.3m MFD vs 0.35m = 0.25x instead of 0.21), same number of diaphragm blades, and same weight.


----------



## VICYASA (Nov 3, 2020)

This is macro??


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Nov 3, 2020)

Seems like a affordable lense to toy around with  depending on pricing in Germany I'll order asap


----------



## Besisika (Nov 3, 2020)

Sorry for being late in the thread but does this come with a hood? Even an additional cost might interest me. I own the pancake and it is a pain to use it outdoor or near a window light. Third party hoods don't always deliver. The price is really fantastic for the time I need a 50mm, and if a native hood is available, I am all for it.


----------



## Dmcavoy (Nov 3, 2020)

Besisika said:


> Sorry for being late in the thread but does this come with a hood? Even an additional cost might interest me. I own the pancake and it is a pain to use it outdoor or near a window light. Third party hoods don't always deliver. The price is really fantastic for the time I need a 50mm, and if a native hood is available, I am all for it.


Only L series lenses come with hoods.


----------



## ozturert (Nov 3, 2020)

That's how you make a nifty-fifty!


----------



## usern4cr (Nov 3, 2020)

Wow - only $199 - that'll sell a lot of lenses, and help some people wanting to jump into the R mount system.

It's not a lens for me, as I'd prefer a 50mm f1.4L which would have great IQ & build at a more moderate size & weight than the f1.2L. But anything that helps Canon with its market share and balance sheet is good news for everyone in the R mount system.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 3, 2020)

AE-1Burnham said:


> Interesting stuff. Let me complain, but still be happy (i.e. price): filter thread is odd size, # of apeture blades is lacking but 7 is better than 5 (...), and cool they have moved away from double gauss lens design (right, or is it just -- different..?). It will likely be my first RF lens for my EOS R (still anxious about selling my EF lenses..!).


No it is a double gauss formula and appears to be very similar to that used in the 1964 Canonet rangefinder camera where a similar optical formula appeared as a 45mm f/1.7 lens. The fifth element is aspherical in the new version. (As opposed to the other Fifth Element which was a rather lovely Milla Jovovich.


I don't know what reputation this camera had as far as IQ goes, but I do remember that the simple double gauss 5 element 5 groups 40mm f/1.9 in the 1981 Canon Sure Shot AF35ML was very sharp indeed. In fact annoyingly so; it was better than my Nikkor lenses at the time.


----------



## Mike9129 (Nov 3, 2020)

I really wish this was a 1.4 because otherwise everything else is great!


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Nov 3, 2020)

$199 is a great price for a RF version of the nifty 50. The $125 of the EF 50mm F/1.8 STM is also a great price, but was kept low due to it being a tweaked and repackaged EF 50mm F/1.8 lens. Now what Canon needs to do is release an intermediate RF 50mm F/1.4 lens, possibly with IS.


----------



## mangobutter (Nov 3, 2020)

$199 is doable-i'll definitely buy it. But also definitely a bit cheeky on Canon's part for what is obviously a low-effort (albeit nice) plastic 50mm lens. I have a feeling this will go down to $149 as a normal price.


----------



## mangobutter (Nov 3, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> No it is a double gauss formula and appears to be the same as used in the 1964 Canonet rangefinder camera where the same optical formula appeared as a 45mm f/1.7 lens. The fifth element is aspherical in the new version. (As opposed to the other Fifth Element which was a rather lovely Milla Jovovich.
> View attachment 193781
> 
> I don't know what reputation this camera had as far as IQ goes, but I do remember that the simple double gauss 5 element 5 groups 40mm f/1.9 in the 1981 Canon Sure Shot AF35ML was very sharp indeed. In fact annoyingly so; it was better than my Nikkor lenses at the time.



Yeah. I'll say it again... this will be a great lens for RF owners to have in their bag, but don't expect any miracles. That extra aspherical element will no doubt increase sharpness at large apertures, but will also not do any favors for smooth bokeh. I predict the old EF STM version will have smoother background blur, but this new version will be sharper. So pick your poison.

Similar for the RF 85 F2 vs the old EF 85. Sharper yet harsher backgrounds.


----------



## mangobutter (Nov 3, 2020)

VICYASA said:


> This is macro??



Highly doubt it. Almost certainly no. but you can make it one with extension tubes =)


----------



## Aregal (Nov 3, 2020)

AE-1Burnham said:


> Interesting stuff. Let me complain, but still be happy (i.e. price): filter thread is odd size, # of apeture blades is lacking but 7 is better than 5 (...), and cool they have moved away from double gauss lens design (right, or is it just -- different..?). It will likely be my first RF lens for my EOS R (still anxious about selling my EF lenses..!).


Don't sell your EF lenses. They're still highly versatile and have "character" like the gen 1 70-200/2.8L IS....at least, that's what I keep telling myself.


----------



## Besisika (Nov 3, 2020)

Dmcavoy said:


> Only L series lenses come with hoods.


Got it! I realize that now. None of my non-L lens have a hood. Thanks,


----------



## ItsEvan23 (Nov 3, 2020)

Well this is exciting, i will most likely be selling my old ef 50.

Anyone think the R is going to come down in price soon for holidays like the RP did and others? i see adorama doing a "cyber monday" thing already


----------



## Joules (Nov 3, 2020)

ritholtz said:


> We got affordable Kit lens (24-105 mm) and prime (50mm). We just need affordable telephone (70-300mm).


Rumors have it we'll get a 100-400 4.5-7.1 instead.


----------



## trulandphoto (Nov 3, 2020)

Besisika said:


> Sorry for being late in the thread but does this come with a hood? Even an additional cost might interest me. I own the pancake and it is a pain to use it outdoor or near a window light. Third party hoods don't always deliver. The price is really fantastic for the time I need a 50mm, and if a native hood is available, I am all for it.


A good 52mm screw on hood for the 40mm pancake (and the EF-S 24mm and RF 35mm as well) is Canon's LH-DC20 designed for the Powershot S* IS series. You can probably find them used and cheap. I don't know why Canon doesn't market it for these lenses.


----------



## wockawocka (Nov 3, 2020)

STM SUCKS


----------



## Andy Westwood (Nov 3, 2020)

Well the price is OK, and it does away with the adaptor when using the EF version so I guess is will sell in high volumes.

It makes a good compact setup especially on an R body with IBIS, do we know how many stops of stabilisation with this lens on an R5 or R6.


----------



## JaimeAndresPhoto1 (Nov 3, 2020)

The rebirth of the nifty-fifty!! These are the type of lenses that will get a lot more attention from consumers. This guy paired with a EOS RP is a light-weight, killer street photography setup.


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 3, 2020)

Besisika said:


> Sorry for being late in the thread but does this come with a hood? Even an additional cost might interest me. I own the pancake and it is a pain to use it outdoor or near a window light. Third party hoods don't always deliver. The price is really fantastic for the time I need a 50mm, and if a native hood is available, I am all for it.


I guess it will be optional, as usual with non L lenses.
By the way, I have and use the 40mm pancake with its Canon lensshade (ES 52), no issues outdoors.


----------



## David the street guy (Nov 3, 2020)

I notice, sadly, that there is only one focus/control ring: you have to switch between focus and whatever else you'll want to customize it for.

The 35mm has a separate focus ring and the regular customizable control ring.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Nov 3, 2020)

This is a really realistic price for the lens and I'll certainly be picking one up. I am most pleased to see a new optical formula because the old lens was not something I wanted to relive. I appreciate these lenses for their size, weight, and price when I want to walk around NOT for work and when I travel.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 3, 2020)

LSXPhotog said:


> I am most pleased to see a new optical formula because the old lens was not something I wanted to relive.


I think you'll find that the "new optical formula" is at least 56 years old if you have a look at the first page of this thread


----------



## Joules (Nov 3, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> I think you'll find that the "new optical formula" is at least 56 years old if you have a look at the first page of this thread


You keep saying that, but do you really mean it? They look similar at a first glance, but not identical. Not to mention important aspects such as coasting, materials and modern manufacturing tolerances. Can we please wait for actual results before writing off this lens?


----------



## privatebydesign (Nov 3, 2020)

Joules said:


> You keep saying that, but do you really mean it? They look similar at a first glance, but not identical. Not to mention important aspects such as coasting, materials and modern manufacturing tolerances. Can we please wait for actual results before writing off this lens?


Yes. And no.

No reason for it to be written off, particularly given the price, but the Double-Gauss design has intrinsic limitations, https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/08/lens-geneology-part-1/ and given the comments of 6 element designs being at their limit at f2.0 it seems Canon are pushing hard with their design with 6 elements and f1.8.

The lens isn't going to break any new ground, and there is no reason why every lens should, but people would be better expecting modest results and be happily surprised than think Canon have rewritten any design rules.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 3, 2020)

Joules said:


> You keep saying that, but do you really mean it? They look similar at a first glance, but not identical. Not to mention important aspects such as coasting, materials and modern manufacturing tolerances. Can we please wait for actual results before writing off this lens?


Who's writing it off ? In a previous post on the subject I stated that the very simple double gauss lens used in the 1981 era Sure Shot AF35ML was very sharp indeed. But the fact is the basis of this optical formula was used by Canon 56 years earlier, and indeed many other 'modern lenses' are quite old formulas too. 

Certainly modern coatings, tolerances, etc make a difference. Look how sharp the 50mm STM lens is in the (very) centre at f/1.8. It's miles better than the old one. 

But Canon haven't invented a new version of the classic double gauss design for this lens, they have modified an old one.

I apologise if pointing this out has dashed hopes of an up-to-the-minute 2020 lens design.


----------



## Joules (Nov 3, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> Who's writing it off ? In a previous post on the subject I stated that the very simple double gauss lens used in the 1981 era Sure Shot AF35ML was very sharp indeed. But the fact is the basis of this optical formula was used by Canon 56 years earlier, and indeed many other 'modern lenses' are quite old formulas too.
> 
> Certainly modern coatings, tolerances, etc make a difference. Look how sharp the 50mm STM lens is in the (very) centre at f/1.8. It's miles better than the old one.
> 
> ...


Well, it appeared to me as if you were trying to demonstrate that Canon were just recycling an old design here (what is lovingly named 'crippling' when talking about camera bodies. See M50 II discussion for recent examples). And I felt like questioning that thought since I don't believe that no effort has gone into the optical design here, even if the result is just a minor tweak.

Sorry if I misinterpreted your intentions here. It just came off as 'painting the devil on the wall' to me, to use a German proverb.

Canon can make great low end offerings. If this design truly is so close to an old one, I am sure there will be a benefit associated with this. And if it is simply reduced manufacturing costs, that's still not a negative if it allows Canon to stay lucrative even at the shrinking low end of the market.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 3, 2020)

Joules said:


> Well, it appeared to me as if you were trying to demonstrate that Canon were just recycling an old design here



They are ! (With some modern tweaks) 

But that doesn't mean it's going to be bad. My favourite lens, albeit a bugger to use, is the Takumar 55mm f/1.8 from the '60s. Now there is a lens that has beautiful rendering, but at the expense of sharpness at 1.8, although as long as focus is very accurate it is acceptable. However it wouldn't be 'acceptable' on a modern test chart. If Brian at TDP had it on his 'lens quality' crops you'd cringe. 

I'm guessing that with this new 50 Canon have gone for sharpness / resolution over rendering. It may be that it is sharper across the frame than the 50 STM but probably won't give the same separation as the 50 STM although that lens itself isn't a patch on the old 55/1.8 Takumar, due, I believe, to the quality of the glass and the curvature and bonding of the rear doublet.

I'm sure the RF 50 will certainly be superb 'bang for buck'.


----------



## Joules (Nov 3, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> They are ! (With some modern tweaks)


The part in the brackets is what I was missing from your previous statements. It makes the difference in tone between 'Don' t expect this lens to perform any miracles' and 'Canon is just ripping us off again by using tech of the past'.


----------



## aceflibble (Nov 3, 2020)

I don't normally visit this site these days, but a mate clued me in that something had come up on here that I knew a thing or two about and that I might want to set y'all straight.

This is not —categorically _not_—the optical formula of the old Canonet 45mm f/1.7. Firstly, anybody should be able to stop just by looking at the diagrams that the spacing of the front two groups is different, the relative scales and sizes of most of the elements are different (the second element in particular), and the rear three elements are also positoned further back and spaced slightly differently. Also, the Canonet 45mm f/1.7 is too big for a 43mm filter thread to be possible; the front element alone is approximately 40mm, which at the angle of view of anything under about 100mm means a 43mm surround would encroach on the image, even without an actual filter being there. From the photos of the new lens we can see that its front element is _far_ smaller than this. Of course the fact one is a 50mm f/1.8 (likely around 51mm f/1.9 actual, same as the other Canon cheap 50s) while the other is a 45mm f/1.7 (actually 44.2mm f/1.72) should also clue you in that this is not the same formula.
Yes, it's six elements in five groups and yes they are in[ _vaguely_ the same shapes and order, but that's different from being the same _formula_, which if you're being technically pedantic about it would actually mean they were literally 100% identical.

Second, as someone who owns several Canonets including three 45mm f/1.7 variations and as someone who has repaired said lenses several times, I can tell you not only are the "coatings, tolerances, etc" going to be different, but the very material of the elements will also be different. The 45mm Canonets, of all apertures, use thorium in two of the inner elements. (Second and fourth, to be specific.) That isn't used any more (though there are rumours that Zhongyi have been sneaking thoriated glass into a couple of their f/0.95 designs, I've not seen any actual evidence of that yet) and there is quite a difference in the results you get from thoriated glass vs modern materials. (Not necessarily better or worse results, of course, with such things being so subjective.) This is the main reason why the later models moved to a 40mm lens, as well as why so many FL lenses were quickly replaced with similarly slightly different focal lengths by the late 60s (the 58mm f/1.2 being replaced by a 55mm being the most famous example). Without thoriated glass on the table, some designs had to be entirely scrapped and getting satisfactory results at the same focal length and apertures _without_ our radioactive friends was too hard, so different focal lengths were chosen which could more easily (and safely) be made to a high standard.

So while, again, it is the same number of elements in the same grouping and in a rough sense the same kind of shapes, the actual nuances of the design show that it's not the same formula (again, saying something is the same _formula_ means something very specific, which this is not; don't throw the term around lightly if you're trying to show off) and beyond the most obvious advancements in build, the fundamental meterials will have the biggest affect on the resulting image quality.


FWIW, of course it's impossible to tell just how sharp, contrasty, flare-resistant or whatever else a lens may be just from looking at the optical formula, but I would anticipate the same kind of improvement from the STM to this RF as there was from the mkII to the STM. In other words, perfectly acceptable for the price point and for the purpose of a cheap(ish; this looks like quite a price hike for here in the UK) 50mm lens, but nothing special in any way. Slightly below-average wide open, dead average at f/2.8 and shockingly sharp at f/4, with totally average colour and contrast throughout and quite strong vignetting, is the trend that I would expect this lens to continue given the design is not trying anything radically new. (If I were a betting person I'd put a fiver on it being slightly sharper at f/2.8 but with at least a half stop more vignetting across the whole aperture range, but I tend to assume that about any lens which shrinks the front element and filter size...)

Anyway. The Canonet 45mm f/1.7, it ain't, and I highly doubt Canon spent a single second thinking about the Canonet when designing this. Stop trying to dig up some kind of 'gotcha' 'cause there's just nothing there.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 3, 2020)

Joules said:


> The part in the brackets is what I was missing from your previous statements. It makes the difference in tone between 'Don' t expect this lens to perform any miracles' and 'Canon is just ripping us off again by using tech of the past'.


 That explains the stony silence to my posts which is almost tangeable over the ether


----------



## mangobutter (Nov 3, 2020)

Canon RP + RF 50 1.8 combo = 645g. Or lighter than the Canon 6D body alone (770g)

Or 2/3rd the weight of the RF 50 1.2 alone which is 950g.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Nov 4, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> I think you'll find that the "new optical formula" is at least 56 years old if you have a look at the first page of this thread



I'm well aware the Double-Gauss design is old and the design we see here is very similar to some older formulas. But I'm saying I do not want a recycled EF 50mm lens formula again. I think the design shows a UD element and we already saw what coats can do to improve ghosting a flare between the STM and non STM versions. So yes, I'm happy to see a new formula being used for this lens and not the same exact formula we had in the last "Nifty Fifty".


----------



## Skux (Nov 4, 2020)

Finally, a lens for the rest of us.


----------



## David - Sydney (Nov 4, 2020)

Lenses have been announced on Canon Australia's website and Digidirect has the 50mm for AUD349 and the RF70-200mm/f4 for AUD2699.
The latter cheaper than the AUD3k that others had predicted. ~USD220 and USD1700 respectively
https://www.digidirect.com.au/canon-rf-70-200mm-f-4l-is-usm-lens
https://www.digidirect.com.au/canon-rf-50mm-f-1-8-stm-lens
Canon Australia's RRP (recommended retail price) is AUD 389 and AUD3079 respectively.


----------



## H. Jones (Nov 4, 2020)

Pre-ordered the RF 50mm F/1.8 STM the second the page went live. At $200 there's absolutely no reason to not buy one. This will be such an excellent, tiny pancake of a lens for when I'm out and about and not focused on photography.


----------



## Besisika (Nov 4, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> I guess it will be optional, as usual with non L lenses.
> By the way, I have and use the 40mm pancake with its Canon lensshade (ES 52), no issues outdoors.


Thanks for letting me know. I didn't know about it. Good stuff.


----------



## Besisika (Nov 4, 2020)

trulandphoto said:


> A good 52mm screw on hood for the 40mm pancake (and the EF-S 24mm and RF 35mm as well) is Canon's LH-DC20 designed for the Powershot S* IS series. You can probably find them used and cheap. I don't know why Canon doesn't market it for these lenses.


Thanks, will try one.


----------



## Tangent (Nov 4, 2020)

Formula aside, the corners look a lot sharper (pause at 2:53) on the RF nifty fifty (preproduction) first look hands-on.


----------



## canonmike (Nov 4, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


This is good news from Canon.....finally, a nifty RF fifty and at a great price. This lens will undoubtedly allow a lot of people to embrace the Canon RF series of cameras, especially those with limited funds as they have been waiting in the wings to jump on the mirrorless format, if only Canon would provide a reasonable venue for them. This lens should help them accomplish that. So happy to see that Canon managed to keep the price down, as well. Good job, Canon....just hope you have an ample supply when they start shipping.


----------



## jvillain (Nov 4, 2020)

This will be a hit for people rocking an RF body on a gimbal or some thing like a Head One on a slider.


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 5, 2020)

Besisika said:


> Thanks, will try one.


Amazon offers replacement (non Canon )shades for the 40mm f2,8.
Like the originals, they have a "funny" shape...


----------



## Michael Clark (Nov 23, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> No it's a pure simple double-gauss design. So it's pretty much identical in capabilities to the EF 50mm STM. Slightly better macro (0.3m MFD vs 0.35m = 0.25x instead of 0.21), same number of diaphragm blades, and same weight.



Both are modified double Gauss designs. (Gauss is capitalized because it is a proper noun - *Johann Carl Friedrich Gauss* invented the two-element Gauss telescope objective lens.) The RF version is less symmetrical due to it being much closer to the sensor than the EF counterpart. The 44mm registration distance of the EF mount is very near the 50mm focal length, while the 20mm registration distance of the RF mount is much shorter than 50mm. The 24mm difference is partially, but not fully, offset by the RF lens' elements being further forward of the flange in the RF lens than in the EF lenses. In the case of the EF lenses, the optical center of the lens is about 7mm forward of the flange (it's actually a 51mm lens in at least the EF 50mm f/1.8 II version). In the case of the RF lens, the optical center will be around 30mm forward of the flange.

A "pure" double Gauss has four independent elements. Two positive meniscus lenses on the ends and two negative meniscus lenses in the interior. Both sides are symmetrical.

In 1895 Paul Rudolph, working for Carl Zeiss Jena, replaced both single interior negative menisci with cemented doublets. This was improved by Taylor, Taylor, and Hobson into the slightly asymmetrical "classic" double Gauss design, with both interior negative menisci still two sets of cemented doublets. Thus the "classic" double Gauss design has 6 elements in 4 groups.

The EF 50mm F/1.8 (in the original, II, and STM versions) had the front interior negative menisci with an air gap between the two elements and the rear interior negative meniscus group with the two elements still cemented together.

The RF 50mm f/1.8 reverses that and the front interior negative meniscus group is a cemented doublet with the rear interior negative menisci having an air gap between the two elements.


----------



## WriteLight (Dec 7, 2020)

So...do we have a shipping date for this yet? I thought I had seen Dec.4, have also read middle of Dec.
Anyone have any additional insight?


----------



## rocknrory (Dec 12, 2020)

WriteLight said:


> So...do we have a shipping date for this yet? I thought I had seen Dec.4, have also read middle of Dec.
> Anyone have any additional insight?



I just received mine a few days ago. Looking forward to testing it out tomorrow on my R5, along with my newly purchased RF 24-105 f/4!


----------

