# Patent: Canon RF 24-80mm f/4L IS & more



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 24, 2019)

> A patent showing a couple of higher-end Canon EOS R kit lenses has made its way to the public eye. One of the optical formulas in this parent is for an RF 24-105 f/4L IS, which we obviously already have.
> The second embodiment is for an RF 24-80mm f/4L IS. This is a smaller lens and makes some sense as a second and less expensive L kit lenses for RF mount cameras.
> 
> *Japan Patent Application 2019-012243*
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 24, 2019)

24-80 looks like a good zoom range. If it was smaller and IQ would be noticeably better, I'd take it over the very versatile range of 24-105. 
A 24-80 f/2.8 would be great


----------



## Stuart (Jan 24, 2019)

Might this be intended as a 24-70 F4 'equivalent' 
Leaving the 24-70 as an F2.8


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 24, 2019)

This would be a fantastic travel lens--I've used the EF 24-70 f4 for years and love it. But I'm really liking the idea of a 2.8. Making the decision worse is that I don't _need_ 2.8 for my paid work (architectural) but only for my playing around stuff. I'm really itching to have a native RF lens instead of a chunky adapted lens and this waiting to see is driving me nuts. Maybe I should just _make do_ with the 28-70 f2…...


----------



## jolyonralph (Jan 24, 2019)

I think they could make the 24-70 2.8 replacement have a wider range too. 

How about a 22-70 f/2.8 or a 24-85 f/2.8 

Actually, I'd probably wager Canon would not release a plain 24-70 RF lens to avoid confusion with the 28-70, a 24-75 at the very least.


----------



## Stuart (Jan 24, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> Maybe I should just _make do_ with the 28-70 f2…...


LOL, the 28-70 is a very heavy lens - i've love one for events, but not as a walk around one.


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 24, 2019)

24-105 F2.8 would be wonderful.


----------



## Random Orbits (Jan 24, 2019)

jolyonralph said:


> I think they could make the 24-70 2.8 replacement have a wider range too.
> 
> How about a 22-70 f/2.8 or a 24-85 f/2.8
> 
> Actually, I'd probably wager Canon would not release a plain 24-70 RF lens to avoid confusion with the 28-70, a 24-75 at the very least.



I'm hoping they leave it as a 24-70 and put IS or minimize its size. Leaving it as a 24-70 should not cause confusion, as there are already EF 24-70 f/2.8 and f/4 variants and 70-200 f/2.8 and f/4 variants. If anything, it would be confusing to have a 28-70 f/2, 22-70 f/2.8, 24-80 f/4 and a 24-105 f/4. I can see why Canon left the 28-70 as a 28. The thing is already large and heavy.


----------



## Tom W (Jan 24, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



Is that second lens not a 24-130 mm f/4 lens? It looks like it, and that would be a great all-around walkabout lens if it's reasonably small and light.


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 24, 2019)

Stuart said:


> LOL, the 28-70 is a very heavy lens - i've love one for events, but not as a walk around one.



Yeah, I wish I could justify the price. I wouldn't mind dragging one around if I had to! Same with the 50 f1.2. I don't even have a 50 and couldn't justify it, though I' love to…..


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 24, 2019)

24 - 80 f/4 would be a good move and combined with existing 70-200 or 100-400: the overlap / gap isn't that cruel. If it is light & has good close focus capabilities a winner for highly flexible lenses.
And a charm with the RF 80-400 f/4.0-5.6 which starts to exist in my dreams about a versatile 2-lens-setup!


----------



## Viggo (Jan 24, 2019)

Not a word on other L primes for RF?


----------



## maves (Jan 24, 2019)

I've always thought 70 was a weird focal length. Neither here nor there. 24-80, or 24-85 2.8 would be a dream. With so many of the Wides going to 35mm I'd happily even lose some mm off the wide end to get some fast mm at the long end.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 24, 2019)

My normal walkabout lens on a FF is the 24-70F4. Good quality and a reasonable size and weight. I can see the R version of it being a hit.


----------



## dominic_siu (Jan 25, 2019)

Aaron D said:


> This would be a fantastic travel lens--I've used the EF 24-70 f4 for years and love it. But I'm really liking the idea of a 2.8. Making the decision worse is that I don't _need_ 2.8 for my paid work (architectural) but only for my playing around stuff. I'm really itching to have a native RF lens instead of a chunky adapted lens and this waiting to see is driving me nuts. Maybe I should just _make do_ with the 28-70 f2…...


I own RF28-70 and it is fantastic, you won’t regret of owning it


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 25, 2019)

Viggo said:


> Not a word on other L primes for RF?


Patents don't tell you if the lens is a "L" or a consumer construction. You can usually guess at which it would be though. I've seen a lot of RF lens patents on CR, but there are no actual lenses that I've read of in the pipeline. Canon has stated that more are coming, so expect to see a assortment this year. I'm thinking of getting the 24-105L, a 24-80 just does not have the zoom range I'd like, and IQ will be so close that it doesn't matter. It would be nice to have a bit wider zoom range, 20-70 would be better than 24-80 to me.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 25, 2019)

Personally I’m waiting for something like 100 f1.4  I’ve missed 100mm since I sold my Zeiss f2, beautiful lens, but MF is an issue...


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 25, 2019)

F/4? Yuck. What is Canon's aversion to 24-70 or 24-80 f/2.8 AND IS? They do such an amazing job with the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS...


----------



## degos (Jan 25, 2019)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm thinking of getting the 24-105L, a 24-80 just does not have the zoom range I'd like, and IQ will be so close that it doesn't matter.



Historically that's never been the case, the Canon 24-105 lenses have always suffered in IQ compared to the shorter range. I don't know why, since the Sigma 24-105 Art is reportedly excellent. 

My Canon Mk I was disappointing and was quickly offloaded. Maybe it's because the 24-105 is setup for larger-scale production for inclusion in FF kits, it has always been considered a barely-L. Appropriately enough the red-ring often fell off.


----------

