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



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 19, 2022)

> The long-rumoured Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM may finally be hitting dealers later in Q3 of 2022. This lens has been talked about ad-nauseam for quite some time now, and it has been on our roadmap since day 1.
> We have been told that the lens is in the hands of testers and marketing folks and recently appeared in an internal dealer roadmap.
> There still seems to be a bit of back and forth as to whether it’s an f/1.2 or an f/1.4, but at this point, I don’t think it’ll matter too much. Canon will sell as many as they can make for a long while.



Continue reading...


----------



## KirkD (Apr 19, 2022)

Finally!! I sold my EF 35mm f1.4L waaaaay too soon and have been sorely missing it. I very much hope that it does as good a job eliminating coma as the EF version. Nightscapes are my principle use for it.


----------



## Flamingtree (Apr 19, 2022)

Drool


----------



## Jstnelson (Apr 19, 2022)

Great news! I sold the EF 35 1.4L ii and have been using the RF 35 1.8 and, it's been a great little lens for the price, but I need this 35 L ASAP! I've been jealous of Sony's new 35 GM


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 19, 2022)

This is the way to go: lenses the main competitors don't have!


----------



## SNJ Ops (Apr 19, 2022)

Jstnelson said:


> Great news! I sold the EF 35 1.4L ii and have been using the RF 35 1.8 and, it's been a great little lens for the price, but I need this 35 L ASAP! I've been jealous of Sony's new 35 GM


As an owner of the 35mm GM it is indeed an excellent lens. Be interesting to see the direction Canon take regarding f1.2 or f1.4.
What are your preferences?


----------



## SNJ Ops (Apr 19, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> This is the way to go: lenses the main competitors don't have!


Sony have a 35mm f1.4 and Sigma have 35mm Arts that come in f1.4 and f1.2 versions on E and L mounts. Its Nikon that don’t currently have an option other than their 35mm f1.8.









35mm F1.4 DG DN | Art | Lenses | SIGMA Corporation


Information about the SIGMA lens 35mm F1.4 DG DN




www.sigma-global.com













35mm F1.2 DG DN | Art | Lenses | SIGMA Corporation


Information about the SIGMA lens 35mm F1.2 DG DN




www.sigma-global.com


----------



## sanj (Apr 19, 2022)

Celebration time! I would have danced harder and longer if it were a 25mm...


----------



## roby17269 (Apr 19, 2022)

My preciousssssss 
Here is a vote for a 1.2!

Been without a 35mm for a long time now. I won't buy the 1.8 since I know I wouldn't use it anymore once the L arrives
I will pre-order as soon as possible... c'mon Canon!


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 19, 2022)

Masks off on airplanes, and now this good news. Both help sustain my delusions of returning to normal...


----------



## Juangrande (Apr 19, 2022)

It better be f1.2. I’ve been anticipating a super fast 35mm for too long now. I do environmental/editorial portraits and love to shoot 35 to include the subjects environment but sometimes I want more separation from the backgrounds. I know some will say there’s not much difference from 1.4 but that depends on camera to subject and subject to environment distances. Any extra separation I can squeeze out from a wide angle lens I’ll take it.


----------



## neurorx (Apr 19, 2022)

Please let the 135mm be next!


----------



## JTP (Apr 19, 2022)

KirkD said:


> Finally!! I sold my EF 35mm f1.4L waaaaay too soon and have been sorely missing it. I very much hope that it does as good a job eliminating coma as the EF version. Nightscapes are my principle use for it.


dude same my friend! I sold my 35 as soon as everything started migrating to the RF glass and I have been checking this website every single day in hopes of the announcement! Can't wait to stop using this bulky 28-70!


----------



## Berowne (Apr 19, 2022)

I am happy with the EF 35L Mk II. No need to spend 3000€ for a f1.2 RF-Version.


----------



## mxwphoto (Apr 19, 2022)

JTP said:


> dude same my friend! I sold my 35 as soon as everything started migrating to the RF glass and I have been checking this website every single day in hopes of the announcement! Can't wait to stop using this bulky 28-70!


I don't think the 35mm is going to be much less bulky if it is f1.2, at least if Sigma's version is any indication.


----------



## john1970 (Apr 19, 2022)

Please be the RF 35 mm f1.2 L lens. I have had this lens on a wish list at my local shop for the past year.


----------



## robotfist (Apr 19, 2022)

Next to the 85mm EF L II, the EF 35mm 1.4 L II is the best prime lens Canon has ever made. I am excited for this new 35mm. I do hope the 24mm L is next, since the EF 24mm II is really starting to show its age. Ultimately, I'll be happy if by the end of next year we finally have a full set of RF superspeed primes (14, 24, 35, 50, 85).


----------



## Blue Zurich (Apr 19, 2022)

Gasp! What could come next? Possibly an RF 50 1.4? 
Come on ASanford, return to the CR Forum and liven things up.


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 19, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> Sony have a 35mm f1.4 and Sigma have 35mm Arts that come in f1.4 and f1.2 versions on E and L mounts. Its Nikon that don’t currently have an option other than their 35mm f1.8.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Neither Sony nor Nikon or Panasonic have native 1,2/35mm lenses, Sigma has a great 1,2, that's true.
By competitors I meant camera companies.


----------



## dcm (Apr 19, 2022)

Maybe the delay was because they are making a statement lens, better than the EF 35mm f/1.2L II. Seems like they could have rolled something like that out a long time ago. Maybe a f/1.0?


----------



## Hector1970 (Apr 19, 2022)

Good to see a new rumour of something whether lens or camera. I have a EF 50mm 1.2 and an 85mm 1.2. I'd love a 135mm F2 or a 200mm F2. I love a good bokeh. I have a Sigma 14mm 1.8 for Astro. I never craved a 35mm 1.2. I don't see the point. of it. I cover the 35mm area with the EF 24-70 2.8 II which is an excellent. lens. What am I missing?


----------



## SNJ Ops (Apr 20, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> Neither Sony nor Nikon or Panasonic have native 1,2/35mm lenses, Sigma has a great 1,2, that's true.
> By competitors I meant camera companies.


And yet if Canon release a 35mm f1.2 L it will get compared to the Sigma Art (and the GM) I can almost guarantee that, especially as the Sigma is highly likely to be much much cheaper. For those who shoot more than one system or are comparing them ,lenses on all major platforms do compete against one another regardless of OEM or 3rd party manufacturer.

There’s a strong rumour that Sigma are due to release a 50mm f1.2 Art DG DN, it will also be compared against the options from Canon, Sony and Nikon.

PS Sigma also make cameras…


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Apr 20, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> Sony have a 35mm f1.4 and Sigma have 35mm Arts that come in f1.4 and f1.2 versions on E and L mounts. Its Nikon that don’t currently have an option other than their 35mm f1.8.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The thing is with Sigma, you never know if they can focus accurately or consistently. In my experience, their optics are generally very good. But their AF and OS systems are quite poor. Plus there's the poor durability of their finishes and low resale value.


----------



## SNJ Ops (Apr 20, 2022)

GMCPhotographics said:


> The thing is with Sigma, you never know if they can focus accurately or consistently. In my experience, their optics are generally very good. But their AF and OS systems are quite poor. Plus there's the poor durability of their finishes and low resale value.


Maybe in the DSLR days that was true but remember Sigma signed up to have the AF protocols for emount so no reverse engineering, AF performance ranges from being nearly as good or just as good on Sony bodies and their build quality is excellent these days. I own their 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN (because its better and much cheaper than Sony’s GM) and have no complaints at all.

Canon shooters are missing out big time on Sigma’s mirrorless glass.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Apr 20, 2022)

robotfist said:


> Next to the 85mm EF L II, the EF 35mm 1.4 L II is the best prime lens Canon has ever made. I am excited for this new 35mm. I do hope the 24mm L is next, since the EF 24mm II is really starting to show its age. Ultimately, I'll be happy if by the end of next year we finally have a full set of RF superspeed primes (14, 24, 35, 50, 85).


The ef 135mm f2.0 L is spectacular and a wee bit sharper than the 85mm f1.2 II L. The ef 24mm f1.4 II L is equally as good as the ef 35mm f1.4 II. The problem Canon have with an RF version of the 35mm f1.4 L is the fact that the existing ef glass is so good, there's not much an RF variant can bring to the table (other than being heavier and larger than the ef mounted version) unless offering a larger f1.2 aperture. for the larger sized lens. Mirrorless lens generally have a design size efficiency under 28mm. Over this focal length and the lenses are usually longer in size than an equivalent SLR / EF mount lens. Some SLR 35mm focal length lenses are retro focus design, but not all.
I just hope Canon doesn't start making EF lenses out of old ef stock but with a built in ef - rf adapter (like the rf 400mm f2.8 / 800mm f5.6 / 1200mm f8).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> For those who shoot more than one system or are comparing them ,lenses on all major platforms do compete against one another regardless of OEM or 3rd party manufacturer.


I suspect that’s a minuscule fraction of the ILC market.

Comparing is probably a bit more common, but actual switching likely is not.


----------



## robotfist (Apr 20, 2022)

GMCPhotographics said:


> The ef 135mm f2.0 L is spectacular and a wee bit sharper than the 85mm f1.2 II L. The ef 24mm f1.4 II L is equally as good as the ef 35mm f1.4 II. The problem Canon have with an RF version of the 35mm f1.4 L is the fact that the existing ef glass is so good, there's not much an RF variant can bring to the table (other than being heavier and larger than the ef mounted version) unless offering a larger f1.2 aperture. for the larger sized lens. Mirrorless lens generally have a design size efficiency under 28mm. Over this focal length and the lenses are usually longer in size than an equivalent SLR / EF mount lens. Some SLR 35mm focal length lenses are retro focus design, but not all.
> I just hope Canon doesn't start making EF lenses out of old ef stock but with a built in ef - rf adapter (like the rf 400mm f2.8 / 800mm f5.6 / 1200mm f8).


Don't get me wrong, the 24mm 1.4 II is really good, but it's no 35mm 1.4 II. The 24mm II is 14 years old and does show some chromatic aberrations while wide open. The coatings are older than the 35's. The 35mm 1.4 II and the 85mm 1.4 L II IS were the last EF primes Canon made, and they are the listed on DXOMark as the sharpest lenses Canon has ever manufactured (alongside the 300mm EF f2.8). And that's including all the latest RF lenses out there! Now, say what you will about charts and tests. I've always been one to just go with my gut instinct. And there is something magical going on with that 35mm 1.4 II. Images from that lens just sing! It will be difficult for the RF version to top it.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Apr 20, 2022)

I love the ef 35mm 1.4L ii on the R5 - really great combo. I fear an RF 1.2 version may have such heavy vignetting that there is really no advantage in light gathering.

I would rather keep my current 35 and get an RF 24mm L


----------



## Johnw (Apr 20, 2022)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I just hope Canon doesn't start making EF lenses out of old ef stock but with a built in ef - rf adapter (like the rf 400mm f2.8 / 800mm f5.6 / 1200mm f8).



And how would you improve the optical formula over the EF for Canon on those lenses? The shorter flange distance of RF doesn’t really offer many advantages for lens design over EF at such long focal lengths.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 20, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> I suspect that’s a minuscule fraction of the ILC market...


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?


----------



## JTP (Apr 20, 2022)

mxwphoto said:


> I don't think the 35mm is going to be much less bulky if it is f1.2, at least if Sigma's version is any indication.


If it's 3 pounds and as fat as the 28-70 f2, I'll surely pass and go and rebuy the EF35 1.4 II I sold to wait for this one. I cannot stand shooting weddings with the 28-70. It's brutal.


----------



## mxwphoto (Apr 20, 2022)

JTP said:


> If it's 3 pounds and as fat as the 28-70 f2, I'll surely pass and go and rebuy the EF35 1.4 II I sold to wait for this one. I cannot stand shooting weddings with the 28-70. It's brutal.


Inferring from the Sigma, 35mm 1.2 is 70% more massive than 1.4 and increase in diameter by 15% so if we apply that logic to canon's 35mm 1.4 ii, one can expect a Canon 1.2 to be around 2.84lb and 3.65 inch in diameter.


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 20, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> And yet if Canon release a 35mm f1.2 L it will get compared to the Sigma Art (and the GM) I can almost guarantee that, especially as the Sigma is highly likely to be much much cheaper. For those who shoot more than one system or are comparing them ,lenses on all major platforms do compete against one another regardless of OEM or 3rd party manufacturer.
> 
> There’s a strong rumour that Sigma are due to release a 50mm f1.2 Art DG DN, it will also be compared against the options from Canon, Sony and Nikon.
> 
> PS Sigma also make cameras…


I once owned a Sigma, never again!
Optical quality was top, focus accuracy was meh. A problem I never had with Canon L lenses, after MFA.
And you cannot say their cameras play in the same league as Canon, Sony and co. Many customers still prefer native lenses, whether they are right or wrong, that's a different question...
As to the coming Sigma 1,2/50, I'm convinced it can optically compete with the best Canisony can offer.


----------



## Felix (Apr 20, 2022)

I would like f/1.4 so that it is neither too big nor too heavy. 
I think f/1.2 will be well above 2.500 again and f/1.4 might be priced like the RF70-200 f/4. 
The main thing is weather protection and nano USM in contrast to the current one...


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 20, 2022)

Felix said:


> I would like f/1.4 so that it is neither too big nor too heavy.
> I think f/1.2 will be well above 2.500 again and f/1.4 might be priced like the RF70-200 f/4.
> The main thing is weather protection and nano USM in contrast to the current one...


I'd add a few Euro 100s to your prices, I think them far too optimistic, unfortunately...


----------



## SNJ Ops (Apr 20, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I once owned a Sigma, never again!
> Optical quality was top, focus accuracy was meh. A problem I never had with Canon L lenses, after MFA.
> And you cannot say their cameras play in the same league as Canon, Sony and co. Many customers still prefer native lenses, whether they are right or wrong, that's a different question...
> As to the coming Sigma 1,2/50, I'm convinced it can optically compete with the best Canisony can offer.


The reason why Sigma’s DSLR AF wasn’t as good as OEM glass is most likely because they were forced to reverse engineer because Canon and Nikon never shared their protocols which is a major reason why many prefer OEM glass. 

No such issues on emount as Sigma have a licensing agreement with Sony as do others so AF is simply not an issue at all.



I never said Sigma are a major camera manufacturer but they do make cameras


----------



## Blue Zurich (Apr 20, 2022)

unfocused said:


> 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?


A few CR searches and you might know them all by name!


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Apr 20, 2022)

robotfist said:


> Don't get me wrong, the 24mm 1.4 II is really good, but it's no 35mm 1.4 II. The 24mm II is 14 years old and does show some chromatic aberrations while wide open. The coatings are older than the 35's. The 35mm 1.4 II and the 85mm 1.4 L II IS were the last EF primes Canon made, and they are the listed on DXOMark as the sharpest lenses Canon has ever manufactured (alongside the 300mm EF f2.8). And that's including all the latest RF lenses out there! Now, say what you will about charts and tests. I've always been one to just go with my gut instinct. And there is something magical going on with that 35mm 1.4 II. Images from that lens just sing! It will be difficult for the RF version to top it.


Yes I agree they are both spectacular lenses. The Blue goo, fresh optical formula and superior coatings. However the AF is fairly standard speed and accuracy for EF L prime glass. The ef 85mm F1.4 LIS is a mk I btw, the mkII is the 85mm f1.2 II L. Lens charts are theoretical ray traces...so pinch of salt...


----------



## xow (Apr 20, 2022)

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


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 20, 2022)

GMCPhotographics said:


> Lens charts are theoretical ray traces...so pinch of salt...


Except for Zeiss, their MTF charts are empirically measured with an actual production lens. For other manufacturers, if LensRentals has tested them on their optical bench (OLAF), that is useful especially since they test more than one copy.


----------



## Jstnelson (Apr 20, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> As an owner of the 35mm GM it is indeed an excellent lens. Be interesting to see the direction Canon take regarding f1.2 or f1.4.
> What are your preferences?


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.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 20, 2022)

Blue Zurich said:


> Gasp! What could come next? Possibly an RF 50 1.4?
> Come on ASanford, return to the CR Forum and liven things up.



I think that when an RF 50mm f/1.4 eventually comes out, we should all chip in to send him balloons or something. 

I miss his Charlie Brown reactions to all the near misses. Seldom laughed harder on the forum.


----------



## SHAMwow (Apr 20, 2022)

Jstnelson said:


> 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 (Apr 20, 2022)

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 (Apr 20, 2022)

i want


----------



## jdavidse (Apr 20, 2022)

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 (Apr 20, 2022)

S be


jdavidse said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

xow said:


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


Me, too!


----------



## danfaz (Apr 21, 2022)

jdavidse said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

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


----------



## tron (Apr 21, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

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 (Apr 21, 2022)

Rafał said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

Please be f/1.2


----------



## SNJ Ops (Apr 21, 2022)

tron said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

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 *C*anon *R*umors (*A*nd *I*nformation) *G*uy, or one of the new mods?)


----------



## tron (Apr 21, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

tron said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

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


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 21, 2022)

unfocused said:


> 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 (Apr 21, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> 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.


----------



## tron (Apr 21, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> 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.


Performance close is not performance exactly the same. Also there is the issue of focus speed and compatibility which thanks to docks is being dealt with.


----------



## SHAMwow (Apr 21, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> 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.


Yup, and I bet they're even more fierce now because the biggest thing holding back 3rd party lenses on DSLR was AF accuracy. But with mirrorless that's a non issue.


----------



## BBarn (Apr 21, 2022)

I'm glad those patiently waiting for a fast L series 35mm will have one soon. For me personally, I wonder if Canon will introduce anything I want to buy this year. We're a third of the way through the year and so far, not a single enticing product. Nikon on the other hand... (but I'm not going down that road... yet).


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 22, 2022)

BBarn said:


> I'm glad those patiently waiting for a fast L series 35mm will have one soon. For me personally, I wonder if Canon will introduce anything I want to buy this year. We're a third of the way through the year and so far, not a single enticing product. Nikon on the other hand... (but I'm not going down that road... yet).


I don't understand how anybody who has bought into RF lenses, or still has a good assortment of EF lenses, could feel so...disenchanted. I'm one of those who has some great RF glass, but decided to keep the EF 35mm f/1.4L II because it is one of the most pleasing, fun, and reliable lenses I've ever had. 

Plus, with so many opportunities opening up as the pandemic (seemingly) eases, there is too much to photograph!


----------



## David - Sydney (Apr 22, 2022)

tron said:


> 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.


For the majority of RF lenses (eg except for RF big whites etc), they offer advantages (eg focus speed, optics, focal length, physical size/weight, magnification, etc) over their EF counterparts to justify their more expensive pricing. 
Not all advantages in each lens of course but if the RF price is too much then Canon is still happy to sell you the EF version or get it second hand from those shooters who have upgraded to the RF version. 
I am happy to keep a mix of EF/RF and will have for a very long time to come


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 22, 2022)

One complaint keeps floating around, and I don't know how serious it is. It's this: Sigma lenses won't work with the RF system. I've only kept the 15mm f/2.8 fisheye and the 180mm f/2.8 macro, but they work better on my R bodies than they did on my 5DIV.

These lenses of mine are not for action! If other Sigma lenses, such as the 35mm f/1.4 Art don't work on RF, could anybody explain why?

Hard to take anybody seriously when good news about a new Canon lens--_on top of so many already for the RF--_is met with moaning and groaning about how long it took, slowness to fill in the catalog, etc. They've had a great 35mm f/1.4 all along! And apparently _some _Sigma lenses work fine.


----------



## tron (Apr 22, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> For the majority of RF lenses (eg except for RF big whites etc), they offer advantages (eg focus speed, optics, focal length, physical size/weight, magnification, etc) over their EF counterparts to justify their more expensive pricing.
> Not all advantages in each lens of course but if the RF price is too much then Canon is still happy to sell you the EF version or get it second hand from those shooters who have upgraded to the RF version.
> I am happy to keep a mix of EF/RF and will have for a very long time to come


I agree! I have kept most of my EF lenses in addition to the new RF I bought. Some EF are redundant like (16-35 2.8L III and 4L IS, 24-70 2.8 II, 100-400 II) but some are staying period! Like 100mm 2.8L IS Macro, 300mm 2.8L IS II, 400mm 4DO IS II, 500mm 4L IS II. No reason for these to be replaced with future RF versions. They have superb IQ and their replacement would cost a fortune with diminishing returns.


----------



## BBarn (Apr 22, 2022)

YuengLinger said:


> I don't understand how anybody who has bought into RF lenses, or still has a good assortment of EF lenses, could feel so...disenchanted. I'm one of those who has some great RF glass, but decided to keep the EF 35mm f/1.4L II because it is one of the most pleasing, fun, and reliable lenses I've ever had.



I have several RF lenses I'm happy with, so I'm not really disenchanted. I'd simply like to see more RF options.

Sorry, I have zero interest in any EF lens for my R series body. I have an adapter, but sold all my EF glass as I acquired suitable RF glass. For my casual use, there are no glaring holes in the RF line. I just find it interesting that Canon seemingly has nothing more to offer at this point that interests me enough to open the wallet.


----------



## Blue Zurich (Apr 22, 2022)

BBarn said:


> I have several RF lenses I'm happy with, so I'm not really disenchanted. I'd simply like to see more RF options.
> 
> Sorry, I have zero interest in any EF lens for my R series body. I have an adapter, but sold all my EF glass as I acquired suitable RF glass. For my casual use, there are no glaring holes in the RF line, I just find it interesting that Canon seemingly has nothing more to offer at this point that interests me enough to open the wallet.


It took many years to build the EF catalog. Are people just that much more impatient these days? Perhaps we need a refresher on just what it takes to R&D and Mfg these items, cheese and rice people.


----------



## David - Sydney (Apr 22, 2022)

tron said:


> I agree! I have kept most of my EF lenses in addition to the new RF I bought. Some EF are redundant like (16-35 2.8L III and 4L IS, 24-70 2.8 II, 100-400 II) but some are staying period! Like 100mm 2.8L IS Macro, 300mm 2.8L IS II, 400mm 4DO IS II, 500mm 4L IS II. No reason for these to be replaced with future RF versions. They have superb IQ and their replacement would cost a fortune with diminishing returns.


I agree with you except the EF16-35mm/4 which is great optically and reasonably priced. Unless you need the extra 2mm on the wide side, I wouldn't consider the RF version to be a replacement. 
I used to have 1.4x/2x EF TCs to use with my EF70-200/2.8 but that wasn't possible with the RF70-200/2.8 so I wanted a longer zoom. The EF100-400mm was/is still expensive and few second hand versions were available locally and even then they were not much of a discount. There was a sale on the RF100-500mm so I bit the bullet and have loved it ever since.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 22, 2022)

SNJ Ops said:


> 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.


Well, I've had two of the Tamron SP lenses. I've also had 4 of the RF lenses (50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L, and the 28-70mm f/2, 24-105mm f/4). I've never owned Sigma or Sony lens. Tamron is not anywhere near the Canon RF lenses. Especially wide open. Especially when it comes to CR.

Yes, some will see them as overpriced.


YuengLinger said:


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


Long live the Pokeyarchy!


----------



## mxwphoto (Apr 22, 2022)

If the 35mm is 1.2 then I would assume a $2899 pricetag. Dual nano usm motors, BR optics, probably no IS. Whether I upgrade or not will really depend on how much (little) vignetting and how round corner bokeh balls are. In the meantime, my like new 35mm 1.4ii has been serving me well at 60% of msrp.


----------



## navastronia (Apr 22, 2022)

YuengLinger said:


> One complaint keeps floating around, and I don't know how serious it is. It's this: Sigma lenses won't work with the RF system. I've only kept the 15mm f/2.8 fisheye and the 180mm f/2.8 macro, but they work better on my R bodies than they did on my 5DIV.
> 
> These lenses of mine are not for action! * If other Sigma lenses, such as the 35mm f/1.4 Art don't work on RF, could anybody explain why?*
> 
> Hard to take anybody seriously when good news about a new Canon lens--_on top of so many already for the RF--_is met with moaning and groaning about how long it took, slowness to fill in the catalog, etc. They've had a great 35mm f/1.4 all along! And apparently _some _Sigma lenses work fine.



I've read your comment a couple times and don't quite understand it. What makes you think the Sigma 35/1.4 Art doesn't work on an RF system? Mine worked flawlessly attached to my EOS RP using the EF adapter just today -- on a paid job, no less.


----------



## ruskkyle (Apr 22, 2022)

I own a C70 and my perspective is solely as a video shooter (I have a little take-everywhere CL for stills which works for me). But this RF 35mm L, when it arrives, will be really tempting as a 50mm equiv on the Super 35 sensor. The _actual_ RF 50/1.2L is a bit long for me tastes for run & gun shooting.

I don’t see myself ever switching completely to RF glass simply because I like fast and wide lenses. My speed boosted EF 24/1.4L produces a look no future RF lens is likely to replicate on the C70.


----------



## Bonich (Apr 22, 2022)

robotfist said:


> Next to the 85mm EF L II, the EF 35mm 1.4 L II is the best prime lens Canon has ever made. I am excited for this new 35mm. I do hope the 24mm L is next, since the EF 24mm II is really starting to show its age. Ultimately, I'll be happy if by the end of next year we finally have a full set of RF superspeed primes (14, 24, 35, 50, 85).


I have both of these - and I will hold both of these.
The RF 50 1.2 is great in the middle.
My missing list:
- RF135L
- RF24L
- RF15L


----------



## Bonich (Apr 22, 2022)

neurorx said:


> Please let the 135mm be next!


This is the one I miss most in the RF lineup!


----------



## YuengLinger (Apr 22, 2022)

navastronia said:


> I've read your comment a couple times and don't quite understand it. What makes you think the Sigma 35/1.4 Art doesn't work on an RF system? Mine worked flawlessly attached to my EOS RP using the EF adapter just today -- on a paid job, no less.


Sorry if I wasn't clear, but I'm suggesting that Canon has an absolutely wonderful ef 35mm f/1.4L II that works even better on the R system than it did on the EF system, and that Sigma has a good 35mm Art also. (I can't tell if those who claim to have an adapter but disdain using it are being facetious. I'm losing my sarcasm detector, I guess.)

I stated that the Sigmas I've kept, the fisheye and the massive macro 180mm f/2.8, work beautifully on the R5, and then ask if the 35mm Art does too. If it doesn't work, why?

Thank you for reporting that yours, as I would expect, works!

And I did have a good laugh when one poster, who, again, might have been sarcastic, demanded that the new 35mm be 1.2...Or else! As if that 1/3 stop at 35mm would have enough real-world significance to theatrically ditch and switch an entire system?


----------



## tron (Apr 22, 2022)

David - Sydney said:


> I agree with you except the EF16-35mm/4 which is great optically and reasonably priced. Unless you need the extra 2mm on the wide side, I wouldn't consider the RF version to be a replacement.
> I used to have 1.4x/2x EF TCs to use with my EF70-200/2.8 but that wasn't possible with the RF70-200/2.8 so I wanted a longer zoom. The EF100-400mm was/is still expensive and few second hand versions were available locally and even then they were not much of a discount. There was a sale on the RF100-500mm so I bit the bullet and have loved it ever since.


You have done well to get the RF100-500. Of course 16-35 4L IS is great! By saying redundant I meant I have RF15-35 2.8L. But since I still have 5DIV and 5DsR I do not want to part with my 16-35 lenses. I like them a lot.


----------



## R1Media (Apr 24, 2022)

Can't wait to see a new L lens in the popular focal length! However, I would still probably stick to my 28-70 f2 as it's the beast.


----------



## drmikeinpdx (Apr 27, 2022)

I'm pretty happy with my RF 35mm F/1.8 for photographing people so I doubt if I will spend the big bucks to get the larger and heavier RF 35mm L. 

I use my 35 F/1.8 as my available light lens on my R6. It's a bit noisy for video, but I'm really only shooting stills these days.

When using strobes, I just keep the RF 24-105 F/4 lens on the camera. It's amazingly sharp and my normal aperture range is F/4 to F/8, so no need to buy an F/2.8 or F/2 zoom.

Canon will have a hard time trying to tempt me to spend more money on new gear.


----------



## Lightshooter (Apr 29, 2022)

I sold my RF 35 1.8 for EF35mm F1.4L II USM,what a lens !!! Canon do better 35mm ?


----------



## SNJ Ops (Apr 30, 2022)

Lightshooter said:


> I sold my RF 35 1.8 for EF35mm F1.4L II USM,what a lens !!! Canon do better 35mm ?


Canon are more than capable of building an optically stellar RF 35mm prime and its fully expected that it will be than the EF mark II. Only question remains is whether it will be f1.4 or f1.2 but I guess it will be an f1.2 to complete a holy trinity of primes.


----------



## danfaz (May 6, 2022)

R1Media said:


> Can't wait to see a new L lens in the popular focal length! However, I would still probably stick to my 28-70 f2 as it's the beast.


I'm sure I'll get the 35 L, despite having the 28-70. At first I sold my 50 1.2, thinking it was redundant having both, but the 50 is considerably smaller and lighter than the 28-70 (and of course is a stop and a third faster), so I bought the 50 again LOL!


----------

