# Patent: Canon RF 28mm f/1.4L USM and Canon RF 35 f/1.4L USM



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 22, 2021)

> Canon News has uncovered a patent showcasing what would be two popular fast prime optical formulas in the form of an RF 28mm f/1.4L USM (Yay!) and an RF 35mm f/1.4L USM.
> As you may remember, we recently saw a patent for the long-rumoured Canon RF 35mm f/1.2L USM. It probably doesn’t make much sense to have both a `1.2 and a 1.4 35mm lens in the lineup. The RF 28mm f/1.4L USM does excite me on a personal level.
> Canon RF 28mm f/1.4L USM
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Apr 22, 2021)

Does "Lens total length" not mean what I think it does? These would be wayyyy too big at 140mm and 154mm in length. The EF 35 1.4L II is 105mm. The new Sony 35mm 1.4 is 96mm.


----------



## Antonis (Apr 22, 2021)

I couldn't be happier with a rf 28 1.4 !!!


----------



## hillj25 (Apr 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Does "Lens total length" not mean what I think it does? These would be wayyyy too big at 140mm and 154mm in length. The EF 35 1.4L II is 105mm. The new Sony 35mm 1.4 is 96mm.


If they are really that big it will be a deal breaker for me for sure.


----------



## Larsskv (Apr 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Does "Lens total length" not mean what I think it does? These would be wayyyy too big at 140mm and 154mm in length. The EF 35 1.4L II is 105mm. The new Sony 35mm 1.4 is 96mm.


My first reaction as well. As much as I appreciate the RF lenses, I do envy Sony for the small but still very good 24 and 35 f1.4 GM lenses. I thought the larger RF lens mount would benefit Canon in both size and quality. Maybe I am wrong.


----------



## Joules (Apr 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Does "Lens total length" not mean what I think it does? These would be wayyyy too big at 140mm and 154mm in length. The EF 35 1.4L II is 105mm. The new Sony 35mm 1.4 is 96mm.


You have to subtract 20 mm from total lens length to get how much is sticking out of the body. And of course you have to add 24 mm to an EF lens length to get a fair comparison, as that's the length of the adapter.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 22, 2021)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Does "Lens total length" not mean what I think it does? These would be wayyyy too big at 140mm and 154mm in length. The EF 35 1.4L II is 105mm. The new Sony 35mm 1.4 is 96mm.


9mm difference. 9mm makes absolutely no difference to me. I find it very hard to believe that 9mm is a deal breaker for anyone. It certainly isn’t a reason to switch brands. 9mm? Nothing to sweat about.


----------



## Juangrande (Apr 22, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


They better make 35mm f1.2!! I’ve been waiting a long time. I have the f1.4 and for environmental portraits shot full body with the subject setback a ways in the scene there’s still too much depth of field.


----------



## Berowne (Apr 22, 2021)

I would appreciate smaler lenses on my R6. The EF-Lenses are quite big with adapter. Here is a comparison with my Leica SL and the 2.8/60mm Macro-Elmarit. This is the size i would have for RF-Primes.


----------



## Aaron D (Apr 22, 2021)

I'd love a 28 mm fixed lens, though I'd prefer a compact f/2. With IS, doesn't have to be an L. It will always be a street/travel lens for me, on an R body.

And an f/1.4 50 mm with IS!


----------



## dlee13 (Apr 22, 2021)

I personally feel they have room for both in the lineup! The f/1.2 lens can be the larger lens with no compromises in IQ but high priced and the f/1.4 is the betweener which has great IQ, fast aperture but moderately priced and smaller/lighter.


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 23, 2021)

Finally, Canon seems to have understood that there is a real demand for Hi IQ wide-angle primes. Nikon and Sony already have theirs.
Good news!
What about a 1,8/20mm ?


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 23, 2021)

Berowne said:


> I would appreciate smaler lenses on my R6. The EF-Lenses are quite big with adapter. Here is a comparison with my Leica SL and the 2.8/60mm Macro-Elmarit. This is the size i would have for RF-Primes.


I too have the R 2,8/60 .
And absolutely love it, not only for being small.
It is deadly sharp, contrasty, distortionless, flare resistant, low vignetting : just a perfect MF lens.
Is this the way to go: smallish EOS R cameras with barrel-sized lenses ?
We need more options.


----------



## photonius (Apr 23, 2021)

Hmm, I don't know, this trend of lens development starts to look excessively over-engineered. Ok, I guess some people might wish to have an extremely well corrected lens with large aperture. But how much is this lump of glass going to weight? IQ will certainly be much better than the old style SLR lenses, but at some point the improvement isn to worth the extra weight and size. Maybe it's my old eyes that don't need pixel perfect resolution anymore.... Anyway, as long as it sells for Canon, it's ok. But don't forget lenses for the rest of the photographers that would like to have something reasonable that is better than a smartphone.


----------



## twoheadedboy (Apr 23, 2021)

Be still my beating heart! 28mm f/1.4!


----------



## rbr (Apr 23, 2021)

Funny timing on this one. I just ordered the Sigma 28 f1.4 ART to use on my R5. Canon really needs to step up their game on the wide end for the RF lenses. I look enviously at all the great wide angl;e options available in the Sony E mount and what Nikon has already put out for the Z cameras.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 23, 2021)

rbr said:


> Funny timing on this one. I just ordered the Sigma 28 f1.4 ART to use on my R5. Canon really needs to step up their game on the wide end for the RF lenses. I look enviously at all the great wide angl;e options available in the Sony E mount and what Nikon has already put out for the Z cameras.


It always makes me smile when an individual says something like “Canon needs to...”. Canon are turning out class leading and tech leading lenses and bodies faster than anybody else.

As an aside, can you get uncooked RAW files from the Sony’s or Nikon’s when using those new small fast wide primes? I suspect not....


----------



## dirtyvu (Apr 23, 2021)

Can't wait for the 35 1.4! Wonder how much. I can imagine the 1.2 being rf pricey. Hopefully 1.4 is truly moderate


----------



## rbr (Apr 23, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> It always makes me smile when an individual says something like “Canon needs to...”. Canon are turning out class leading and tech leading lenses and bodies faster than anybody else.
> 
> As an aside, can you get uncooked RAW files from the Sony’s or Nikon’s when using those new small fast wide primes? I suspect not....


Fair enough. I must say that I love the files coming from Sigma ART lenses on the R5. I can deal with the extra ounces.


----------



## Kiton (Apr 23, 2021)

Aaron D said:


> I'd love a 28 mm fixed lens, though I'd prefer a compact f/2. With IS, doesn't have to be an L. It will always be a street/travel lens for me, on an R body.
> 
> And an f/1.4 50 mm with IS!


I am with you on the 28 being an F2. I feel like a broken record harping on Sigma and Canon to follow Nikon with a 1.8 or F2 lens. That is all we need in the street, I get them wanting the 35 and the 85 that is big and bright and comes with an optional sherpa, but the 28 is a lens that should slip in to a pocket!


----------



## sanj (Apr 24, 2021)

I wish for a 25mm 1.2


----------



## Kiton (Apr 25, 2021)

sanj said:


> I wish for a 25mm 1.2 https://shop.camtecphoto.com/en/Zeiss/Zeiss-Milvus-25mm-F1.4-?cat_id=62


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Apr 26, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> 9mm difference. 9mm makes absolutely no difference to me. I find it very hard to believe that 9mm is a deal breaker for anyone. It certainly isn’t a reason to switch brands. 9mm? Nothing to sweat about.


I totally agree. If I was in the market for a fast 35mm prime then 9mm wouldn't make any difference to me at all. However, I've been a long term user of a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1. Sure the newer mk2 is superior in every regard (including price). However, all that extra sharpness and faster AF and built quality caused the lens to be a lot heavier and physically larger. Comparing a rf 35mm f1.4L to a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1 is like a night and day handling experience. 
On a different note, the new rf 100mm IS L Macro...geeze..sure it's got a few interesting new features...but the size of that thing compared to the EF version!


----------



## koenkooi (Apr 26, 2021)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I totally agree. If I was in the market for a fast 35mm prime then 9mm wouldn't make any difference to me at all. However, I've been a long term user of a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1. Sure the newer mk2 is superior in every regard (including price). However, all that extra sharpness and faster AF and built quality caused the lens to be a lot heavier and physically larger. Comparing a rf 35mm f1.4L to a ef 35mm f1.4L mk1 is like a night and day handling experience.
> On a different note, the new rf 100mm IS L Macro...geeze..sure it's got a few interesting new features...but the size of that thing compared to the EF version!


It's slightly wider, but seems to be the same length as the EF100L + RF adapter.


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 26, 2021)

I'd rather have larger EOS R bodies with smaller, lighter lenses.
Nevertheless, I believe the current lens philosophy is a better choice for Canon, to get ahead of competition, appealing to pro users demanding f 1,2 and more.
And smaller Canon lenses are doubtlessly under development.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 27, 2021)

A 28mm f/1.4 would be very interesting IF they can keep the size and weight down.
Canon seems to be going for giant headline grabbing lenses instead of making small and light practical primes.


----------



## Aaron D (Apr 28, 2021)

OK, I'm just this week thinking of adding 'people' to my assignment photography offerings. I'm looking for a 35mm and an 85. 

For an 85, there is the phenominal pair of f/1.2 choices, neither of which I can afford--or necessarily want--to buy. Such extremes for that last 1/3 of a stop! A 1.4 L _with_ IS, smaller, and priced at like $1200-1800 would have been way more tempting. So I get the f/2. That's certainly fine, but underwhelming. I'd like an L because it'll be used A LOT with any luck.

This rumored fast 35 will likely be another $2800 f/1.2 despite this 1.4 patent. So I'll have the f/1.8 as an only option. Meh. Sure it's OK, but look how much sharper the butt-ugly Nikon 1.8 is in comparisons. I'm not going to dump all my stuff to go Nikon, but I'll likely wait another 3 years for a trio of 1.4 lenses.....

<rant/>


----------



## Kiton (Apr 28, 2021)

If I wash it in a HOT water cycle, will it shrink to a F2.0 ??

asking for a friend


----------



## JairoMartinez (Jun 16, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


is there a date or time line know for when the 28mm L comes out?


----------



## dirtyvu (Jun 17, 2021)

I'm anxiously awaiting the price. Would love a 35 1.2! Holding the fort with the 1.8 but it's more serviceable than stunning


----------

