# There is talk of a Canon RF 20-50mm f/4-5.6 IS STM [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 10, 2020)

> Here’s an interesting lens design, that would likely be quite compact. Perhaps a ‘pancake’ type zoom for the RF mount in the form of a Canon RF 20-50mm f/4-5.6 IS STM.
> I think for such a lens to be desirable, it would definitely have to be extremely small, light and affordable.
> More to come…



Continue reading...


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 10, 2020)

It might be quite small, but it would not be a pancake. 

- A


----------



## Joules (Feb 10, 2020)

That sounds more like a (FF?) variation of an 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 Is STM. Something to pair with a super affordable RF camera.

It could be a semi pancake if it also is a collapsing design.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 10, 2020)

An RF 4.0 17 IS would be more interesting - at least for my purposes as (1) a good ultra wide and (2) a vlogging lens.


----------



## DJL329 (Feb 10, 2020)

Stack of pancakes?


----------



## Chavim (Feb 10, 2020)

Not sure where to post this comment, so here we go:

Do you get tips on upcoming rebates? That would be very useful to know!

Thanks!!


----------



## Stuart (Feb 10, 2020)

What an interesting street lens.


----------



## Jethro (Feb 10, 2020)

If the R6 ends up beinge a 'low price' entry-level FF offering, this might be a kit lens option for it. If the optics weren't too bad, it would be interesting as a walk-around lens.


----------



## slclick (Feb 10, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> It might be quite small, but it would not be a pancake.
> 
> - A


Yes but it really sounds like Canon is listening to SOME of your posts!


----------



## Optics Patent (Feb 10, 2020)

20-50 is an odd range. Feels like a crop sensor kit lens (28-70?).


----------



## slclick (Feb 10, 2020)

Optics Patent said:


> 20-50 is an odd range. Feels like a crop sensor kit lens (28-70?).


I disagree. I think it's a great wide to normal range. I understand some have issues with short zoom ranges such as the Sigma 24-35 but it is a very good lens imho. This might be as well.


----------



## brad-man (Feb 10, 2020)

slclick said:


> Yes but it really sounds like Canon is listening to SOME of your posts!


Why? Because 50mm is in the title?


----------



## luka28 (Feb 10, 2020)

in my opinion this would be a great walkaround lens, getting it wider then 24 is also a cool move since now all the mobile phones also get ultrawide cameras/lenses and like it or not camera manufacturers now need to fight that segment also. If it would be a pancake lens this would be instant buy or best kit lens ever invented.


----------



## Optics Patent (Feb 10, 2020)

slclick said:


> I disagree. I think it's a great wide to normal range. I understand some have issues with short zoom ranges such as the Sigma 24-35 but it is a very good lens imho. This might be as well.



You’re probably right. With the superior image quality were seeing these days, the ability to crop to size means this is a 20-70 or 20-105. 

I predict we will see real digital zoom in the next few years where the sensor crops at the upper end. The key is controlling the zoom based on available image quality and how to set the zoom without fussy added control beyond the manual zoom ring. 

I have a patent pending invention for this.


----------



## slclick (Feb 10, 2020)

brad-man said:


> Why? Because 50mm is in the title?


No, because he has stated many times about the R line needing small, light affordable lenses. Now maybe I got it wrong and he meant Primes, not Zooms. My humblest apologies if so kind sir.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Feb 10, 2020)

Joules said:


> That sounds more like a (FF?) variation of an 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 Is STM. Something to pair with a super affordable RF camera.
> 
> It could be a semi pancake if it also is a collapsing design.



I don't think so if the focal length is really 20-50mm. Maybe will be a cheaper STM lens but 20mm is another world from 18mm (28.8mm).


----------



## brad-man (Feb 11, 2020)

slclick said:


> No, because he has stated many times about the R line needing small, light affordable lenses. Now maybe I got it wrong and he meant Primes, not Zooms. My humblest apologies if so kind sir.


I believe there can be no wrong interpretation as he has opined about both small, light & affordables as well as 50mms. Then again, his opining on 50mm was in the realm of the EF, so perhaps it is I that is confused. In which case, sir, it is I who begs forgiveness...


----------



## ahsanford (Feb 11, 2020)

Is f/5.6 all that small when Canon appears about to offer an f/7.1 lens?









Correction: Canon is bringing us an RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM Macro


It looks like I incorrectly assumed the speed of the upcoming RF 24-105mm lens (I should know better). Canon is instead releasing an RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM



www.canonrumors.com





- A


----------



## Canfan (Feb 11, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


20-50mm f4 would be more desirable. 
to save on size try can always leave out IS.
F5.6 is less desirable


----------



## Woody (Feb 11, 2020)

If this lens is real, I will start investing in Canon RF mount.


----------



## BillB (Feb 11, 2020)

Canfan said:


> 20-50mm f4 would be more desirable.
> to save on size try can always leave out IS.
> F5.6 is less desirable


F4 would be more expensive too.


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 11, 2020)

That is such a Pentax focal length for a zoom lens.


----------



## slclick (Feb 11, 2020)

Chaitanya said:


> That is such a Pentax focal length for a zoom lens.


That Pentax 20-40 is a very nice lens.


----------



## mclaren777 (Feb 11, 2020)

It wouldn't have good optics, so I'm not interested.


----------



## slclick (Feb 11, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> It wouldn't have good optics, so I'm not interested.


It won't? But it's a CR1, we know so much! I was sure we had this nailed down to the final specs, gosh darn and well, thanks for saving me money.


----------



## ashmadux (Feb 11, 2020)

I think for such a lens to be desirable, it would definitely have to be extremely *better than 4-5.6.

Yuck. Just ....yuck.*


----------



## ashmadux (Feb 11, 2020)

Stuart said:


> What an interesting street lens.



If interesting was very, very NOT interesting

Got to be one of the worst aperture and zoom rangers I've heard of in recent memory.

What's next, a *50-87 f5.6-6.3. No IS. *


----------



## slclick (Feb 11, 2020)

Love this zoom range, different strokes for ....


----------



## SecureGSM (Feb 11, 2020)

slclick said:


> I disagree. I think it's a great wide to normal range. I understand some have issues with short zoom ranges such as the Sigma 24-35 but it is a very good lens imho. This might be as well.


Hey... 24-35 F2.0 is a specialty, an extremely wide and constant aperture lens. Whether the 20-50/whatever slow variable lens sounds like a kit but is waaaay too limited for an average consumer wanting a single lens do it all 
Too limited for traveling either So....


----------



## Andy Westwood (Feb 11, 2020)

Very interesting, I’d buy that if as said it is small, light and affordable and not F7.1 lol


----------



## Stuart (Feb 11, 2020)

ashmadux said:


> If interesting was very, very NOT interesting
> 
> Got to be one of the worst aperture and zoom rangers I've heard of in recent memory.
> 
> What's next, a *50-87 f5.6-6.3. No IS. *


Why so? good DOF for varied depth scenes - f8+ and wide enough to capture the whole scene or nip it in a bit.


----------



## Optics Patent (Feb 11, 2020)

While a zoom lens won't be a "pancake," it may be collapsible to a near-pancake storage condition. The Nikon crop frame 16-50mm kit lens is 135g, 32mm long from flange when collapsed (not much longer than an EF adapter), and $300.

A FF lens would need to scale up in most respects, but there may be similarities.

For references, the smallest Canon RF lens is the RF 35mm, which is more than double the length (63mm) and weight (300g), and nearly double the price ($500).

On IS, I'd add that I assume that the entry level market values this because it's much more understandable than things like F numbers. Until all bodies they might consider have IBIS, I predict that consumer kit zoom lenses will have IS.


----------



## Optics Patent (Feb 11, 2020)

mclaren777 said:


> It wouldn't have good optics, so I'm not interested.



They are presumably not trying to interest a discerning expert like you. Consumers presumably trust that a Canon lens is good and will take good pictures. 

(You realize you said with unqualified confidence about a lens that doesn't exist and you can't have tested that "It wouldn't have good optics"?) ;-)


----------



## Optics Patent (Feb 11, 2020)

ashmadux said:


> I think for such a lens to be desirable, it would definitely have to be extremely *better than 4-5.6.
> 
> Yuck. Just ....yuck.*



To be desirable by whom?


----------



## IcyBergs (Feb 11, 2020)

World's first internally zooming pancake


----------



## tron (Feb 11, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


I hope they will introduce 17-70 instead or at least first.


----------



## Dragon (Feb 11, 2020)

20mm f/4 for FF at the short end won't be all that small. It may be light and relatively small, but likely not anything close to a pancake. A 20 to 24 mm crop lens can be small and also 35-40mm FF, but not so easy with 20mm FF and zoom and IS take space as well.


----------



## slclick (Feb 11, 2020)

Dragon said:


> 20mm f/4 for FF at the short end won't be all that small. It may be light and relatively small, but likely not anything close to a pancake. A 20 to 24 mm crop lens can be small and also 35-40mm FF, but not so easy with 20mm FF and zoom and IS take space as well.


When I read that my mature EF mind agrees but my infantile RF mind wonders if that's no longer true.


----------



## Dragon (Feb 11, 2020)

slclick said:


> When I read that my mature EF mind agrees but my infantile RF mind wonders if that's no longer true.


It could be collapsible like some of the M lenses, but the objective will still have to be a reasonable size to make 20mm work well. 28-50 could be much smaller, but not nearly as flexible. I like the range. The 11-22 on the M is a delightful lens and this new lens translates to 12.5-31.25mm, which would be better for general purpose use but still cover the wide end well. It is worth noting that the 11-22 is collapsible, but it is still one of the biggest and heaviest of the M series lenses. If this lens has the kind of IQ that the 11-22 has, it will be wildly popular. In fact, that could be the trigger that gets me to buy an R body.


----------



## tron (Feb 11, 2020)

Dragon said:


> It could be collapsible like some of the M lenses, but the objective will still have to be a reasonable size to make 20mm work well. 28-50 could be much smaller, but not nearly as flexible. I like the range. The 11-22 on the M is a delightful lens and this translates to 12.5-35, which would be better for general purpose use but still cover the wide end well. It is worth noting that the 11-22 is collapsible, but it is still one of the biggest and heaviest of the M series lenses. If this lens has the kind of IQ that the 11-22 has, it will be wildly popular. In fact, that could be the trigger that gets me to buy an R body.


17.5mm to 35 mm you mean...


----------



## Dragon (Feb 11, 2020)

tron said:


> 17.5mm to 35 mm you mean...


No, actually I should have said 12.5 to 31.25mm equivalent for a 1.6 crop. I adjusted my OP to be clearer as it could have been misinterpreted. I was referring to the crop equivalence of the new lens, not the FF equivalence of the 11-22.


----------



## tron (Feb 11, 2020)

Dragon said:


> No, actually I should have said 12.5 to 31.25mm equivalent for a 1.6 crop. I adjusted my OP to be clearer as it could have been misinterpreted. I was referring to the crop equivalence of the new lens, not the FF equivalence of the 11-22.


Ok now that is technically clear although I haven't seen the opposite equivalence to be used anywhere in practice.In other words you meant that a FF 20-50 range anyway is a superset of the crop 11-22 (17.5-35).

Correct no matter which direction of transformations we choose


----------



## Dragon (Feb 11, 2020)

tron said:


> Ok now that is technically clear although I haven't seen the opposite equivalence to be used anywhere in practice.In other words you meant that a FF 20-50 range anyway is a superset of the crop 11-22 (17.5-35).
> 
> Correct no matter which direction of transformations we choose


Kind of an offset superset, but yes, that is the point I was making. The 11-22 is an excellent lens and this new R lens could likely use a similar collapsible design strategy for an even more useful general purpose range. When you think about the crop opportunities at 45MP, this really covers a 20-70 range quite nicely and this one is (so far at least) f/5.6 minimum, so it will likely be aimed higher than the 7.1 lens and that would also be consistent with the 11-22 which is toward the upper end of the M lens price range.


----------



## jedy (Feb 11, 2020)

No news on any affordable RF primes then.


----------



## Optics Patent (Feb 11, 2020)

jedy said:


> No news on any affordable RF primes then.



My assumption is that the loss-leader kit lenses will be zooms.


----------



## Dragon (Feb 11, 2020)

jedy said:


> No news on any affordable RF primes then.


All in due time. Most folks who are thinking about affordable RF primes already have a collection of affordable EF primes, so not really a crisis and the not-so-affordable RF primes are very cool. At the entry level, affordable zooms are needed to get new buyers onboard and after the glitz and glamor of the early high end lenses, that is priority one. It does look like they are trying to pull the segment of the Rebel market that would consider moving to FF directly to R. I think they also see that there is a big chunk of the Rebel market that will never move beyond APS-c and hence you have the M line here to stay for quite a while.


----------



## JoshEFuller (Feb 12, 2020)

I know it's been rumored, but I'd LOVE to see a wide pancake lens option. Preferably a 24mm or wider. Even f2.8 would be fine, as long as it's cheap. I have plenty of other lenses in the toolkit but not a lot of travel-sized options. I already have a 5d4 so there's not a lot of point in having an EOS R if I can't take advantage of the size/weight.


----------



## Rule556 (Feb 12, 2020)

Stuart said:


> What an interesting street lens.



At f/2.8, yes. This lens, no. At least for me.

Though this lens would seem to be very capable for a student.


----------



## Rule556 (Feb 12, 2020)

JoshEFuller said:


> I know it's been rumored, but I'd LOVE to see a wide pancake lens option. Preferably a 24mm or wider. Even f2.8 would be fine, as long as it's cheap. I have plenty of other lenses in the toolkit but not a lot of travel-sized options. I already have a 5d4 so there's not a lot of point in having an EOS R if I can't take advantage of the size/weight.



Yes please! That would be my perfect compliment to my travel setup.


----------



## uri.raz (Feb 12, 2020)

Rule556 said:


> At f/2.8, yes. This lens, no. At least for me.



So RF 24-70mm f/2.8?


----------



## Rule556 (Feb 12, 2020)

uri.raz said:


> So RF 24-70mm f/2.8?



Yeah, but smaller. I realize it’s not possible. A guy can dream though.


----------



## JoshEFuller (Feb 12, 2020)

Rule556 said:


> Yes please! That would be my perfect compliment to my travel setup.


YES! Perfect for just walking around and taking snaps. Really hoping for something like that this year.


----------



## Scenes (Feb 15, 2020)

Dutch_Snapper said:


> What I like about the EF-S and EF pancakes is that they offer f/2.8 as well as being compact. A lens cap with fairly decent optics included.
> I cannot say I find the aperture range attractive on this supposed zoom. Sounds like a low end kit-lens. I will skip this breakfast.



sounds perfect for a silent focusing run and gun lens for video work.and don’t forget F4 full frame is the equivalent more or less of a F2.8 on a crop.


----------



## Dragon (Feb 16, 2020)

Dutch_Snapper said:


> What I like about the EF-S and EF pancakes is that they offer f/2.8 as well as being compact. A lens cap with fairly decent optics included.
> I cannot say I find the aperture range attractive on this supposed zoom. Sounds like a low end kit-lens. I will skip this breakfast.


But there are exactly two of them. 24mm for EF-s and 40mm for EF, which is an almost perfect scaling of the 24 (also, the 22mm EF-M). That is about the optimum FL for making a pancake (practical from 35-45). I have a Minolta MD 45 f/2 that is almost a pancake and it is an awesome little razor sharp piece of glass. Works great on an M and now there are MD to R adapters, so should be pretty nice there as well. The lens in this post is actually a very useful range with the 20mm wide end. 20mm FF does not really fit into a pancake design. The EF 20mm has a pretty big chunk of glass at the front and it is not nearly as sharp wide open as the 24, 28, and 35 in the same family. If this new lens has IQ like the 11-22 M lens, it will be delightful.


----------

