Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
p.1 #1Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
It would make sense...
Jim
https://www.canonrumors.com/is-a-canon-rf-105mm-f-1-4l-vcm-on-the-way/
Jim
https://www.canonrumors.com/is-a-canon-rf-105mm-f-1-4l-vcm-on-the-way/
Jul 04, 2026 at 06:58 AM
p.1 #2Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
AFAIK, Canon has always done 100mm rather than 105mm. Whatever the case, physics says it won't be 67mm filter size like the other VCM primes, so if it's part of this line, it will break that mold.
I'd much prefer to pair a fast 100 with a xx-70 zoom. 85/1.4 is too close to 70mm and 135 leaves quite a gap. 70-200 does just fine but occasionally faster than f/2.8 can be useful.
I'd also appreciate a 28/1.4 VCM.
I'd much prefer to pair a fast 100 with a xx-70 zoom. 85/1.4 is too close to 70mm and 135 leaves quite a gap. 70-200 does just fine but occasionally faster than f/2.8 can be useful.
I'd also appreciate a 28/1.4 VCM.
Jul 04, 2026 at 05:44 PM
p.1 #3Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
The other alternative is that they could make it a 100 f/1.7 or f/1.8 (they might even sort of be able to make it f/1.5 but that would be cutting it close). I'm not sure whether the aperture or the diameter of the lens will change, but one has to change. It would be a very interesting lens.
Jul 04, 2026 at 07:22 PM
p.1 #4Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
I like the idea, but size, weight, and price would need to be kept in check...
Wouldn't it also steal sales from the 135/1.8L?
Wouldn't it also steal sales from the 135/1.8L?
Jul 04, 2026 at 09:03 PM
p.1 #5Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
I have a hard time imagining a 105mmn f/1.4 lens keeping a size consistent with the other VCM primes (which seems to be a raison d'être of the line). I would of course love to be surprised.
As Ron says, Canon has always done 100mm designs. In recent decades, this focal length has been entirely co-opted by macro lenses, so maybe doing a 105mm design is a good way to distinguish this as something new.
I've always been a fan of this focal length. In my personal collection I still have the New FD 100 mm f/2, the EF 100mm f/2, and the (legendary) Nikon AI-s 105mm f/2.5.
Looking forward to what might be delivered.
Edited on Jul 05, 2026 at 07:12 AM · View previous versions
As Ron says, Canon has always done 100mm designs. In recent decades, this focal length has been entirely co-opted by macro lenses, so maybe doing a 105mm design is a good way to distinguish this as something new.
I've always been a fan of this focal length. In my personal collection I still have the New FD 100 mm f/2, the EF 100mm f/2, and the (legendary) Nikon AI-s 105mm f/2.5.
Looking forward to what might be delivered.
Edited on Jul 05, 2026 at 07:12 AM · View previous versions
Jul 05, 2026 at 12:01 AM
p.1 #6Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
I don't think the 135/1.8 gets the same love the EF version did. It's pretty chunky and I've found its AF isn't quite as consistent as other RF lenses. Perhaps because it's not a VCM. It is very sharp and in this respect much better than the EF version. Where I wish Canon would put more effort in the design of 'bokeh' lenses is reduction of optical vignetting resulting in cats eyes.
A 100/1.4 would have a similar entrance pupil size to the 135/1.8 and therefore similar bokeh quantity. It would be similar diameter, therefore also chunky. But should be shorter.
I think there's enough difference between a 100 and 135 to justify each on the market, though each photographer will likely prefer one over the other. I got the 135 to complement the 28-70/2 as a faster alternative to a 70-200. But I've since added the 70-200 Z and will reach for it most of the time over the 135, unless I can really benefit from the extra 1.3 stops. I don't really use the 135 as a portrait lens though. I feel 135 is a bit too long. For this application I would much prefer a fast 100. If it's f/1.4 it will be two stops gain over the 70-200 and therefore will have a unique signature and also usefulness at dark ambient light events, etc.
A 100/1.4 would have a similar entrance pupil size to the 135/1.8 and therefore similar bokeh quantity. It would be similar diameter, therefore also chunky. But should be shorter.
I think there's enough difference between a 100 and 135 to justify each on the market, though each photographer will likely prefer one over the other. I got the 135 to complement the 28-70/2 as a faster alternative to a 70-200. But I've since added the 70-200 Z and will reach for it most of the time over the 135, unless I can really benefit from the extra 1.3 stops. I don't really use the 135 as a portrait lens though. I feel 135 is a bit too long. For this application I would much prefer a fast 100. If it's f/1.4 it will be two stops gain over the 70-200 and therefore will have a unique signature and also usefulness at dark ambient light events, etc.
Jul 05, 2026 at 12:24 AM
p.1 #7Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
Something that would be cool, taking into consideration the physical constraints of focal length vs diameter (67 mm filter), might be a 105 mm f/2 MACRO fitting the size/form factor of the VCM series. Someone on another forum noted that the purpose of these lenses almost dictated not changing filter size because of the need for consistency for the types of filters, mat boxes, and other gear that videographers might use (and I'm not a video guy so I don't even know what all they use). Making everything fit is somewhat of a necessity or else they would need to carry a lot of extra gear and swap more than just the lens on location.
Jul 05, 2026 at 06:01 AM
p.1 #8Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
Tom_W wrote:
Something that would be cool, taking into consideration the physical constraints of focal length vs diameter (67 mm filter), might be a 105 mm f/2 MACRO fitting the size/form factor of the VCM series. Someone on another forum noted that the purpose of these lenses almost dictated not changing filter size because of the need for consistency for the types of filters, mat boxes, and other gear that videographers might use (and I'm not a video guy so I don't even know what all they use). Making everything fit is somewhat of a necessity or else they would need to...Show more →
This is totally true, but when shooting video it is also useful to have lenses with the same T-stop. Otherwise you have to change lighting or ND filters or ISO all of which can be problematic as well. Ideally lenses in a set have the same physical size and filter threads and the same T-stop. The issue here is that the front element of a 105 f/1.4 has to be at least 75mm in diameter (and making at a 100mm doesn't really help, a 100 f/1.4 needs a front element at least 71.4mm in diameter). So either the physical size has to change or the f/stop which means the T stop as well.
If they make the lens we will see which way they go. My guess is they would change the T stop, but I don't have much confidence at all in that guess. I think your guess of a 105 f/2 macro is an interesting one. The only thing that makes me doubt it is there is already a 100 f/2.8L Macro and as that lens makes pretty clear if they want a 1X magnification macro it would be hard to make an f/2 1X macro as small as the VCM lenses. My guess is a 100 or 105 f/1.7 or f/1.8.
Something that would be cool, taking into consideration the physical constraints of focal length vs diameter (67 mm filter), might be a 105 mm f/2 MACRO fitting the size/form factor of the VCM series. Someone on another forum noted that the purpose of these lenses almost dictated not changing filter size because of the need for consistency for the types of filters, mat boxes, and other gear that videographers might use (and I'm not a video guy so I don't even know what all they use). Making everything fit is somewhat of a necessity or else they would need to...Show more →
This is totally true, but when shooting video it is also useful to have lenses with the same T-stop. Otherwise you have to change lighting or ND filters or ISO all of which can be problematic as well. Ideally lenses in a set have the same physical size and filter threads and the same T-stop. The issue here is that the front element of a 105 f/1.4 has to be at least 75mm in diameter (and making at a 100mm doesn't really help, a 100 f/1.4 needs a front element at least 71.4mm in diameter). So either the physical size has to change or the f/stop which means the T stop as well.
If they make the lens we will see which way they go. My guess is they would change the T stop, but I don't have much confidence at all in that guess. I think your guess of a 105 f/2 macro is an interesting one. The only thing that makes me doubt it is there is already a 100 f/2.8L Macro and as that lens makes pretty clear if they want a 1X magnification macro it would be hard to make an f/2 1X macro as small as the VCM lenses. My guess is a 100 or 105 f/1.7 or f/1.8.
Jul 05, 2026 at 06:21 AM
p.1 #9Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
I'll take a 135 f/2 VCM please. That would get me back to where I was in the DSLR days with a 35 on one body and the 135 on my 2nd body, 90% of the time.
Jul 05, 2026 at 09:50 AM
p.1 #10Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
rscheffler wrote:
AFAIK, Canon has always done 100mm rather than 105mm. Whatever the case, physics says it won't be 67mm filter size like the other VCM primes, so if it's part of this line, it will break that mold.
I'd much prefer to pair a fast 100 with a xx-70 zoom. 85/1.4 is too close to 70mm and 135 leaves quite a gap. 70-200 does just fine but occasionally faster than f/2.8 can be useful.
I'd also appreciate a 28/1.4 VCM.
Traditionally 100mm prime for Canon and 105mm as the end of many Canon Zooms.
A 100mm VCM would break the mould but then again looking at the CINE lens lines designed for full frame Cooke SP3 and Leitz Hektor's their 100mm go against the mold and move to a larger filter size.
I would like to see a 100MM VCM. I find more often than not when out shooting I am taking a set of VCMs with me or 1 or 2 to compliment another lens. Ironically for myself when the VCM line started I never expected to buy into them or use them as often as I do. Was always more of a 1.2 lens user.
A 28 would be a great addition but looking at CINE for full frame 28 seems to be an overlooked focal length. Then again it is an opportunity for Canon to offer a 28 VCM as many through comments have said they would add that.
I also think a Macro VCM would be a good one to add.
AFAIK, Canon has always done 100mm rather than 105mm. Whatever the case, physics says it won't be 67mm filter size like the other VCM primes, so if it's part of this line, it will break that mold.
I'd much prefer to pair a fast 100 with a xx-70 zoom. 85/1.4 is too close to 70mm and 135 leaves quite a gap. 70-200 does just fine but occasionally faster than f/2.8 can be useful.
I'd also appreciate a 28/1.4 VCM.
Traditionally 100mm prime for Canon and 105mm as the end of many Canon Zooms.
A 100mm VCM would break the mould but then again looking at the CINE lens lines designed for full frame Cooke SP3 and Leitz Hektor's their 100mm go against the mold and move to a larger filter size.
I would like to see a 100MM VCM. I find more often than not when out shooting I am taking a set of VCMs with me or 1 or 2 to compliment another lens. Ironically for myself when the VCM line started I never expected to buy into them or use them as often as I do. Was always more of a 1.2 lens user.
A 28 would be a great addition but looking at CINE for full frame 28 seems to be an overlooked focal length. Then again it is an opportunity for Canon to offer a 28 VCM as many through comments have said they would add that.
I also think a Macro VCM would be a good one to add.
Jul 05, 2026 at 11:20 AM
|
p.1 #11Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
Of all the variables, I think they’d keep the physical size and weight relatively consistent with the existing VCM lenses.
The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…
The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…
Jul 05, 2026 at 12:01 PM
p.1 #12Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
rscheffler wrote:
Of all the variables, I think they’d keep the physical size and weight relatively consistent with the existing VCM lenses.
The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming...Show more →
Yeah I think the purpose of the VCM is to be the anti-pig line so I don't see them making anything much bigger than the 67mm front filter size, so I could see a 105 f/1.8 or 135 f/2 but time will tell.
Of all the variables, I think they’d keep the physical size and weight relatively consistent with the existing VCM lenses.
The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming...Show more →
Yeah I think the purpose of the VCM is to be the anti-pig line so I don't see them making anything much bigger than the 67mm front filter size, so I could see a 105 f/1.8 or 135 f/2 but time will tell.
Jul 05, 2026 at 02:29 PM
p.1 #13Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
Well, there's always the chance that the rumor is a little off - perhaps a 100 or 105 f/2 NON-VCM, along with a 200 f/2.8, 300 f/4, and 400 f/5.6. Kind of like the old days.
Jul 05, 2026 at 04:24 PM
p.1 #14Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
artsupreme wrote:
The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…Yeah I think the purpose of the VCM is to be the anti-pig line so I don't see them making anything much bigger than the 67mm front filter size, so I could see a 105 f/1.8 or 135 f/2 but time will tell.
I thought they were supposed to be smaller, cheaper than high grade fast lenses and mainly for videos though not cine. The puny front diameter contributes to extra vignetting. There is no IS system nor switch for IBID.
I suppose 100/1.8 has some use, but I've used 100/2 and not found it very interesting. I'd rather have 85/1.4 or 135/1.8.
If they are trying for the same front end, it should be 100/1.6, but that is inconsistent with the other lenses.
EBH
rscheffler wrote
Of all the variables, I think they’d keep the physical size and weight relatively consistent with the existing VCM lenses.The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…
I thought they were supposed to be smaller, cheaper than high grade fast lenses and mainly for videos though not cine. The puny front diameter contributes to extra vignetting. There is no IS system nor switch for IBID.
I suppose 100/1.8 has some use, but I've used 100/2 and not found it very interesting. I'd rather have 85/1.4 or 135/1.8.
If they are trying for the same front end, it should be 100/1.6, but that is inconsistent with the other lenses.
EBH
Jul 05, 2026 at 11:35 PM
p.1 #15Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
artsupreme wrote:
The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…Yeah I think the purpose of the VCM is to be the anti-pig line so I don't see them making anything much bigger than the 67mm front filter size, so I could see a 105 f/1.8 or 135 f/2 but time will tell.
I don't think a 135 f/2 could have a 67mm filter thread. The front element needs to be just a little too big. It would have to be at least 72mm, like the EF 135 f/2, if it used a typical filter size. A 100mm and maybe even a 105mm could be f/1.6, however, although I suppose f/1.8 is more likely, could have a 67mm filter thread like all the other VCM lenses.
rscheffler wrote
Of all the variables, I think they’d keep the physical size and weight relatively consistent with the existing VCM lenses.The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…
I don't think a 135 f/2 could have a 67mm filter thread. The front element needs to be just a little too big. It would have to be at least 72mm, like the EF 135 f/2, if it used a typical filter size. A 100mm and maybe even a 105mm could be f/1.6, however, although I suppose f/1.8 is more likely, could have a 67mm filter thread like all the other VCM lenses.
Jul 06, 2026 at 05:56 AM
p.1 #16Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
Steve Spencer wrote:
The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…Yeah I think the purpose of the VCM is to be the anti-pig line so I don't see them making anything much bigger than the 67mm front filter size, so I could see a 105 f/1.8 or 135 f/2 but time will tell.I don't think a 135 f/2 could have a 67mm filter thread. The front element needs to be just a little too big. It would have to be at least 72mm, like the EF 135 f/2, if it used a typical filter size. A 100mm and maybe even a 105mm could be f/1.6, however, although I suppose f/1.8 is more likely, could have a 67mm filter thread like all the other VCM lenses.
I’d still be happy with a 135 f/2,2 VCM then as I think that’s possible in the 67mm filter size
artsupreme wrote
rscheffler wrote
Of all the variables, I think they’d keep the physical size and weight relatively consistent with the existing VCM lenses.The T-stop difference is less of a factor if you’re usually shooting stopped down a bit already to begin with. If wide open there’s a custom function, at least on the stills side of the menus, that will automatically adjust the ISO (or shutter speed) to keep exposure consistent.
Therefore I would expect a 100/1.8. Canon doesn’t do f/1.7 and I don’t ever recall an f/1.6 lens, though it is an on-camera setting option for aperture values.
If we’re dreaming big, a 100/1.0 would be pretty wild. Same front element size as a 200/2 or 300/2.8. Given it would already be big, I’d vote to make it TC compatible for added versatility.
But I would still like to see an f/2 tele zoom from Canon first…
I’d still be happy with a 135 f/2,2 VCM then as I think that’s possible in the 67mm filter size
Jul 06, 2026 at 07:40 AM
p.1 #17Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
Steve Spencer wrote:
This is totally true, but when shooting video it is also useful to have lenses with the same T-stop. Otherwise you have to change lighting or ND filters or ISO all of which can be problematic as well. Ideally lenses in a set have the same physical size and filter threads and the same T-stop. The issue here is that the front element of a 105 f/1.4 has to be at least 75mm in diameter (and making at a 100mm doesn't really help, a 100 f/1.4 needs a front element at least 71.4mm in diameter). So either the physical...Show more →
This sums it up very well Steve. In my view I lean towards Canon maintaining the T-Stop(f-stop). Video shooters unlike still shooters want consistency and not have to be changing ND filters, lighting and ISO when moving between lenses. yes they would have carry a 77mm filter if they with 77mm filter thread but they can still maintain the same T-stop. Though if they are on a gimbal it may require some adjusting depending on the weight and balance of the lens. I am sure the lens designers are taking that into account into its design. We haven't seen any lens design diagrams of the rumoured 100/105 VCM though the rumour says it will be a 1.4.
On the other hand it is just a rumour and since Canon says one more is coming it could be the rumour mill is wrong and it ends up being a 28 or some other focal length. Though I think it will be 100 to match what else it out their in the video/full frame Cine set realm.
This is totally true, but when shooting video it is also useful to have lenses with the same T-stop. Otherwise you have to change lighting or ND filters or ISO all of which can be problematic as well. Ideally lenses in a set have the same physical size and filter threads and the same T-stop. The issue here is that the front element of a 105 f/1.4 has to be at least 75mm in diameter (and making at a 100mm doesn't really help, a 100 f/1.4 needs a front element at least 71.4mm in diameter). So either the physical...Show more →
This sums it up very well Steve. In my view I lean towards Canon maintaining the T-Stop(f-stop). Video shooters unlike still shooters want consistency and not have to be changing ND filters, lighting and ISO when moving between lenses. yes they would have carry a 77mm filter if they with 77mm filter thread but they can still maintain the same T-stop. Though if they are on a gimbal it may require some adjusting depending on the weight and balance of the lens. I am sure the lens designers are taking that into account into its design. We haven't seen any lens design diagrams of the rumoured 100/105 VCM though the rumour says it will be a 1.4.
On the other hand it is just a rumour and since Canon says one more is coming it could be the rumour mill is wrong and it ends up being a 28 or some other focal length. Though I think it will be 100 to match what else it out their in the video/full frame Cine set realm.
Jul 06, 2026 at 11:05 AM
p.1 #18Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
A recent Canon patent showed a design with f = 97.5 mm and an f-number of 1.46. That would be a tight fit, but who knows.
Jul 06, 2026 at 02:21 PM
p.1 #19Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
What's a little vignetting? All fixable in post. Except the look of the bokeh. Canon hasn't seemed too concerned about such subjective image quality consequences and to shoehorn such a lens into the current VCM design constraints, a bit of number rounding for marketing simplicity is bound to happen. In any case, it's another point in favor of this hypothetical lens being 100mm rather than 105mm.
Jul 06, 2026 at 04:22 PM
p.1 #20Is a Canon RF 105mm f/1.4L VCM on the Way?
Toothwalker wrote:
A recent Canon patent showed a design with f = 97.5 mm and an f-number of 1.46. That would be a tight fit, but who knows.
If they are willing to round and truncate in that way, then if they alter that design a "smidge," and make it a 95.5mm and an f/number of 1.49, that ought to make the front element about 64mm and give them the room they need. It still won't solve that the T number of the lens might be a bit different from the other lenses in the series. You can truncate the aperture value, and leave a lot of vignetting, but once you start doing that you may affect the consistency of the look and I think that is a design goal too. It probably wouldn't even be a sixth of a stop, so maybe it is ok, and won't be noticeable. I suppose we will have to wait until the lens is produced to see.
A recent Canon patent showed a design with f = 97.5 mm and an f-number of 1.46. That would be a tight fit, but who knows.
If they are willing to round and truncate in that way, then if they alter that design a "smidge," and make it a 95.5mm and an f/number of 1.49, that ought to make the front element about 64mm and give them the room they need. It still won't solve that the T number of the lens might be a bit different from the other lenses in the series. You can truncate the aperture value, and leave a lot of vignetting, but once you start doing that you may affect the consistency of the look and I think that is a design goal too. It probably wouldn't even be a sixth of a stop, so maybe it is ok, and won't be noticeable. I suppose we will have to wait until the lens is produced to see.
Jul 06, 2026 at 05:35 PM