Adam Au wrote:
Why are the mirrorless lenses bigger? Isn't the point of a smaller system smaller lenses? Does this have to do with their flange distance or something else?
Something else. Lens size is independent of camera register (for the most part). For example, lens f-stop is defined by the ratio of the focal length divided by the diameter of the entrance pupil, which is the size of the aperture as seen through the front element. That's it.
The RF 35/1.8 STM and RF 24-105/4L IS are "reasonable sizes" because they probably have virtually the same optical, mechanical, and electronic components and performance as their EF counterparts.
The 24-70mm zoom is huge, because at f/2 it's a full-stop faster than the previous and current f/2.8 zooms. Same difference as when comparing the EF 300/4L IS and 300/2.8 L IS; one stop.
The RF 50/1.2L is larger because the design team made decisions that (almost certainly) gave a much higher priority to providing high image quality than to minimizing size and weight.
Adam Au wrote:
... Isn't the point of a smaller system smaller lenses?
No. The only 'point' is to make a camera without a mirror.
The point of the "EF-M" series is to make smaller lenses. They're smaller because they're not as "fast" as their full-frame cousins (i.e. f-stop), not because they're designed for a short-register camera.
Sep 05, 2018 at 08:45 AM
Previous versions of jcolwell's message #14585140 « Canon RF vs. EF lenses: Lens Size, 50mm L and 28-70mm L »
