topic Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"? in EF & RF Lenses

RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

kvbarkley — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 13:21:51 GMT

Canon has just announced an RF 16 - 28mm lens

Ken Rockwell points out:

it has "Impressive durability and weather-resistant construction equivalent to an L-series lens for use in harsh environments."

and

"This lens is now the smallest, lightest RF zoom lens with image quality equivalent to a Canon L-series specification."

So why isn't it an L?

Re: Why isn't it an "L"?

deebatman316 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 00:06:09 GMT

Are there any DO (Diffractive Optics) elements in it. Most if not all L lenses have that. Also all L lenses except the RF 10-20mm F/4L STM, RF 35mm F/1.4L, RF 24mm F/1.4L VCM and RF 50mm F/1.4L VCM lack USM AF motors. It seems as though USM is more of a premiere feature now. A lot of older EF lenses were equipped with the high end Ring Type USM AF motors. In the EF Mount Canon only had 3 L lenses that lacked USM AF motors. Those lenses all used Arc Form Drive AF motors instead of Micro Motor.

Re: Why isn't it an "L"?

Ron888 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 05:11:01 GMT

Wait what? Diffractive optics are used on only two RF lenses and those aren't L series.Also USM ceased being their top end focus motor some time ago.RF lenses use several different types of motor now depending on their intended usage- video or photo

Re: Why isn't it an "L"?

deebatman316 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 13:10:04 GMT

I was mixing it up with UD elements. Those are mainly found in L lenses. Some non L lenses have those too. Canon has only used Ring Type USM, Nano USM, STM and VCM in the RF Mount. No other AF motors have been used. The EF Mount was a different story. They used Arc Form Drive (1987-1991) Ring Type USM (1987-Present), Micro Motor (1992-2012), STM (2012-Present), Micro Motor USM (1993-2008), Nano USM (2016-Present).

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

shadowsports — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 14:28:43 GMT

Greetings,

I think the decision is a financial one. Lenses are the real investment in photography. Part of Sony's success has been their ability to provide users with high performing, constant aperture, weather sealed lenses. They sure as heck don't make better cameras 😄. This is both attractive and compelling to a broad range of photographers. People want affordable lenses. They want to put three or four lenses in their bag but don't want to take out a loan to do so. Lenses like the RF 16-28 is a way for Canon to say, "Hey, we can do that too". Canon has all of this data and more. They understand, consumer perception, affordability and value for your money. I think we're going to see a lot of new lenses like this moving forward. I'm sure there will be plenty of L series lenses too.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

jrhoffman75 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:58:53 GMT

@kvbarkley wrote:

Canon has just announced an RF 16 - 28mm lens

Ken Rockwell points out:

it has "Impressive durability and weather-resistant construction equivalent to an L-series lens for use in harsh environments."

and

"This lens is now the smallest, lightest RF zoom lens with image quality equivalent to a Canon L-series specification."

So why isn't it an L?

Perhaps because it is in the group of lenses that are relying on in-camera optical correction?

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

ebiggs1 — Sat, 25 Jan 2025 15:58:11 GMT

The RF 16-28mm F2.8 was designed for Canon’s beginner and mid-range full-frame cameras I.E., the R8 level of cameras. It is nearly a RF 28-70mm F2.8 IS STM clone, IMHO. The fact these level of lenses are good has nothing to do with it. The design market has everything to do with it.

This also reminds me about the discussion wayback why the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens was not given the "L" tag. It's in the same class but of course no EF-S lens got the "red ring".

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

deebatman316 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:16:51 GMT

Some of Canon’s cheaper lenses rely on lens correction or vignetting will be visible. This is the case with lower cost lenses regardless of Full Frame or APS-C.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

deebatman316 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:18:16 GMT

Pentax uses a similar approach. But there are a lot of compromises though with Pentax’s lens mount.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

jrhoffman75 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:19:50 GMT

That is my point. Nothing to do with full frame or crop sensor design.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

deebatman316 — Fri, 24 Jan 2025 16:49:48 GMT

Even some L lenses rely on lens correction or vignetting would be visible. One famous L lens that needs it at very wide angles is the RF 14-35mm F/4L IS USM lens. This lens is dependent on lens correction.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

justadude — Sat, 25 Jan 2025 15:12:45 GMT

"But there are a lot of compromises though with Pentax’s lens mount."

Curious what compromises you feel there are with the Pentax K-mount? I've loved this system since I started using it around 1980. I also like that I can use my old vintage Pentax lenses just as seamlessly on my still used Pentax DSLRs without the need for any adapter.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

deebatman316 — Sat, 25 Jan 2025 15:38:47 GMT

The whole system of jamming 2 AF systems in 1 lens then bringing out new lenses with electronic aperture control. This makes old cameras incompatible with these new lenses. Pentax does have IBIS so no need for lens based IS. But the high level in lens AF motor failure. Then trying to keep compatibility with older cameras with fall back to screw-drive. No new 3rd Party lens options everyone has pulled out. Except for Pentax of course. So if the lens’ built in AF motor fails it won’t fall back to screw drive on a new body. But on an old body that doesn’t support in lens AF motors. It will simply only use screw drive to focus the lens. Screw drive does work but as the lens gets older the gears start wearing more and more. Leading to less accurate focus just bumping the focus ring will bring it out of focus. Pentax is very highly dependent on screw drive AF. In a world where everyone has moved to in lens AF motors. Pentax is often last to update newer technology such as electronic aperture control and in lens AF motors. Pentax got into the in lens AF motor game in 2008. Before that Minolta/ Sony A Mount SSM in 1998 then Nikon in 1992 with AF-I. Canon was of course the first in 1987 with the EF Mount. But before the EF Mount was the FD Mount. Which they also tried screw drive and in lens AF motors.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

Waddizzle — Sat, 25 Jan 2025 17:14:33 GMT

I have wondered the same thing about the EF-S 10-22mm lens. It was a miniature tank of a lens. It had a metal body and used internal focusing and zooming. No claims to be weather resistant, though.

Jared Polin just released a video where he spoke briefly about the announcement. He promised to have a review in the near future. He seemed impressed, too. He was anxious to see the image quality.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

jrhoffman75 — Sat, 25 Jan 2025 18:02:19 GMT

Back in the EF days I read an article about "L" lenses and one of the criteria was that they fit full-frame bodies. That was given as the reason why there were no EF-S "L" lenses.

WRT the new 16-28 RF lens, reportedly it doesn't have the fluorine coating that "L" lenses have and the switches don't have the sealing.

In the end, only Canon knows why.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

ebiggs1 — Sun, 26 Jan 2025 15:19:55 GMT

"I have wondered the same thing about the EF-S 10-22mm lens."

Yes, another good example.

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

ebiggs1 — Sun, 26 Jan 2025 15:20:55 GMT

"...they fit full-frame bodies."

As good of a reason as any. "In the end, only Canon knows why."

Re: RF16-28mm lens: Why isn't it an "L"?

chrishoesel — Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:15:38 GMT

I think this is a good (new) direction that Canon are taking. Build decent, mid-tier lenses that are more economical and aimed at travel photography for portability and less financial risk (we all know how bad the anti-tourist movements and pick-pocketing are right now) while retaining constant-aperture performance throughout the zoom range and good optical quality albeit digitally-corrected.

Digital profile correction is a thing nowadays, like it or not, even in "L" lenses as of late. I suppose in the end, the resulting image quality is what matters.