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

[kvbarkley]

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?

[jrhoffman75]

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

[deebatman316]

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.

[ebiggs1]

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".

[Waddizzle]

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. 

[jrhoffman75]

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.