Where are all the small lenses?

[JoeySnaps]

One of the supposed benefits of mirrorless cameras, resulting from dispensing with the mirror box, was going to be new designs of lenses, including compact wide-angle and standard lenses, since the rear element could now be positioned closer to the sensor, making complex retrofocus designs un-necessary.

So why is it that almost all the new lenses appearing for the R series cameras are notably big and heavy? This:

... is the old FD 50mm f/1.4 lens, which those of us with long beards may remember was very well thought-of in its day. And it's tiny! Comparing it with modern 50mm f/1.4 lenses (there isn't one for the RF mount, but the f/1.2 gives an idea, and there are f/1.4 lenses for other systems) they are all enormous - and heavy.

I would dearly love to have a pancake lens in RF mount, so the camera could be carried in a (capacious) coat pocket complete with lens. Please, Canon?

[rs-eos · Accepted solution]

Yea, I was a bit bummed by this as well.  When I move to mirrorless (prob in another 3 years or so), It will be the R5 Mark II or equivalent.  The savings in size and weight compared to an EOS 5D IV will be dwarfed by the increase in size and weight by the RF 50mm f/1.2 (vs EF 50mm f/1.2).

The 50mm is my most used lens and this will lead to around a 30% heavier camera/lens combo.

I am though looking foward the much better quality and sharpness one can achieve with the RF version.   So at least there will be much benefits to gain to make up for the extra weight.

[ebiggs1]

Whatever floats your boat. But adding an adapter and readily accepting poorer IQ and more aberration isn't my forte.

[JoeySnaps]

Well, yes, my post was made with tongue firmly in cheek. But Stephen has suggested a real practical solution which I will action in due course.

[ebiggs1]

Sounds like a plan! I must admit I am not a fan of the 50mm FL as a normal use lens. As I opined above, the reason it was ever considered normal was, and is, the fact it is approximately the same AOV as the human eye. It is just a difficult FL to use as a general lens. IMHO, the 35mm on a FF camera makes way more sense.

I never bought or had the "Nifty fifty" and never had a desire to use one. That's not to say it wasn't or isn't a good lens. It is just an unfriendly FL to live with. On the other hand, I love my EF 50mm f1.2L. When the opportunity to make use of it, it is fantastic. However you wouldn't like it at all since it is huge and very heavy. My trinity of fast primes include the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art, the EF 50mm f1.2L and the EF 85mm f1.2L. In that stable the Siggy 35mm gets used more than the 50 and 85 combined. And, all three combined don't get used as much as my EF 24-70mm f2.8L zoom but that is another story.

Good luck with your new Nifty Fifty R! 😀

[JoeySnaps]

Good points, EB. And, having made such a fuss about lack of RF compact lenses, I have to confess that I do actually own the RF 35mm f/1.8 STM which is fairly small and light, and very good optically. Not a pancake, by any means, but it's half the size of any other RF lens I own. It gets quite a lot of use, it is as you say a very useful focal length and much lighter than my 24-105mm L zoom.

I've just checked out the price of the 50mm and Amazon have it at a very good price here in the UK so I expect I'll treat myself.

[ebiggs1]

OK, then, go for it! Show some samples when you get it.

[JoeySnaps]

Thanks Stephen!