Canon has announced its latest RF-mount lens: the 14-35mm f/4L IS, a smaller, lighter, more affordable brother to the 15-35mm f/2.8L IS.
The new lens will be a welcome addition to RF shooters who can’t justify the $2,299 of its sibling and don’t need such a wide aperture. At $1,699, this f/4 ultra-wide zoom lens weighs 1.2 lb (544 g) compared to 1.85 lb (840 g) of the faster lens and is significantly shorter too: a mere 3.9“ (9.9cm) compared to the 15-35mm’s 4.99” (126.8mm). It’s also a shade slimmer at 3.3” (8.4cm) in diameter.
16 elements sit in 12 groups, there are 9 rounded aperture blades, and the front filter thread is 77mm. The minimum focus distance is notably smaller than the faster lens at just 7.9” (20.1cm).
The lens includes stabilization which Canon claims will offer 5.5 stops of shake correction, increasing to seven stops when paired with a body that features IBIS. Canon also promises excellent dust and weather resistance.
$1,699 isn’t cheap but Canon shooters — landscape photographers in particular — will be pleased to have a slightly more affordable option available. Previously, the slower of Canon’s L-series ultra-wide zooms has made up for the slower aperture by featuring stabilization, but Canon opted to include it in the faster lens as well. Instead, Canon’s engineers have squeezed even more width into the f/4 version, taking advantage of the possibilities presented by the new mount.
Will you be placing an order? Let us know in the comments below
![Will the RF 500mm f/4L IS Telephoto Be the First "Big White” Lens For Canon Mirrorless? [Rumor]](https://cdn.fstoppers.com/styles/small-16-9/s3/lead/2019/05/443ea87e7bd10a3fade27ca232abe9d7.jpg)
I'm still waiting for an RF 50mm f/1.4L!
Just one thing, at $1699 its not affordable, just less expensive than the alternative.
This is why I balk at moving to mirrorless, the lenses are much more expensive than the dslr counterparts.
That was my immediate reaction as well. $1700 should definitely not be praised as a budget option, hurts a bit more coming from a mount without many 3rd party players. That being said, I do appreciate the effort Canon is putting into their lenses. I'm sure a portion of the price is a result of the R&D required to create lenses that take advantage of the wider mount and short flange distance. While many EF lenses have been just slightly modified for decades (some as far back as FD), it's my understanding that to take full advantage of the improved mount, a whole new set of optics is required.
You'd think that Canon would want to recoup that R&D layout faster with prices to move products.
That only makes sense in a scenario where they are not supply constrained. Add to this the fact that they need to make more per lens even without factoring R&D recovery just to maintain profitability in a shrinking market.
They can't get RF 70-200 2.8L's onto store shelves... Why bother with new models. Hope Tamron and Sigma will hurry up with their options to move Canon's prices down to a more reasonable rate. Until then, I'm sticking with the EFs.
That's a legit question. I would assume the answer is that the more complete their system is, the faster they get people to move to the R System or at least not defect to an alternative. And the constrained supply right now is working to keep prices up. No sales on Canon RF gear are necessary.
Beautiful, but $1700? Yeah, no. I'll make do with what I have.
That price... I much rather go with a couple wide, fast primes
Calling a $1,700 lens affordable is a bit of a stretch.
A F4 ultrawide for almost 2k is a big ask imo…canons system really lacks the „enthusiast“ middle segment. They offer high end, they offer some entry primes, but almost nothing around the 1k mark. Was really expecting this to be there…too expensive imo.
Affordhahahahahahable.