September 23, 2014, 02:39:37 PM

Author Topic: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L  (Read 10574 times)

peederj

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2012, 11:58:54 AM »
How many of Canon's lenses are parfocal as it is? It's a serious pain for video.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2012, 11:58:54 AM »

drummstikk

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 103
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #16 on: March 07, 2012, 12:48:39 AM »
I suggest learning to read an MFT chart as the first step,

I suggest learning how to spell *MTF* chart as a first step. . .
"Focused. Or focused not. There is no 'almost.'"

                                                          --Yoda (paraphrase)

willrobb

  • Guest
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #17 on: March 08, 2012, 08:28:26 AM »
Exciting prospect. I'm really happy with my 17-40mm F4L, it's been a well used lens for ke over the last few years but sometimes Ihad wished I had the f2.8 of my 24-70L. A 2.8 at it's widest could be very useful, hopefully a fair bit cheaper than the 16-35mm as well.

Caps18

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 286
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #18 on: March 08, 2012, 09:11:32 AM »
I'd really prefer a 16-35 f/4 (like the new Nikkor) for landscape work, although I accept that there are a lot of people that would like a 14-24 f/2.8.  Perhaps this is Canon's attempt at a compromise to save having to develop two lenses.  I think that would be a mistake, as the two new wide angle full frame zooms that Nikon has serve two different market, just like the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-105 f/4 and the two 70-200s.

There is a 16-35 f/2.8, and I have it.  It works great for landscapes.

I don't understand who they are targeting with this new 17-40?  I could see a 17-50 f/2.8-4 being interesting I guess.  And I could see a 17-40 f/2.8 doing well.  I don't understand why I would want this 17-40 f/2.8-4 over my 16-35 unless the price was a lot less.
5D mark 2, 16-35mm f/2.8, 17mm TS-E f/4, 85mm f/1.8, 300mm f/4 + 1.4x, 580 EX Flash

jimmy156

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 39
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #19 on: March 08, 2012, 09:20:31 AM »
If this puppy comes out it will be hard for me not to sell my perfect 17-40 f/4L for this

The 17-40mm is far from perfect. I suggest learning to read an MFT chart as the first step, and then having a good look at the corners of your shots at f/4.

why be condescending? The 17-40L is capable of taking stunning photo's, what else is necessary?

cfai84

  • Guest
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #20 on: April 22, 2012, 12:57:44 PM »
The price most likely will double or hit somewhere around the 1400-1600 range just like the 24-70mm; if nothing is really astonishing about it comparing to the previous one...

Any idea how long will it take since patent release?


spinworkxroy

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 261
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2012, 01:08:14 PM »
The price most likely will double or hit somewhere around the 1400-1600 range just like the 24-70mm; if nothing is really astonishing about it comparing to the previous one...

Any idea how long will it take since patent release?

Not all patent get released..
Sometimes they patent it because they are testing it..doesn't mean they will ever release it..:)
Like hat many have mentioned…why the need for this lens when if you're going to pay so much more for it (i'm sure of that), just go get the 16-35 then..
It could just be one of Canon's "test" lenses that got patented and they're still deciding if they want to release it..i don't know…we might never see the light of it

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2012, 01:08:14 PM »

Heidrun

  • Guest
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #22 on: April 22, 2012, 04:20:07 PM »
Dont need a new 17-40. I need a 12-24 or 14-24. If its not with 2,8. Then i want it with 4,0 L is

Jettatore

  • Guest
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #23 on: April 22, 2012, 04:48:13 PM »
How about a 12-40 f/4 or a 16-35 f/2 (I know next to nothing about lens construction so they probably are both impossible to build without weighing 50 pounds each)

dunkers

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #24 on: April 22, 2012, 04:51:27 PM »
If this puppy comes out it will be hard for me not to sell my perfect 17-40 f/4L for this

The 17-40mm is far from perfect. I suggest learning to read an MFT chart as the first step, and then having a good look at the corners of your shots at f/4.

why be condescending? The 17-40L is capable of taking stunning photo's, what else is necessary?

+1
MTF charts aren't everything. If you're happy with the photos that it produces, then it is perfect your tastes.
5D3 | 60D | 100L IS | 70-200L II IS | 24-105L

NWPhil

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 179
  • one eye; one shot - multiple misses
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #25 on: April 23, 2012, 02:58:29 PM »
If this puppy comes out it will be hard for me not to sell my perfect 17-40 f/4L for this

The 17-40mm is far from perfect. I suggest learning to read an MFT chart as the first step, and then having a good look at the corners of your shots at f/4.

why be condescending? The 17-40L is capable of taking stunning photo's, what else is necessary?

+1
MTF charts aren't everything. If you're happy with the photos that it produces, then it is perfect your tastes.

+1

now about the lens:
if a constant 2.8 would allow me to obtain good IQ at f/4, would be a deal, but not with variable aperture - and like others I would rather see a 14-24 2.8.

Maybe not so much of a need during daytime; for low light conditions and nighscapes, I can see the use.
I have the 17-40, and can't even recall using it at 40mm focal, but often I get down to f/4 and find myself still pushing the iso
Canon shooter, but anything goes as ammunition (L, non L, Zeiss, Leica, Rokinon,Sigma)

birdman

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 123
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #26 on: April 26, 2012, 05:26:59 PM »
All I know is the current 17-40 distorts pretty bad until about 19mm. My copy does at least. I would prefer wider, maybe 15-30mm, if that's even feasible, and has 77mm filter threads.

They're gonna milk the 16-35/2.8 until sales drop A LOT. At its current price, the only reason to buy is for a tiny bit wider angle and 2.8 aperture (over the 17-40). I hope they will make a stellar UWA...and of course given their newer lens prices don't expect one for under $1,800.0
5d2; 17-40L; 35L; 50/1.8 Mk. 1; 70-300 IS; 100mm/2.8

awinphoto

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1994
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #27 on: April 26, 2012, 06:07:46 PM »
The 17-40 is supposed to be better on the wide end than the long end... while I would love an update i do have a few concerns...

A) this lens sharply increasing in price, 16-35 II, 70-200 2.8 II, 5dIII, etc... 
B) like many newer updates, the lens becoming an 82mm rather than 77mm...
C) not really jiving over the variable aperture aspect of this lens...  I would love a 2.8 option, but 2.8 on the wide end really isn't as much as a benefit as it is on the long end... But i dont know if it's even possible to have F4 on the 17 end and 2.8 for the 40 end...  Kinda seems simpler to have a constant aperture, unless that will increase costs even more. 
Canon 5d III, Canon 24-105L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 70-200 F4L, Canon 100L 2.8, 430EX 2's and a lot of bumps along the road to get to where I am.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #27 on: April 26, 2012, 06:07:46 PM »

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4052
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #28 on: May 02, 2012, 09:12:07 AM »
The price most likely will double or hit somewhere around the 1400-1600 range just like the 24-70mm; if nothing is really astonishing about it comparing to the previous one...

Any idea how long will it take since patent release?


If the price is btw $1400-$1600.... 16-35 II seems to be a better choice<f2.8 end to end>. I would ONLY consider IF this lens has ZERO distortion at 17mm on FF.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2012, 09:15:17 AM by Dylan777 »
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1516
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #29 on: May 02, 2012, 09:45:02 AM »
If this puppy comes out it will be hard for me not to sell my perfect 17-40 f/4L for this

The 17-40mm is far from perfect. I suggest learning to read an MFT chart as the first step, and then having a good look at the corners of your shots at f/4.

why be condescending? The 17-40L is capable of taking stunning photo's, what else is necessary?

I had 2 17-40's one new and one recently used from ebay. I sold the new one unimpressed... then after a year decided due to filter sizes (77mm), it will go well with my other lenses, so I got one from ebay...

I could not be happier. It is small, sharp, wide... and a great value for the money. It can take some amazing shots...
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon 17-40 f/2.8-4L
« Reply #29 on: May 02, 2012, 09:45:02 AM »