Canon Still in Deep Research of Canon EF Cinema Lenses

Richard Cox
5 Min Read
Canon Patent Cine Zooms

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here’s how it works.

This is a curious patent application from Canon. From the designs, it’s pretty evident that these aren’t your usual mirrorless zoom lenses.

A little background first on what we use to determine use cases for lenses. It’s all about the image height.

The image height on Canon’s published applications and patents is the radius of the projected image circle required to fully illuminate the sensor. Essentially, the diagonal measurement of the sensor is divided by two.

Armed with this, we break out our handy calculator and using the size of the C300 Mark III as a baseline with a Super-35 sensor size of 26.2 x 13.8 mm, which means that the diagonal measurement is 29.61mm and that halved is 14.8mm. Now when we look at the patent application and see that the image height in teh patent application is 14.8mm, then it is almost a certainty that these lenses are meant to project an image over a super-35 sensor.

We do this with all patents, but we usually see numbers that are very similar in dimension. For example, 13.66mm is typically APS-C, and 21.64mm is standard for full-frame cameras. That wraps up the math lesson for the day; the test is scheduled for Wednesday. No calculators or AI allowed.

Now, back to this patent application. In this patent application, we see some complex inner zoom designs with an image height of Super 35, which leads me to believe that these are intended to be Cini lenses, most of which are helpful for the old EF mount.

How relevant are these when everyone’s switched to mirrorless? It’s hard to say, as there’s still a vast number of EF-mount cinema cameras in the world – it would seem odd for Canon itself not to sell lenses to those who may actually need them. These lenses all have variable aperture, which is usually frowned upon, but these may be less expensive variants than the eye watering price of the constant aperture cine zooms that start with the baseline price of “if you have to ask, you can’t afford it”

Canon CN-E 24-300mm F2.8-4

This cinema zoom is a super zoom, ranging from 24-300mm, maintaining a constant f/2.8 throughout the wide to 150mm range. That makes it a fairly credible f/2.8 zoom cinema lens, capable of zooming up to 150mm at 2.8. That may be Canon’s thinking is that there’s going to be a limit to how much you zoom in and need to keep a constant aperture, that the variable after a point does not matter. I honestly have no idea, I’m sure someone will tell me if I’m wrong ;)

WideMiddleTelephoto
Focal Length24.94
F-Number2.73 2.73 4.10  
Half Angle of View30.69 5.74 2.95  
Image Height14.8014.8014.80
Lens Length316.78 316.78 316.78
Back Focus Distance40.0040.0040.00

Canon CN-E 15-120mm F2.8-4.0

As with the prior design, this zoom maintains a constant 2.8 aperture through its mid-range zoom distance of 85mm, making it a very interesting 15-85mm F2.8 lens with the ability to extend to 120mm with a variable aperture.

WideMiddleTelephoto
Focal Length15.09 84.97 116.08  
F-Number2.72 2.73 3.65  
Half Angle of View44.45 9.88 7.27    
Image Height14.8014.8014.80
Lens Length339.07 339.07 339.07
Back Focus Distance46.1646.1646.16

Closing Thoughts

Canon appears to have stagnated somewhat with its cinema line; perhaps it needs to acquire Arri and accelerate its efforts. We did mention this in the past, so Canon, you have a large war chest for this sort of thing – here’s your chance to do a Nikon, but only better.

Just a Reminder!

With all patents and patent applications, I have to stress constantly – this is simply a look into Canon’s research; the only thing we can quantify accurately is that Canon is researching this. A patent application doesn’t mean they are going to release this in the next month, or even year, or even at all.

Go to discussion...

Share This Article
Follow:
Richard has been using Canon cameras since the 1990s, with his first being the now legendary EOS-3. Since then, Richard has continued to use Canon cameras and now focuses mostly on the genre of infrared photography.

4 comments

  1. Interesting find. Canon seems to be keeping cinema glass development pretty active, even with all the push toward RF lenses. Makes me wonder if they’re planning something bigger for the cine line, or just protecting patents for future options.
  2. These lenses raise a question. Why can't/don't still zoom lenses hold the larger aperture for as much of the zoom range as possible. For example, a 300 f/2.8 lens requires a front element of about 107mm. Now consider a 100-300 f/2-2.8. That 107mm should allow that f/2 to be maintained out to 214mm. So why doesn't it? My fantasy lens would be a 200-500 f/2.8-4 with a selectable 1.4x TC. Update: It would hold f/2.8 out to 350 mm.
  3. These lenses raise a question. Why can't/don't still zoom lenses hold the larger aperture for as much of the zoom range as possible. For example, a 300 f/2.8 lens requires a front element of about 107mm. Now consider a 100-300 f/2-2.8. That 107mm should allow that f/2 to be maintained out to 214mm. So why doesn't it? My fantasy lens would be a 200-500 f/2.8-4 with a selectable 1.4x TC. Update: It would hold f/2.8 out to 350 mm.
    That's a great point, I can see 3 answers:
    • Image quality not up to L standards on the wider end with larger aperture.
    • Perceived quality, constant aperture is often seen as holy grail for zoom lenses and variables one something for entry level lenses.
    • Selling more lenses, if you provide a 200-500 f2.8-4.0 with 2.8 up to 350mm, who would buy a 400mm f2.8 ? We're speaking of a 13K€ lense that would not sell. I could see sigma doing it but not Canon.
  4. These lenses raise a question. Why can't/don't still zoom lenses hold the larger aperture for as much of the zoom range as possible. For example, a 300 f/2.8 lens requires a front element of about 107mm. Now consider a 100-300 f/2-2.8. That 107mm should allow that f/2 to be maintained out to 214mm. So why doesn't it? My fantasy lens would be a 200-500 f/2.8-4 with a selectable 1.4x TC. Update: It would hold f/2.8 out to 350 mm.
    Take a look at a zoom lens and you will see a chassis to carry the aperture blades down the barrel, and as the chassis moves down the barrel, you no longer have a 107mm opening. The opening is now down the barrel, not the opening at the end of the lens. That's how it seems to me, anyway and why these types of variable apertures would require a much larger front element and be much larger and heavier than people think. Maybe not even possible to design.

Leave a comment

Please log in to your forum account to comment