Patent: 24-1060mm Zoom Lens

[Canon Rumors Guy]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/patent-24-1060-zoom-lens/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/patent-24-1060-zoom-lens/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/patent-24-1060-zoom-lens/"></a></div>
<strong>That’s a 44x Zoom


</strong>Canon has published a patent for a zoom lens with an equivalent focal length of 24-1060. That’s a 44x zoom for those that are counting. Could we see this in the next SX PowerShot camera? A good possibility.</p>
<p><strong>Patent Publication No. 2012-98699</strong></p>

<ul>
<li>2012.5.24 Release Date</li>
<li>2010.10.7 filing date</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Example 7</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Zoom ratio 44.28</li>
<li>13.08 – - 190.43mm f = 4.30 focal length</li>
<li>Fno 2.87 – 5.00 – 7.07</li>
<li>16.50 – - 1.17 deg 37.77 a half angle of view.</li>
<li>3.88 – - 3.88mm 3.33 image height</li>
<li>93.62 – - 137.94mm 94.49 lens length</li>
<li>BF 1.00mm</li>
<li>13 pieces in 10 groups Lens Construction</li>
<li>Two four-sided aspherical</li>
<li>3 UD glass sheet</li>
<li>One fluorite</li>
<li>Group 4 consists of positive and negative positive positive</li>
<li>(For Focusing the fourth lens group) Rear focus</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2012-05-30" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[TrumpetPower!]

Eh, maybe I'm misreading this...but I see:

• 13.08 – - 190.43mm f = 4.30 focal length

190.43 / 13.08 = 14.56

Also, assuming that the lens is 24 - ? in 135-format FOV equivalent, then 24 / 13 = 1.8x crop factor, and it'd be 350 equivalent at the long end.

Still, a 15x optical zoom is impressive in what's essentially a 4/3 format, as is 350mm equivalent telephoto.

But maybe I'm looking at the worng part of the list, or my math is off?

b&

 

[neuroanatomist]

Misread. It's 4.3mm - 190.4mm which gives the 44x, and the crop factor is 5.6x, which is a 1/2.3" sensor, the same size found in SX260 HS (and many other P&S cameras).

At the long end it's f/7.1 - that's pretty dark (and likely beyond the aperture where the diffraction penalty starts for a 12-14 MP 1/2.3" sensor).

 

[VirtualRain]

Oh c'mon... It looks like the EF 24-1000 f2.8 L IS USM Zoom we've all been waiting for! ;D

 

[gmrza]

Likely MTF data on a lens like this? 500 line widths per image height at the long end? How can a lens with that kind of zoom factor not be a huge compromise on IQ?

 

[Dianoda]

Just curious, does anyone know if Canon has put a fluorite element in a p&s lens before? This one is a bit... odd. Maybe targeted for video?

 

[TrumpetPower!]

Misread. It's 4.3mm - 190.4mm which gives the 44x, and the crop factor is 5.6x, which is a 1/2.3" sensor, the same size found in SX260 HS (and many other P&S cameras).

At the long end it's f/7.1 - that's pretty dark (and likely beyond the aperture where the diffraction penalty starts for a 12-14 MP 1/2.3" sensor).

Ah -- thanks. Makes sense.

Your correction, that is...the lens doesn't. Sounds like it originated entirely within the marketing department. "Hey! I know! Let's create a 100x superultramegazoom that tops out at a billion million thousand at the long end!"

I'll guarantee you that every photographer and engineer at Canon who worked on it had to suppress multiple exclamations of, "Just what kind of crack are you smoking?"

Ignore the optics for a moment. Can you imagine the sort of camera shake you'll get with a 1000mm equivalent held at arm's length? Now, add back in the optics, plus the small sensor, plus the fact that there's no mention of mechanical stabilization...we're talking an expensive paperweight here that's only good for making impressionistic blurs barely distinguishable from the high ISO noise.

Cheers,

b&

 

[neuroanatomist]

Can you imagine the sort of camera shake you'll get with a 1000mm equivalent held at arm's length?

Oh I dunno about that. Even at f/7.1, in sufficiently bright light - say, the Utah salt flats at high noon, or better yet, the dayside on Mercury - one ought to be able to get a high enough shutter speed.

 

[RunAndGun]

Your correction, that is...the lens doesn't. Sounds like it originated entirely within the marketing department. "Hey! I know! Let's create a 100x superultramegazoom that tops out at a billion million thousand at the long end!"

I'll guarantee you that every photographer and engineer at Canon who worked on it had to suppress multiple exclamations of, "Just what kind of crack are you smoking?"

Ignore the optics for a moment. Can you imagine the sort of camera shake you'll get with a 1000mm equivalent held at arm's length? Now, add back in the optics, plus the small sensor, plus the fact that there's no mention of mechanical stabilization...we're talking an expensive paperweight here that's only good for making impressionistic blurs barely distinguishable from the high ISO noise.

Cheers,

b&

Lol. I live in the TV world and we actually have 100x zoom lenses. Canon makes two and Fuji makes a 101x. With the 2x engaged, you're talking about a top end equivalent to over 7,000mm. Granted they weigh over 50lbs a piece and cost as much as a small house... I'd settle for a quality still lens equal to my "bread & butter" TV lens, 13x4.5 f/1.8(4.5mm-59mm)(2/3" sensor) which translates to about 17.5mm-228mm(full frame 35mm). Plus with the built-in 2x you can go to an equivalent of about 456mm on the top end. Granted we're still talking about something that costs as much as a nice car...

 

[Eagle Eye]

Got some info on this. Talked to the guy at my local camera shop and he said that his Canon rep told him that this lens was going to be for a new 100mp 3D (Mark II) full frame camera with 12 fps. The lens is going to have eight stops of image stabilization and a "perfect picture" mode. Not sure what that is... It's due out in 2018. I really need a zoom is this range now. I wanted the 24-105, but this lens will probably noticeably make my photos more perfect. Should I wait?

 

[unfocused]

This isn't that big of a surprise. The SX40 already has a 24-840 equivalent. It has a viewfinder (crappy) so you don't have to hold it at arm's length. Nikon and other competitors have similar super zooms. All have IS. This is entertaining, but it's really evolutionary and to be expected.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

* Two four-sided aspherical

Huh? Shouldn't that be four two-sided aspherical?

 

[Positron]

Got some info on this. Talked to the guy at my local camera shop and he said that his Canon rep told him that this lens was going to be for a new 100mp 3D (Mark II) full frame camera with 12 fps. The lens is going to have eight stops of image stabilization and a "perfect picture" mode. Not sure what that is... It's due out in 2018. I really need a zoom is this range now. I wanted the 24-105, but this lens will probably noticeably make my photos more perfect. Should I wait?

You know by the time it's out there will be something better in the pipe. I think you should just buy 3 copies of the 28-300L and connect them end-to-end with gaffer's tape.

* Two four-sided aspherical

Huh? Shouldn't that be four two-sided aspherical?

No, the lens elements are actually cuboids. Every surface is ASPH except for the front and rear.

 

[q3chap]

Oh c'mon... It looks like the EF 24-1000 f2.8 L IS USM Zoom we've all been waiting for! ;D

Yes, I think this is THE announcement of the year. I dont know if I should preorder it with a price tag of 249000 USD. Hmn .. I am affraid, that there will be a delays of ten years because of the earth quake in thailand.

 

[bbasiaga]

If its not at least as sharp as the 24 TSE II wide open on the wide end, and maintain the resolution of the hubble telescope at the long end, then it'll be a total fail and I'm switching to Olympus. LOL

-Brian

 

[Dylan777]

Reminded me of this video on youtube:

5200mm Canon Lens World's MOST powerful Super telephoto EF FD (updated upload)

watch .55sec to end

 

[Caps18]

They should make it with an EF mount. Add some IS in there too. Make it an L lens while you are at it.

I could get some good pictures at the game from the nose bleed seats with a 2x.

You do need a 2000mm to get a good picture of the Moon.

 

[dryanparker]

Can you imagine the sort of camera shake you'll get with a 1000mm equivalent held at arm's length?

Oh I dunno about that. Even at f/7.1, in sufficiently bright light - say, the Utah salt flats at high noon, or better yet, the dayside on Mercury - one ought to be able to get a high enough shutter speed.

Hehe... +1

 

[Daniel Flather]

It will be out in November 2012 2014