Patent: Canon 11-24mm f/4 Lens

HTML:
<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/2014/01/patent-canon-11-24mm-f4-lens/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/01/patent-canon-11-24mm-f4-lens/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-01-25" title="Egami" target="_blank">Egami</a> has shown that Canon has filed a patent for an ultra-wide angle zoom:</p>
<p>(Translated)</p>
<p>Description and self-interpretation of the patent literature</p>
<p><strong>Patent Publication No. 2014-10286</strong>
</p>
<li>Publication date 2014.1.20</li>
<li>Filing date 2012.6.29</li>
<p>
</p>
<p><strong>Example 1</strong>
</p>
<li>Zoom ratio 2.06</li>
<li>Focal length f = 11.30-18.00-23.30mm</li>
<li>Fno. 4.10</li>
<li>Half angle ω = 62.42-50.24-42.88mm</li>
<li>Image height Y = 21.64mm</li>
<li>172.19-161.28-162.86mm overall length of the lens</li>
<li>BF 38.82-52.31-63.15mm</li>
<p>
</p>
<p>Canon users have been left out in this focal range for quite some time. With Nikon and their legendary 14-24mm f/2.8G ED and  other third party offerings filling up the gap in the market. Can Canon produce an optically superior lens that also has such a shallow depth of field? Until they do, the only wide-angle zooms that Canon makes that come close are the <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/review-canon-ef-16-35mm-f2-8l-ii/" title="16-35mm review" target="_blank">16-35 f/2.8 L II</a> or the <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/review-canon-ef-8-15-f4l-fisheye/" title="8-15mm review" target="_blank">8-15mm f/4L Fisheye</a>.</p>
<p>[<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-01-25" title="Egami" target="_blank">Egami</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
 

Tom W

EOS R5
Sep 5, 2012
360
357
lol said:
"image height" would give the radius of the image circle. Double that is enough to cover the diagonal of a full frame sensor.

Thank you! It's unusual for me, but I decided to withhold my opinion until I learned what "Y" was. :)

Yes, if it's full frame and of good quality, I would be wanting this lens badly! Heck, I could use it on the cropper also.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 22, 2013
932
60
ewg963 said:
I wish it was f/2.8...

Just out of curiousity, why? I mean, practically, and not just because you want a collection of f/2.8 or faster lenses :)

24mm is too wide for events & people (where you might want the speed) due to the distortion, so odds are 99% of the use of this will be for landscape. Landscape is f/8+ most of the time... And the wide side we already have the 16-35mm f/2.8 for events & people - whose focal length is actually long enough to shoot people without unflattering distortion.

It is possible the f/4 design might reduce cost, size, weight, and actually improve image quality at smaller apertures where this would be used 99% of the time.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 22, 2013
932
60
willis said:
Cool patent, but just make it F2.8 ::)
Would be amazing landscape lens and for star photography.

Comparing the 16-35 f/2.8 and 17-40 f/4, the 17-40 actually performs better at small apertures than the 16-35 f/2.8. Small apertures is where most of landscape work is done, thus the f/4 may actually be preferable to f/2.8 for landscape.

In terms of star photography, it is doubtful you are going to get anything better than the 8-15mm fisheye, 24mm f/1.4, or 24-70 f/2.8 II - all great existing options for stars.

This lens would likely fill the hole in ultrawide rectilinear zoom while preserving quality at small apertures for landscape which an f/2.8 lens might not be able to do as well.
 
Upvote 0

rs

Dec 29, 2012
1,024
0
UK
Zv said:
It's only a patent. Unlikely this will ever see the light of day. Least we know Canon are exploring the wide end for a change.

11mm? How would that work I wonder while keeping it rectilinear? Intresting.

It's possible. Anything where the diagonal sees less than 180' is possible. Just difficult. A rectilinear lens will need the corners stretching out loads to keep straight lines straight, and being such an extreme wide angle, expect huge stretching from such a lens. Clouds in the sky will take on a whole new lens created shape.

http://www.canon.com/bctv/calculator/calculator1.html will give you an idea about the AoV of such a lens.

The Sigma 12-24 is the nearest match that currently exists.
 
Upvote 0