Patent: Canon EF 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS

[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/?p=15775"></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/?p=15775">Tweet</a></div>
<p>A patent for an EF 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS has appeared. Along with this lens is a patent for the EF 24-70 f/4L IS. I do think Canon does need a new full frame non-L zoom lens to go into less expensive kits, or for an even less expensive full frame camera down the road.</p>
<p><strong>Description and self-interpretation of the patent literature</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Patent Publication No. 2014-16464,2014-16465
<ul>
<li>Publication date 2014.1.30</li>
<li>Filing date 2012.7.9</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Example 3
<ul>
<li>Macro when in parentheses</li>
<li>Zoom ratio 2.84 (2.87)</li>
<li>Focal length f = 24.30-35.10-69.00mm (67.23-60.62)</li>
<li>Fno. 4.10 (5.28-5.56)</li>
<li>Half angle ω = 41.68-31.65-17.41 ° (17.84-19.64)</li>
<li>Image height Y = 21.64mm</li>
<li>134.65-141.04-164.94mm overall length of the lens (162.09-152.75)</li>
<li>BF 39.15-46.02-59.68mm (64.95-67.73)</li>
<li>β = -0.17 (-0.7)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Example 4
<ul>
<li>Macro when in parentheses</li>
<li>Zoom ratio 3.42 (2.84)</li>
<li>Focal length f = 24.30-35.10-82.99mm (68.22-64.03)</li>
<li>Fno. 3.58-4.42-5.89 (5.92-5.87)</li>
<li>Half angle ω = 41.68-31.65-14.61 ° (17.60-18.67)</li>
<li>Image height Y = 21.64mm</li>
<li>126.64-128.32-155.92mm overall length of the lens (149.57-148.58)</li>
<li>BF 39.39-49.31-64.14mm (65.59-65.96)</li>
<li>β = -0.17 (-0.6)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Canon patents
<ul>
<li>(4, etc. as in Example 3) seven-group zoom of positive and negative positive and negative positive positive and negative</li>
<li>(4, etc. the second group, as in Example 3) inner focus</li>
<li>implement the macro function by the first group fed out to the object side</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-02-10" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[chmteacher]

Boring, slow, and the opposite of innovative.

 

[Random Orbits]

Agree on the need of a consumer zoom. FF prices will fall, and as it does, there will be a market for consumer FF zooms.

 

[preppyak]

Boring, slow, and the opposite of innovative.

Eh, what can they really innovate in that spectrum? They already have the whole 24-xx spectrum covered; they just need to update the 28-135.

They'd obviously have to sell this below the street price of the 24-105 to have any chance of it selling well; it'll be interesting to see if they can release something like this for <$600.

 

[cellomaster27]

overkill. really doesn't seem necessary AT ALL imho. different thoughts? lol

 

[RGomezPhotos]

At first I thought "boring". Really, a 24-70L f4? But then I thought of it as broadening their range. There's not much in the middle. You got low and high. Okay, boring but practical at least.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

Poor Canon. About to lose a TON of its video shooters to Panasonic with the GH4. Getting beat now by Sigma in regards to stellar optics at an affordable price. Trying to merely catch Nikon on the UWA. I really hope the "year of the lens" is more than just vari-aperture designs an IS updates to relatively slow primes.

 

[Dylan777]

EF 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS = :'(

 

[verysimplejason]

It'll be useful only if it's priced significantly below the white-boxed 24-105 L lens and its IQ comparable again to the 24-105 L (at least near it).

 

[dgatwood]

Eh, what can they really innovate in that spectrum? They already have the whole 24-xx spectrum covered; they just need to update the 28-135.

Not really, on both counts. This looks like Canon is trying to build some new low-end kit lenses for convincing people to switch from crop-body cameras to full-frame cameras. If you want to get the low-end consumers to move from EF-S to EF, you need a lens that will feel similar to what they're shooting with now. Lots of folks shoot with the 18–55 kit lens, which is angle-equivalent to about a 29–88. For those folks, a 24–85 lens is a pretty good match—wider at the wide end, and only slightly wider at the long end.

The big problem I see with this is that they're adding this lens into a market that already offers a better full-frame kit lens (the 24–105), with more reach, and a bigger aperture (except at the widest setting), for not a whole lot of money. If this lens costs, for example, $500, I'd expect most folks to instead pony up the extra couple hundred bucks for a white-box 24–105. The tiny bit of extra light gathering at the wide end can't make up for the loss at the other end, and the extra reach of the 24–105 gets it a lot closer to what most EF-S camera users use. The only way this lens makes sense is if it is just ridiculously cheap—we're talking shorty forty cheap.

In other words, I'm not sure why they bothered. But more than that, I really don't understand why they would produce a FF equivalent to the kit lens, but not to the step-up lenses. Of the crop-body camera owners who upgrade to a step-up lens, I'm pretty sure the majority choose either either the 15–85 or 18–135 lens, and Canon has nothing equivalent to either of those lenses. The closest they come to a FF equivalent of the 15–85 is the 28–135, which is noticeably less wide on the wide end. And Canon doesn't have anything even remotely comparable to the 18–135 unless you either include discontinued lenses or the 28–300L monstrosity.

So... I just have no idea what their marketing people are thinking. IMO, Canon seriously needs consumer-grade, image-stabilized 24–135 and 28–250 lenses. They sure as heck don't need a 24–85. Just my $0.02.

 

[pj1974]

The idea of a Canon EF 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS lens is nothing very fascinating. (Unlike Canon’s EF 200-400mm 1.4x f/4 L USM IS which I believe is a phenomenal lens!)
However I do see it might have merit if Canon can produce it at a price at least a couple hundred dollars lower than the 24-70mm L IS (which I believe is its current closest ‘competition’).

Canon already have produced a 24-85mm f/3.5-5.6 USM but without IS. See some reviews / user reports here:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/185-canon-ef-24-85mm-f35-45-usm-lab-test-report--review
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/59/cat/11
http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/6/sort/7/cat/27/page/1
It does ok, but doesn’t performing that well wide open and while it has USM, it doesn’t have IS. So, to me, it’s a new 24-85mm might be close to the same size (or even slightly smaller) than the current 24-70mm L IS, it could win if it’s a ‘budget’ option. I agree with some other posts, that the 24-105mm is still a compelling budget option too (it’s L and weather sealed, but not optically the most brilliant across the board, but it’s got decent bang for the buck).

I used to have the 28-135mm USM IS (and a decent copy of that), however I sold it after I bought an EF-S 15-85mm (much more practical zoom range for an APS-C).
I could see some people pairing a decent (new) EF 24-85mm with a 6D, if it was priced right –and had at least decent (if not stellar) optics, especially ‘wide open’.

Let’s see what eventuates!

 

[mrsfotografie]

Makes sense, with full frame sensors moving down the line, Canon needs to reinvent the entry level full frame standard zoom. FWIW the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is no longer listed on the Canon Europe website.

 

[dufflover]

They need some sort of cheap FF kit lens. They just need to remember to make it cheap.
You fixed/variable aperture snobs can go on whinging though; this never is/was about saying it's a "good" lens though good to see Canon's recent releases even down the consumer end (like the EF-S STMs) have great IQ.

This is purely for the people who are convinced to buy one because it comes with a lens that doesn't add a bucketload of cost. Better getting them a body with future possibilities of sales than not getting the body sale at all because the price shot up too much with the L-zoom.

 

[rs]

Makes sense, with full frame sensors moving down the line, Canon needs to reinvent the entry level full frame standard zoom. FWIW the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is no longer listed on the Canon Europe website.

+1

While this lens isn't for me or most of the people who read this site, Canon sell a huge number of rebels with kit lenses. This is merely a FF kit lens, hopefully with a price tag, size and weight to match. Just look at the myriad of 28-80 and 28-90 kit zooms that Canon used to make to get an idea of what this lens could represent.

Let's hope that the intention of this patent at least means the the intention to make a FF rebel and/or SL1/100D to compliment this lens - not now, but a couple of years down the line when FF sensor prices drop further

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Eh, what can they really innovate in that spectrum? They already have the whole 24-xx spectrum covered; they just need to update the 28-135.

Not really, on both counts. This looks like Canon is trying to build some new low-end kit lenses for convincing people to switch from crop-body cameras to full-frame cameras. If you want to get the low-end consumers to move from EF-S to EF, you need a lens that will feel similar to what they're shooting with now. Lots of folks shoot with the 18–55 kit lens, which is angle-equivalent to about a 29–88. For those folks, a 24–85 lens is a pretty good match—wider at the wide end, and only slightly wider at the long end.

The whole point in a kit lens is for the photographer to start with something cheap so they would get a good idea what lens they want to spend good money on (wider and/or longer, faster, etc).

In other words, I doubt people would start with APS-C + 18-55mm and say "oh, I like the lens, we just want a bigger sensor", and fork the cash needed for a 6D + EF 24-85mm.

The scenarios I see are

A) APS-C + kit -> upgrade lens -> possibly buy more lenses -> upgrade to FF

B) Cheap FF w/ EF 24–85 in the kit -> upgrade lenses.

In the later case, a cheaper than the current 24-105mm kit would make it easier to buy FF as first camera, skipping APS-C cameras altogether.

 

[verysimplejason]

So that would spell the end of the 24-105.

It will entirely depend on the IQ and price...

 

[rs]

So that would spell the end of the 24-105.

Example 3 on this patent is quite likely the end of the 24-105.

 

[traveller]

I'm not sure that this isn't just a possibility that Canon patented when it was designing full-frame macro capable standard zooms; it seems to me that what we actually got was the 24-70 f/4 IS.

Does Canon need a lower price kit lens? That depends upon the price of the camera body; it seems that kit lenses tend to fall into the "cost ~25-33% of camera body price" bracket. Currently the 24-105 is selling for $1100/£650, which is fine for the $3200/£2300 5D Mk3, but a bit high for the $1750/£1350 6D.

Canon are also deeply Nikon focused (and vice-versa), Nikon have a cheaper kit option with their new 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 VR at $2296. Whilst the 6D has the better lens, for the uninitiated $2450/£1925 is still more expensive than the Nikon kit. On top of this, I'd be willing to bet that Canon is making a lower profit margin on its 6D kit than Nikon is on their D610 kit. This would leave them vulnerable to any price cutting promotion from Nikon, so there is probably some justification for a cheaper kit lens option, however boring to forum members!

 

[Woody]

Nikon has a cheap low weight (465g) 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 VR lens as cheap kit lens.

Canon's patent calls for 24-85 f/3.5-5.6 IS.

Hope Canon can improve on this unless Canon's version is MUCH lighter.

 

[Marsu42]

However I do see it might have merit if Canon can produce it at a price at least a couple hundred dollars lower than the 24-70mm L IS (which I believe is its current closest ‘competition’).

Doesn't mean much as the 24-70L/4 is still overpriced - but probably this upcoming new lens is the reason for that, they don't want to compete with themselves but intended to leave some space below all along.

Example 3 on this patent is quite likely the end of the 24-105.

... and as the new lens won't be sealed Canon at least gets rid of the competitior for their 24-70L zooms, making people interested in a large zoom lens buy a 70-xyz right away :->