Patent: Canon RF 17-70mm f/3.5-5.6

Ale_F

6D - 7D
Nov 22, 2018
44
32
This could be better than 24-240.
Actually Canon is looking to a mid-high market, but if it wants to sell numbers, there is a need of non-L lenses. Not 1 or 2 but 5 -6 lenses.
I see in the future also 2 other pieces: a simple and compact R without viewfinder (lower than RP) and a 35mm pancake.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,112
356
While it's not a standard APS-C kit lens, even though it would be much better to have an RF-S 17-70mm, it would to the job in a pinch if Canon wanted to simply release an APS-C camera into the wild with no supporting RF-S lenses. It's one of the few full frame lenses that I could see fitting into both full frame and aps-c, as a kit lens for both sensor sizes. the EOS RP could use it as a sweet kit lens, and so could an APS-C RF camera.

Also, this is the second time we've seen 17-70mm in patent applications, which makes it a bit more likely it's going to happen.
17-70 would go nicely with 70-200, 70-300 and 100-400 on either a FF or crop camera.
 
Aug 22, 2010
1,608
304
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
I'm really surprised that Canon haven't designed a range of small and light pancake prime lenses...after all...the RF mount is an ideal Range Finder.
So far every thing launched has been in the exotic and very large category. But for many, the RF mount sits alongside their EF kit and needs to find a reason to be...so small and light is the way forwards for many. Not everyone is looking for an DSLR replacement camera.
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
437
261
I'm really surprised that Canon haven't designed a range of small and light pancake prime lenses...after all...the RF mount is an ideal Range Finder.
So far every thing launched has been in the exotic and very large category. But for many, the RF mount sits alongside their EF kit and needs to find a reason to be...so small and light is the way forwards for many. Not everyone is looking for an DSLR replacement camera.
'Designed' and 'launched' are two very different things. We don't really know what Canon has been designing, we only know what they announce.
Personally, I'm hoping for an improved version of the EF f/1.8 primes in RF mount, but I wouldn't say no to an RF version of the EF-M 22mm f/2.
 

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
292
113
I'm really surprised that Canon haven't designed a range of small and light pancake prime lenses...after all...the RF mount is an ideal Range Finder.
So far every thing launched has been in the exotic and very large category. But for many, the RF mount sits alongside their EF kit and needs to find a reason to be...so small and light is the way forwards for many. Not everyone is looking for an DSLR replacement camera.
Hear hear! I'm keen of course to see the 135/1.0 or whatever brain-melting spec they come up with next but the most likely lenses I'd buy are: 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8, all of which designed to stick out no further than the grip even at the sacrifice of optical quality. That said I don't think it need be a huge sacrifice. Leica's made rangefinder lenses like that for almost a century now; heck, Canon used to too. I used to always have my Contax G2, and later my EOS M, in my backpack. ALL the time. I got the R in Jan but I'm still taking more pix with the iPhone because the R with the 24-105 is just too big to have with me everywhere. (And the 35/1.8 is too: I don't need IS nor macro.)
 

Antono Refa

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
816
112
True, but that's not a standard kit lens on any of the 000x or 00x models. The normal kit lenses are 18-55 and 18-135. In the past they have started at 17, but the 15-85 was always a premium upgrade.
I think the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 and the EF-S 17-85mm were always a premium upgrade.
 
Jul 24, 2019
7
2
Only in your mind.

Image height: 21.64mm
That only confirms it's not an ff lens. The image height on an apsc lens is lower, but ff sensors are taller. So it will not cover the image on a FF sensor.

This confirms they are testing apsc lenses for a probable aspc Eos R camera.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,565
2,002
That only confirms it's not an ff lens. The image height on an apsc lens is lower, but ff sensors are taller. So it will not cover the image on a FF sensor.

This confirms they are testing apsc lenses for a probable aspc Eos R camera.
Sorry, but it only confirms you don’t understand patent nomenclature. ‘Image height’ in an optical formula patent refers to the radius of the image circle, i.e. one-half of the diagonal of the sensor. 21.64 mm x 2 = 43.3 mm, which is the diagonal of a 24 x 36 mm FF sensor. It’s a FF lens.
 
Jul 24, 2019
7
2
Sorry, but it only confirms you don’t understand patent nomenclature. ‘Image height’ in an optical formula patent refers to the radius of the image circle, i.e. one-half of the diagonal of the sensor. 21.64 mm x 2 = 43.3 mm, which is the diagonal of a 24 x 36 mm FF sensor. It’s a FF lens.
True, I'm not used to trusting what I can see on these patents.

Time will tell us what Canon does .
 
  • Like
Reactions: neuroanatomist

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,153
566
I think the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 and the EF-S 17-85mm were always a premium upgrade.
15-85.

"Premium" or not, but it's an equivalent of 24mm-... FF, which is a pretty common standard for a "normal-range" zoom these days.
 
Jul 24, 2019
7
2
15-85.

"Premium" or not, but it's an equivalent of 24mm-... FF, which is a pretty common standard for a "normal-range" zoom these days.
All three were premium upgrades for apsc models.

And before those existed, canon apsc users had the Ef 17-40 f4 L.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Antono Refa

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,153
566
All three were premium upgrades for apsc models.

And before those existed, canon apsc users had the Ef 17-40 f4 L.
I don't care what they were. There was a time when a consumer 28-80 lens was a "premium upgrade" to a kit 35-80. But the times have changed, and today a "standard" zoom without a 24mm equivalent in its zoom range cannot be called "an ideal lens".
 
  • Like
Reactions: flip314
Jul 24, 2019
7
2
I don't care what they were. There was a time when a consumer 28-80 lens was a "premium upgrade" to a kit 35-80. But the times have changed, and today a "standard" zoom without a 24mm equivalent in its zoom range cannot be called "an ideal lens".
I totally agree with that!
I got used to having a 24 equivalent on my hs10 9 years ago and when I bought my Apsc camera 18mm wasn't wide enough sometimes.

Now I use a 17-50 2.8 which is ok on the wide end when you get used to it.

The EFs 15-85 is a great lens, but a new version is long overdue.

Or at least the same lens at a better price.