Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS

Status
Not open for further replies.

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
10,836
3,198
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
HTML:
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;clear:right; float:right; margin-left:10px; margin-top:10px;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/patent-ef-100-400-f4-5-5-6l-is/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float:right; margin-left:10px; margin-top:10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/patent-ef-100-400-f4-5-5-6l-is/" 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 style="clear:right; float:right; margin-left:10px; margin-top:10px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/patent-ef-100-400-f4-5-5-6l-is/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Another patent

</strong>This is probably the third separate patent I have seen for an EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS over the last 24 months. A zoom ring version does exist in the wild. We’re told the push/pull is finished and we’ll get a properly sealed 100-400. The cost will be north of $2500 USD and we could finally see it announced before the end of the year. Also appearing in the patent is a 70-300.</p>
<p><strong>The breakdown below is Google translated</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><span>Patent Publication No. 2013-105053</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Publication date 2013.5.30</span></li>
<li><span>Filing date 2011.11.15</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 1</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 4.01</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 72.48-135.49-290.86mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno. 4.58-4.94-5.85</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 16.62-9.07-4.25 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 21.64mm</span></li>
<li><span>143.42-175.48-201.87mm overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 39.98mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 3</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 3.75</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 104.16-166.66-391.00mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno. 4.60-5.20-5.80</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 11.73-7.40-3.17 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 21.64mm</span></li>
<li><span>221.48-252.31-300.68mm overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 70.65-87.69-113.37mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Canon</span><span> patent</span>
<ul>
<li><span>I want to put in the first group the anomalous dispersion optical element</span></li>
<li><span>It is possible correction and lateral chromatic axial chromatic aberration, but spherical aberration of color and field curvature occurs</span></li>
<li><span>By optimizing the placement, the correction and field curvature, the spherical aberration of the color of g-line</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2013-06-13" target="_blank">EG</a>]</strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,820
39
Interesting about 70-300. The current 70-300 is a great lens; light weight and reasonable sharp. Wonder what the Canon-gods have in store for us.

It would great if the new 100-400 is on par with the 70-300 or even better, close to the 70-200. Though I suspect a 4x zoom will be hard to make as sharp as the 70-200 (which is 2.8x zoom).
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,222
13,084
Where's Example 2??

Canon Rumors said:
We’re told the push/pull is finished and we’ll get a properly sealed 100-400.

The inference is that a push-pull lens is not 'properly sealed.' However, for the similarly-designed push-pull 28-300L, Canon states that the, "Tight seal structure ensures excellent dust-proof and drip-proof performance." So there's no reason we couldn't get a properly sealed push-pull 100-400L...
 
Upvote 0
AvTvM said:
at least in the patents one can see by how much Canon (and other lens makers) screw us by providing the focal lengths written on the lens! :mad:

no need to waste research on yet another boring, slow, consumer 70-300.
Just get on with that 100-400 II.
By that way of thinking, this other lens is just a boring, slow, consumer 100-400.

I think you need to man up and get the 200-400 1.4x. That one is definitely not a consumer lens. :p
 
Upvote 0
Nov 4, 2011
3,165
0
neuroanatomist said:
The inference is that a push-pull lens is not 'properly sealed.' However, for the similarly-designed push-pull 28-300L, Canon states that the, "Tight seal structure ensures excellent dust-proof and drip-proof performance." So there's no reason we couldn't get a properly sealed push-pull 100-400L...

Don't know how difficult it may be to weatherseal push-pull zooms. Not interested in those.

What I am observing however, is that Canon is withholding wheathersealing in anything other than expensive Luxury products. In reality, wheathersealing of DSLRs and lenses is really simple and does not cause significant additional R&D and production costs. As demonstrated by Pentax over and over again. All it takes is a few O-rings in the right places:

That's what cheap kit-lenses look like at Pentax these days:
DAL18_55WR.jpg


http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/Pentax-K-50-Wetterfest-und-robust [and sorry, got it in German only at the moment]
 
Upvote 0
AvTvM said:
Don't know how difficult it may be to weatherseal push-pull zooms. Not interested in those.

What I am observing however, is that Canon is withholding wheathersealing in anything other than expensive Luxury products. In reality, wheathersealing of DSLRs and lenses is really simple and does not cause significant additional R&D and production costs. As demonstrated by Pentax over and over again. All it takes is a few O-rings in the right places:

That's what cheap kit-lenses look like at Pentax these days:
DAL18_55WR.jpg


http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/Pentax-K-50-Wetterfest-und-robust [and sorry, got it in German only at the moment]

I think we've seen example after example over the last few years that suggest Canon's philosophy is to give consumers as little as they can get away with and still move product. Exhibit A: the T5i; Exhibit B: the 50D, complete with video capabilities that were disabled prior to release.

Now, before anyone says anything, I'm not saying this isn't their right. It is something to be aware of before jumping on the Canon bandwagon. Pentax, for example, offers more for your dollar but if you want to use a high end tilt-shift lens or an elaborate Speedlite system Pentax may not be the best choice.
 
Upvote 0
May 4, 2011
1,175
251
With a FF kit, this would be a tempting upgrade path from the 70-300L to get a bit more reach...but at that price point it might just make more sense to grab a 70D (when it comes out) and use the 70-300 with it when I need maximum reach (I consider it an outdoor lens anyway - I don't use it inside where FF quality makes the biggest difference)...figures.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,222
13,084
Act444 said:
With a FF kit, this would be a tempting upgrade path from the 70-300L to get a bit more reach...

I'd say that will depend on the physical specs of the new 100-400L. While I'd appreciate a step up in IQ and IS, I find that the current 100-400L delivers excellent images. But I'm still considering (and will likely purchase soon) the 70-300L as a travel lens.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 14, 2012
910
7
t.linn said:
Pentax, for example, offers more for your dollar but if you want to use a high end tilt-shift lens or an elaborate Speedlite system Pentax may not be the best choice.

Whether Pentax offers "more for your dollar" rather depends on what you want. If you care about accurate, really fast and quiet focusing, or a good selection of long zooms, for instance, they give you less. Weather sealing (not many of their lenses are), great ergonomics and a superb sensor (I used to own a K-5; I gather its successor is even better) are all very well, but....
 
Upvote 0

tron

CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,223
1,616
neuroanatomist said:
Act444 said:
With a FF kit, this would be a tempting upgrade path from the 70-300L to get a bit more reach...

I'd say that will depend on the physical specs of the new 100-400L. While I'd appreciate a step up in IQ and IS, I find that the current 100-400L delivers excellent images. But I'm still considering (and will likely purchase soon) the 70-300L as a travel lens.

Regarding 70-300 I will be interested in your opinion when/if you get it. I already have two 70-200 lenses (70-200 2.8L IS II and 70-200 4L IS) I intend to keep. A third one in the same more or less focal range would be too much.The f/4 is an excellent travel lens. Light and sharp. In addition I do not like the reverse use of zooming and focusing rings in 70-300 ...

On the positive side I would not have to bring my 300 4L and there are bags that you can put the 70-300 lens vertically - but not the 70-200 f4 - and save a lot of space!!!

Choices...
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.