Patent: Switchable 1.4x & 2.0x teleconverter

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
7,530
286
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
A patent showing a new style of teleconverter from Canon has appeared at the Japanese Patent Office this week and translated by Canon News.
Canon is showing off a teleconverter that can switch between 1.4x and 2.0x, which would be a great way to increase the usability, flexibility and efficiency of using teleconverters.
If you’re on location with both Canon teleconverters, it adds to the risk of dust getting inside the camera body. If you’re switching between 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters, you may also miss the shot.
Adding teleconverters to big lenses increases the size, weight and bulk of lenses as well, so simply putting built-in teleconverters into every super telephoto lens probably isn’t the answer either. Canon has been working very hard to reduce the...
Continue reading...


 

degos

EOS 80D
Mar 20, 2015
194
119
Adding teleconverters to big lenses increases the size, weight and bulk of lenses as well, so simply putting built-in teleconverters into every super telephoto lens probably isn’t the answer either

Nah, the rear end of the f4 superteles ( even the IIIs ) is empty space. A TC would add some lateral bulk for the switch and insertion mechanism, but the weight would be near the mount end and so less noticable.

 
Reactions: Pape

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,491
285
Germany
Guess I‘m not in that market because of the price.
But if the disadvantage in size wasn‘t that big - why not?
 

mb66energy

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 18, 2011
1,207
141
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
Maybe I would buy it with an EF 2.0 200 - if it has 1x / 1.4x / 2x it would become an 2 - 200 / 2.8 - 300 / 4 - 400 in a moderately compact package! But I think it will be "only" 1.4x <-> 2x as compromise for IQ / size / prize
 

Sean C

EOS M50
Apr 21, 2015
35
14
It's be neat to add a bulge like the 200-400 has for the extender, and make a R to EF adapter that can swing the elements out of the way to make a 1.0 with no loss as well.
 
Reactions: Dantana

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
296
146
picture shows there is 1x ,1,4x and 2x
I guess there are 2 converter you can turn to sides. Other left and other right.
There must be lens what makes room for 1x?
Or its just 1,4x 2x converter what is good too :)
Or maybe that main objective got collapsing rear end construction?
would be nice bonus for RF super teles on those cases what got room for that.
 
Last edited:

Antono Refa

EOS 7D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
777
87
Seems to me like Canon is considering one of two options:

1. A 1.0x/1.4x/2.0x made as an integral part of a super tele lens, like the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x.

2. A standalone 1.4x/2.0x tele extender. As this is two-for (with added convenience & mechanical complexity) and has no competition, it would be significantly more expensive than combined price of 1.4x & 2.0x extenders.

Oh, and it would prove Canon is doomed due to lack of innovation.
 

neonlight

EOS 80D
Jul 10, 2015
116
8
Both 1.4x and 2x extend the length of the tele lens (look at the image plane in the three diagrams). That means it won't do 1x unless there is some glass to do that in the TC which may lose definition to some extent. So this has to be a stand alone 1.4 or 2x only. The option of two TC's in a lens would work as the lens/TC's would be designed together.
If the new tele RF lenses (for example) could be designed to work with a longer space then 1x might be doable, but there again that would negate the purpose of moving the back elements nearer the sensor!
 
Reactions: Pape

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,146
2,072
I am frequently switching between 1.4x, 2x TCs and bare 400mm prime, but I am not sure I would want this unit. One of the problems with extenders is that the bare lens is the sharpest, the 1.4xTC degrades IQ by about 10% and the 2xTC by 20-30%. What I would prefer would be a zoom optimised for the longest length, and I wish Canon would make some more telephoto zooms.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
296
146
I am frequently switching between 1.4x, 2x TCs and bare 400mm prime, but I am not sure I would want this unit. One of the problems with extenders is that the bare lens is the sharpest, the 1.4xTC degrades IQ by about 10% and the 2xTC by 20-30%. What I would prefer would be a zoom optimised for the longest length, and I wish Canon would make some more telephoto zooms.
yep but zoom lenses got nearly double amount of lenses . Theoretically it never can be as good as prime. Even big money is turning things better for zooms.
Or could they optimize to longest focal lenght and reduce amount of lenses to minimum.
Or hrm tele converter got lot of lenses nowadays too ,so i guess you right Alan.
How about crop sensor camera and 600mm f8 full frame lense with inbuild 2x speedbooster for bif?
 
Last edited:

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,146
2,072
yep but zoom lenses got nearly double amount of lenses . Theoretically it never can be as good as prime. Even big money is turning things better for zooms.
Or could they optimize to longest focal lenght and reduce amount of lenses to minimum.
Or hrm tele converter got lot of lenses nowadays too ,so i guess you right Alan.
How about crop sensor camera and 600mm f8 full frame lense with inbuild 2x speedbooster for bif?
My Canon 100-400mm II zoom lens at 400mm is hardly worse than my 400mm DO II and very sharp at the edges too. It's only when you put on TCs that the prime pulls ahead. A new lightweight native 300mm f/4 would be more attractive to me than a 600mm f/8 that doubled down.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
296
146
My Canon 100-400mm II zoom lens at 400mm is hardly worse than my 400mm DO II and very sharp at the edges too. It's only when you put on TCs that the prime pulls ahead. A new lightweight native 300mm f/4 would be more attractive to me than a 600mm f/8 that doubled down.
Yep native 300mm f4 is good enough when high resolution sensor . With RP i wishing something with inbuilded TC or speed booster :p Or i could just buy d90
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,146
2,072
Yep native 300mm f4 is good enough when high resolution sensor . With RP i wishing something with inbuilded TC or speed booster :p Or i could just buy d90
It's just for ease of carrying etc, I'd prefer to use 300, 300+2xTC than 600, 600`+0.5xTC
 
Reactions: Pape

ERHP

EOS RP
May 9, 2013
354
148
San Diego
erhp.smugmug.com
I'd probably buy a multi-TC like that, especially if it does 0/1.4X/2X. It really comes down to what type of images you want to make. Some people, myself definitely included, try to get as close as possible for the more static detailed portrait shots and are relatively screwed when the subject takes flight because wings get clipped. If you know the species you are shooting, you figure out most of the tell tales of impending flight and could back off the TC if it is a lever activation like the 200-400. Just tired of cleaning the dust off the sensor from multiple swaps each outing.
 
Reactions: Pape