Canon to Release Super Telephoto Zoom in 2016 [CR2]

[KeithBreazeal]

I'm waiting for the 100 MP imager. Add a tack sharp 200mm f2.8 with electronic zoom. There, done.
Meanwhile, the war of big zooms will continue. Maybe just fork over a few bucks for one of those mirrorless things with the 100x zoom.

100MP camera:

https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Camera-Systems/XF-Camera-System.aspx

Yup. Let me amend my post... affordable. I went through the large format phase in the film days. I was young and strong back then. Now I'm just strong willed.

 

[Lee Jay]

The optical formula says:

Focal length 200.00 340.00 600.00
F-number 4.60 4.60 5.20

Read more: http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/#ixzz44QJTxPOh

600mm and f/5.2 is 115.4mm of aperture.

That makes me even more dubious of the projected cost, though the Sigma Sport has a filter thread that size.

 

[rs]

The optical formula says:

Focal length 200.00 340.00 600.00
F-number 4.60 4.60 5.20

Read more: http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/#ixzz44QJTxPOh

600mm and f/5.2 is 115.4mm of aperture.

That makes me even more dubious of the projected cost, though the Sigma Sport has a filter thread that size.

The internal zoom and 200-400 rivalling length also jump out at me:

Overall length of the lens 355.16 355.16 355.16

This patent with its full on 600/5.2 and internal zoom don't match the rumours of a cheap light non L lens. Were there any other 200-600 or similar patents out there by Canon which these rumours could align with?

 

[ahsanford]

The optical formula says:

Focal length 200.00 340.00 600.00
F-number 4.60 4.60 5.20

Read more: http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/#ixzz44QJTxPOh

600mm and f/5.2 is 115.4mm of aperture.

That makes me even more dubious of the projected cost, though the Sigma Sport has a filter thread that size.

Sigma Sport filter thread is 105mm, according to TDP and B&H. And as Neuro pointed out before, filter diameter does not always equal front element size and the Sigma may actually be smaller.

- A

 

[rs]

I'm waiting for the 100 MP imager. Add a tack sharp 200mm f2.8 with electronic zoom. There, done.
Meanwhile, the war of big zooms will continue. Maybe just fork over a few bucks for one of those mirrorless things with the 100x zoom.

To get the 600mm framing from a 200mm lens, you have to use a 3x crop from the centre, resulting in an area smaller than a 1" sensor camera. It'd have 1/9th of the pixels of the full frame, so 11MP from your 100MP theoretical body. And the lens/crop area would be equivalent to 600/8.4. Where's that 3x TC when you need it?

 

[unfocused]

One thing that hasn't been brought up, is the possibility of fudging the f-stop and focal length. The difference between f6.3 and f5.6 is less than a half stop. Perhaps a true 600mm f5.6 lens would be prohibitively expensive, but where is the line? Since f6.3 is practical, maybe an f6 570 mm sold as f5.6 600 mm?

What do you mean when you say f/6.3 is practical? Consider that what Tamron calls 150-600mm f/5-6.3 was patented as a design of 152-582mm f/5.12-6.45. When ahsanford earlier stated, "Tamron = 95mm front element = $989," he really meant 95mm front filter thread – the front element is smaller, closer to the ~90mm you'd expect based on the above non-rouded values of 582 / 6.45. Canon does and will continue to fudge, but you'll need to compared fudged numbers with other fudged numbers.

Wow! It's like you go out of your way to alienate people, even when they are agreeing with you.

 

[Loswr]

One thing that hasn't been brought up, is the possibility of fudging the f-stop and focal length. The difference between f6.3 and f5.6 is less than a half stop. Perhaps a true 600mm f5.6 lens would be prohibitively expensive, but where is the line? Since f6.3 is practical, maybe an f6 570 mm sold as f5.6 600 mm?

What do you mean when you say f/6.3 is practical? Consider that what Tamron calls 150-600mm f/5-6.3 was patented as a design of 152-582mm f/5.12-6.45. When ahsanford earlier stated, "Tamron = 95mm front element = $989," he really meant 95mm front filter thread – the front element is smaller, closer to the ~90mm you'd expect based on the above non-rouded values of 582 / 6.45. Canon does and will continue to fudge, but you'll need to compared fudged numbers with other fudged numbers.

Wow! It's like you go out of your way to alienate people, even when they are agreeing with you.

???

 

[ahsanford]

One thing that hasn't been brought up, is the possibility of fudging the f-stop and focal length. The difference between f6.3 and f5.6 is less than a half stop. Perhaps a true 600mm f5.6 lens would be prohibitively expensive, but where is the line? Since f6.3 is practical, maybe an f6 570 mm sold as f5.6 600 mm?

What do you mean when you say f/6.3 is practical? Consider that what Tamron calls 150-600mm f/5-6.3 was patented as a design of 152-582mm f/5.12-6.45. When ahsanford earlier stated, "Tamron = 95mm front element = $989," he really meant 95mm front filter thread – the front element is smaller, closer to the ~90mm you'd expect based on the above non-rouded values of 582 / 6.45. Canon does and will continue to fudge, but you'll need to compared fudged numbers with other fudged numbers.

Illuminate me -- I have a novice 'the lens ain't exactly X' sort of question:

If the patent is in fact what was built in production in your Tamron example, were I to slam it to '600' on the FL ring I'm actually getting 582mm. As I understand, nutty FL tricks like this happen all the time.

[ enter 'there is no dumb question / thank you for asking' zone]

But when I'm at 582mm and the lens is shot wide open, is the physical aperture actually at 6.3 or 6.45? Does it electronically report 6.3 to the camera but physically only open to 6.45? Or does it just open to a true f/6.3 and the lens just doesn't let in the light that it ought to -- would that darken the frame or something?

[ exit 'there is no dumb question / thank you for asking' zone]

- A

 

[Loswr]

But when I'm at 582mm and the lens is shot wide open, is the physical aperture actually at 6.3 or 6.45? Does it electronically report 6.3 to the camera but physically only open to 6.45? Or does it just open to a true f/6.3 and the lens just doesn't let in the light that it ought to -- would that darken the frame or something?

Assuming the lens is as described in the patent, it reports f/6.3 in the EXIF, but physically opens to 90.2mm, which at 582mm is f/6.45. Now, it's also reporting 600mm, not 582mm. This is one factor in T-stop (actual light transmission, empirically measured) vs. F-stop (calculated from focal length and aperture). DxO reports transmission for the lens as T6.6 (in addition to rounding, element coatings and the number of air-glass interfaces affect transmission). I suspect the firmware in the lens ramps the values reported in EXIF for FL and aperture from 'fudged' ones to the actual ones as the lens is zoomed / stopped down.

 

[slclick]

But will it go to '11'?

 

[tron]

But will it go to '11'?

Hmmm, it's in the opposite side of focal lengths. You seem to need 11-24 8)

 

[Loswr]

But will it go to '11'?

Hmmm, it's in the opposite side of focal lengths. You seem to need 11-24 8)

Don't you mean 11.3-23.3mm f/4.1?

 

[Lee Jay]

The optical formula says:

Focal length 200.00 340.00 600.00
F-number 4.60 4.60 5.20

Read more: http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/#ixzz44QJTxPOh

600mm and f/5.2 is 115.4mm of aperture.

That makes me even more dubious of the projected cost, though the Sigma Sport has a filter thread that size.

Sigma Sport filter thread is 105mm, according to TDP and B&H. And as Neuro pointed out before, filter diameter does not always equal front element size and the Sigma may actually be smaller.

- A

You're right...I have the C and I knew the S was 10mm bigger. I was remembering the S and adding 10 to that instead of to the 95mm filter thread on mine.

 

[Diko]

But when I'm at 582mm and the lens is shot wide open, is the physical aperture actually at 6.3 or 6.45? Does it electronically report 6.3 to the camera but physically only open to 6.45? Or does it just open to a true f/6.3 and the lens just doesn't let in the light that it ought to -- would that darken the frame or something?

Assuming the lens is as described in the patent, it reports f/6.3 in the EXIF, but physically opens to 90.2mm, which at 582mm is f/6.45. Now, it's also reporting 600mm, not 582mm. This is one factor in T-stop (actual light transmission, empirically measured) vs. F-stop (calculated from focal length and aperture). DxO reports transmission for the lens as T6.6 (in addition to rounding, element coatings and the number of air-glass interfaces affect transmission). I suspect the firmware in the lens ramps the values reported in EXIF for FL and aperture from 'fudged' ones to the actual ones as the lens is zoomed / stopped down.

That would explain this post of mine.

 

[scyrene]

If you want long reach for bird photography, you have to choose the right body as well as the lens. The 7DII (as does the 7D) has AF at f/8. The new 80D has superior AF at f/8 by having the 4 points surrounding the centre one active - even better than the 7DII and 5DIII etc. None of them are cheap.

I thought you could have the four surrounding AF points active (as support) at f/8 on the 5D3 too? When I press the M-Fn button and cycle through the options, one of them is the centre point and four surrounding ones highlighted. Is that not the same thing?

The way it's described on Canon DLC (see p.2), only the center point is active with most f/8 combos. That differs from the 1D X, 5DIII and 7DII where the center point is assisted by 4 surrounding expansion points.

However, when the 80D is used with two specific lens+TC combos – 100-400 II + 1.4xIII or 200-400 + 2xIII (built-in 1.4x disengaged) – will allow 27 AF points at f/8.

Thank you

 

[gunship01]

But will it go to '11'?

Quite nice Spinal Tap reference. Point and tip of the hat to you sir.
Lol

 

[Haydn1971]

The interesting part for me is also the 355mm lens length in the patent

 

[Maiaibing]

It'd have 1/9th of the pixels of the full frame, so 11MP from your 100MP theoretical body. And the lens/crop area would be equivalent to 600/8.4. Where's that 3x TC when you need it?

11 mpix @ 600mm seems really good to me. YMMV.

As for f/8.4 that's only optically. But you still shoot @f/2.8 and enjoy all the light and speed that follows. So also some advantages towards Canon's 600mm lens.

Anyway. I'm all-in with Canon's 100 MPIX camera and a 200 f/2.0 IS L to complete the package once it hits the stores.

 

[Loswr]

The interesting part for me is also the 355mm lens length in the patent

Keep in mind that a lens patent is for an optical formula, so the lens length starts at the sensor.

 

[Steve Dmark2]

Hello Together,

very interessting patent. Would like to see the final outcome of the lens very soon.
But im more interested into fixed focal lengths.

Zoom Lenses in this range of focal length are very heavy. I also found myself selling the Sigma 150-600 C again because it is to heavy for me for a long day out there.

My wish to canon is:

400mm 5.6L IS Update.
or a
500mm 5.6L IS


Cheers.