Patent: A New Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
PhotographerJim
Explorer of Life
The 300mm 2.8 mk2 is the optically best lens that I've ever used. I didn't think it very heavy, so I too wonder what will they improve to justify the assumed inflated cost?
Upvote
0
Come on, think about the specs of this lens. It clearly is not a Canon EF (DSLR full frame) or an EF-S (APS-C) lens. Instead, it is a Canon Micro Four Thirds (MFT) lens.
First of all the Image height is 21.64mm. That is about the image circle diameter of MFT (21.60mm to be exact). That specification has no relevance to full frame or APS-C image dimensions. Canon Rumors used Google Translate, so the translation isn't exact. "Image height" should be "Image Diameter".
Secondly, the angle of view of this lens is 4.23 degrees. The angle of view of a 300mm lens on a full frame DSLR is 8.15 deg. 4.23 deg. is closer to a 600mm lens on a full frame FSLR or about 300mm (292.5mm in this case) on MFT!
Thirdly, look at the physical length of this lens: 273.95mm, that's almost 26mm longer than the current state of the art Canon EF 300mm f2.8L Mk II lens. Canon is hardly going to replace that with a longer lens! So why is the MFT design physically longer? Well, by relaxing the physical specifications of a lens (allowing it to be bigger), a lens design engineer has more scope to deliver high optical performance without having to resort to as many exotic and expensive optical materials. Or, by doing both, relaxing the size specification and using exotic materials, even higher optical performance can be achieved (like Zeiss Otus lenses). By the way, this Canon design is physically slightly shorter than the Olympus 300mm f2.8 4/3 lens.
For whatever reason, Canon has decided to design and patent this MFT lens. Time will tell if if ever sees the light of day.
First of all the Image height is 21.64mm. That is about the image circle diameter of MFT (21.60mm to be exact). That specification has no relevance to full frame or APS-C image dimensions. Canon Rumors used Google Translate, so the translation isn't exact. "Image height" should be "Image Diameter".
Secondly, the angle of view of this lens is 4.23 degrees. The angle of view of a 300mm lens on a full frame DSLR is 8.15 deg. 4.23 deg. is closer to a 600mm lens on a full frame FSLR or about 300mm (292.5mm in this case) on MFT!
Thirdly, look at the physical length of this lens: 273.95mm, that's almost 26mm longer than the current state of the art Canon EF 300mm f2.8L Mk II lens. Canon is hardly going to replace that with a longer lens! So why is the MFT design physically longer? Well, by relaxing the physical specifications of a lens (allowing it to be bigger), a lens design engineer has more scope to deliver high optical performance without having to resort to as many exotic and expensive optical materials. Or, by doing both, relaxing the size specification and using exotic materials, even higher optical performance can be achieved (like Zeiss Otus lenses). By the way, this Canon design is physically slightly shorter than the Olympus 300mm f2.8 4/3 lens.
For whatever reason, Canon has decided to design and patent this MFT lens. Time will tell if if ever sees the light of day.
Upvote
0
Yes absolutely they need a 50mm 1.2 ii asap! That should be priority as the sigma art kicks its ass and canon already put up their new 35 1.4 to defend against the sigma 35 art so, a 50 should hopefully be soon. I want that as although my 50 sigma is great optically the focus is crap on my 1dx2 so I just want a good canon 50 so its future proofed with new canon bodies and just know it'll viewfinder focus accurately in future unlike a sigma
Upvote
0
David Soares said:
Actually, sorry to correct you, but this is for a full frame lens.
The image height in these patents is the image circle radius. 21.6mm is the half diagonal of a full frame sensor, and is the horizontal axis dimension used in the MTF Charts of a full frame lens.
The angle of view is also the "half angle" (I have no idea why it is like this in the patents, but assume it is the same reason they use image circle radius and not diameter). So 4.23 degrees half angle is 8.46 degrees full angle of view which is nearly the same as the spec for the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens.
You can also see this information in other patents. Refer to this:
http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-24-105mm-f4l-is-ii/
What I do find interesting in the patent is the BF 60.8 and slightly longer lens. As you said, this will probably mean less exotic element designs, and in making the lens slightly longer and possibly smaller diameter, may mean a reduction in weight of the overall lens.
Hope this helps.
Upvote
0
AUGS said:
Yup this is a FF lens.
And makes me wonder why the heck would they do this lens? The 300 2.8 IS II is like the benchmark standard next to the 400 2.8 IS II and the 200 F2 IS. These are the top 3 performers currently in their lineup for any lens.
Makes no sense but if it means smaller diameter, lighter and new... so be it. This means the resale value of the II version will drop some. I'm all for that.
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics
Canon Rumors Premium
AlanF said:
Alan....I happen to have a 400mm f2.8 LIS. So I'm well aware of what a 400 with a 2x can do. My point was that the 400 DO II is chosen because it's lighter than the 300 2.8. If the 300 2.8 gets really light then it'll cause the 400 DO to drop in it's primary attraction.
Upvote
0
Scifi.
300/2.8L II is the best lens Canon currently has and actually it has the greatest improvement over the previous generation. If there's one lens that doesn't need upgrade, it's the 300/2.8.
I'm always open to magic and surprises though....even smaller and lighter maybe?
300/2.8L II is the best lens Canon currently has and actually it has the greatest improvement over the previous generation. If there's one lens that doesn't need upgrade, it's the 300/2.8.
I'm always open to magic and surprises though....even smaller and lighter maybe?
Upvote
0
riker said:
That's for sure. I have it and its a blast to use with the the 5DS/R.
What to improve? I have no clue. Maybe Canon is looking for a way to lower manufacturing costs. This would be my best guess on why they want to change the formula.
Sometime manufacturing issues lead the way. This was why the 200mm f/1.8 went out and the 200mm f/2.0 took over (with worse optics than the f/1,8). In fact if there's a big white looking for an update its the 200mm f/2.0.
Yes, is great but the f/1.8 was better because of the lead glass used in that model. The current 300mm f/2.8 IS L II is the improvement the 200mm f/2.0 should also get in a ver. II. Not a lot different optically, just a little better - but overall small, solid advances.
Upvote
0
what does this imply about the future of DO lens? A few super tele DO lens and the rest traditional?
Would love to see canon develop these lens with a built-in 1.4 extender (or better yet), a variable extender (such as 1.2, 1.4, 1.7)
Would love to see canon develop these lens with a built-in 1.4 extender (or better yet), a variable extender (such as 1.2, 1.4, 1.7)
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics
Canon Rumors Premium
riker said:
I wouldn't agree with you that it's the best Canon lens. It's a very impressive lens and certainly in their top 10 of all time. But it's certainly not the best.
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics said:
I have had the 300/2.8 II for several years and now have the 400mm DO II as well. I have stopped using the 300mm and use only the 400mm II and will be selling the 300 precisely because of the advantage of having 800mm with the 2xTC. Small differences in weight do not come in to it, for me at least.
Upvote
0
Honestly, I think Canon could really do with a 100-300mm f/2.8 IS lens instead of replacing the 300mm f/2.8 IS. I rented out the 120-300 once for a major job and wasn't happy with the poor autofocus, but it's a good range for an f/2.8 lens. If it was as sharp and fast focusing as the 300mm f/2.8, they could easily sell it for more than the 300mm f/2.8 IS and still make a killing.
I think it could sell a lot more than the 300 f/2.8 IS as awell. I constantly see 200-400 F/4 lenses and almost never see the 400 F/4, so a lot of professionals are definitely choosing the single big white zoom over its prime version.
I think it could sell a lot more than the 300 f/2.8 IS as awell. I constantly see 200-400 F/4 lenses and almost never see the 400 F/4, so a lot of professionals are definitely choosing the single big white zoom over its prime version.
Upvote
0
tron said:+1riker said:
How much smaller and lighter? It would have to be a DO type lens....riker said:
Haha, well I'm still not a fan of DO and the reason for it is exactly the 300/2.8L II.
While
300/2.8 I -> II changed 2550g to 2350g and minimum focusing distance 2.5m to 2m,
400/4 DO I -> II changed 1940g to 2100g and minimum focusing distance 3.5m to 3.3m
...and 400/4 DO II finally reached the optical performance of the first generation of 300/2.8L which is huge step compared to the previous generation which was crap but still useless in my eyes near the ass-kicking 300/2.8 II which is now only 250g heavier and a full stop faster.
According to dxomark, on a 5DsR the 300/2.8L II has 45MP resolution while the 400/4DO has 29MP.
So as for DO lenses, no thanks UNLESS they are at least 25-30% lighter.
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics said:
Well, this could be a pretty pointless argument
Anyway, to me it's the best Canon lens without any questions. It has the highest resolution with 45MP measured on 5DsR, where the second on the list comes with only 37MP. So by means of sharpness/resolution it's FAR the best Canon lens ever. Vignetting, CA and the rest I don't care about, most of it can easily be corrected in post with two clicks, the rest is never visible to the bare eye.
And then come the other awesome properties of the lens, like light weight and close focusing distance.
This lens is not only beating the crap out of any other brand's 300mm, but also standing out of the crowd among Canon lenses. This is one of the lenses I love Canon for even when I hate them. An engineering masterpiece, a magical creation.
I'm almost sad I don't need it, and I'm not American to buy it just to have it
Upvote
0
Similar threads
