Patent: Canon 18-105mm f/4-5.6 With Built-in Telconverter, But With a Twist.

[mitchel2002]

is it possible that this is the high end ef-m lens that was spoken about?

 

[Luds34]

This does seem like a crop lens. 18mm on APS-C (Canon especially) just isn't all that wide. Getting to 15mm is a big difference. I think it sounds like an intriguing lens regardless.

 

[Antono Refa]

Why not make a 15 - 105 to start with?

much harder to do.

Canon already makes an Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, so..

1) how much harder would it be to make a slightly slower & longer lens?

2) What would be the point of making this lens?

IMHO, the point of the patent isn't Canon making this lens, but rather the innovation in the wide-converter.

 

[Wizardly]

This does seem like a crop lens. 18mm on APS-C (Canon especially) just isn't all that wide. Getting to 15mm is a big difference. I think it sounds like an intriguing lens regardless.

Although one of the four working examples has a back focus of 35mm, the other three are firmly in the EF mount range.

 

[LonelyBoy]

IMHO, the point of the patent isn't Canon making this lens, but rather the innovation in the wide-converter.

Yes. This lens ain't it, but I, personally, would find it very handy to have a 70-200 that could have a .5x "TC" dropped in at the wide end to turn it into a 35mm. The 70-200 is my ideal for shooting races, but then I have to swap lenses for post-race and podium shots. It's not bad if I can just run back to my car, but it would be a much handier solution than lugging two lenses around for the job. The patent isn't that extreme though.

 

[Antono Refa]

With innovation like that, CANON IS DOOMED!

Same thing when Laowa released a 2x macro lens. It's so innovative of Laowa to present a >1:1 macro, even though canon makes a 5x macro for nearly 20 years.
________________________________________________________________________________________

Edit: Voightlander makes a 10mm f/5.6 lens for Sony E mount, so Canon's EF 11-24mm is the widest rectilinear lens ever. It still proof of innovation, though.

Canon's MP-E 65 doesnt focus to infinity and its a FF lens while Venus 60mm focuses all the way to infinity from 2x mag and its a APS-C lens. So if you really want to compare Venus then it should be compared to Canon's EF-s 60mm or Tamron's 60mm f2 macro not MP-E 65. Both those lenses Mp-e and Venus fill separate niche for macro photographers.

The point was macro lenses that have larger than 1:1 magnification.

 

[Antono Refa]

IMHO, the point of the patent isn't Canon making this lens, but rather the innovation in the wide-converter.

Yes. This lens ain't it, but I, personally, would find it very handy to have a 70-200 that could have a .5x "TC" dropped in at the wide end to turn it into a 35mm. The 70-200 is my ideal for shooting races, but then I have to swap lenses for post-race and podium shots.

My understanding is this would be a 70-200mm lens with 88mm image height (read: medium format 3x zoom lens, how many of those are there?) w/ a .5x tele converter to compress it to 35-100mm.

IMHO, the reverse architecture (35-100mm w/ 2x built in tele extender) is more likely.

Canon made an EF 50-200mm f/3.5-4.5L, maybe it would be resurrected with a slightly larger zoom.

 

[LonelyBoy]

My understanding is this would be a 70-200mm lens with 88mm image height (read: medium format 3x zoom lens, how many of those are there?) w/ a .5x tele converter to compress it to 35-100mm.

IMHO, the reverse architecture (35-100mm w/ 2x built in tele extender) is more likely.

Canon made an EF 50-200mm f/3.5-4.5L, maybe it would be resurrected with a slightly larger zoom.

Hmm. That 50-200L is interesting in theory, but I sprang for the 70-200/2.8ISii specifically so all the AF points would turn on. Guess I'm just stuck lugging around extra lenses, but it was a nice theory, and I do understand the use and purpose of this sort of lens, even if not everyone does.