Patent: Canon EF 300-600 f/5.6 w/1.4x TC

[GMCPhotographics]

However, the delay of the 1DX past the spring of that year, had more to do with production issues than with development...as early units displayed at the previous fall launch were the same camera as those sold the next summer. If I am wrong, please help to clarify. There were indeed certain privileged pros who were able to purchase their 1DX's at the same time that the D4 became available (January or February?), but everyone else had to wait months later into, July wasn't it?

There were definitely AF unit issues with the 1D X. That was the primary reason for it's delay. We aren't talking about the f/8 stuff, there were apparently other AF issues that had to be delt with. As far as I understand, for the "early release" models, they were actually prototypes that were effectively loaned out to those privileged pros until the final production models were really ready...at which time the loaners had to be turned in. The 1D X released officially just a few weeks before the Olympics got rolling, IIRC, and those who had loaners and were already packed up and shipped out for the Olympics were allowed to keep those models until the Olympics were over. Similarly, there were quite a number of 200-400mm TC lenses loaned out for the Olympics as well.

Yes, I read somewhere that the 200-400 LIS lenses at the Olympics were all prototypes and needed a tweek due to a re-arrangement of the control switches, which arose due to pro comments during the Olympics. This then caused a further three month delay to the final launch date.

 

[CarlTN]

However, the delay of the 1DX past the spring of that year, had more to do with production issues than with development...as early units displayed at the previous fall launch were the same camera as those sold the next summer. If I am wrong, please help to clarify. There were indeed certain privileged pros who were able to purchase their 1DX's at the same time that the D4 became available (January or February?), but everyone else had to wait months later into, July wasn't it?

There were definitely AF unit issues with the 1D X. That was the primary reason for it's delay. We aren't talking about the f/8 stuff, there were apparently other AF issues that had to be delt with. As far as I understand, for the "early release" models, they were actually prototypes that were effectively loaned out to those privileged pros until the final production models were really ready...at which time the loaners had to be turned in. The 1D X released officially just a few weeks before the Olympics got rolling, IIRC, and those who had loaners and were already packed up and shipped out for the Olympics were allowed to keep those models until the Olympics were over. Similarly, there were quite a number of 200-400mm TC lenses loaned out for the Olympics as well.

Thank you. Yes I had read on here about those 200-400's...that was well over a year before the public could buy one.

 

[9VIII]

The wide aperture affects AF speed and AF point precision and capability. Remember, particularly in the 61pt AF system, there are f/2.8 double cross type points, f/4 cross type points, f/5.6 line points, and the center expansion f/8 points. With an f/4 lens, you ALWAYS AF at f/4, no matter what you stop down to for actual shooting. The extra stop of light allows the AF system to operate more quickly and more accurately. When f/4 AF points are used, they tend to be more precise than f/5.6 points, which need larger pixels in order to sense as well as f/4 pixels.

The point of an f/4 lens isn't that you always shoot wide open (although in the evening, it isn't uncommon...I tend to be around f/8 aperture for shooting during daytime, and f/4-5.6 for shooting around sunset, for wildlife.) It's that you ALWAYS AF wide open (by design.) And yes, with an f/4 lens, when you slap on a 1.4x TC, you still AF at f/5.6, which is still better than AF at f/8, no question.

Jrista, thank you.
I actually completely forgot about the difference between f4 AF points and f5.6 ones. The high precision f2.8 AF points are referenced so much I guess I clumped all the others into the same group. (After reading multiple articles detailing all the AF points, and watching the entire B&H Canon AF seminar [ ww.youtube.com/watch?v=iAx86nblZ2g ][great video BTW], you would think that someone would remember something like that. I guess a guy can only fill his head with so much.)
That changes my perception of the TCs quite a bit. I've been assuming that you get "worse AF" when using a TC because of a combination of optical performance and some kind of interference in the circuitry, if on the other hand it's actually just due to the change in the type of AF points used, then the 600f4+1.4xTC is actually going to AF exactly the same as the 800f5.6. I was assuming the latter would have an advantage.
Indeed that does make a very good case for the 600f4, and makes the 300f2.8 more appealing now that I know it's not some mystical interference from the teleconverter making AF worse at 600mm.

A little digging brings this up

From the TDP review http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Extender-EF-1.4x-III-Review.aspx

Shooting with the Canon EF 1.4x III Extender mounted results in reduction of autofocus speed. According to Chuck Westfall (Canon USA): "As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders."

So adding an extender does specifically and purposefully slow down AF.

 

[jrista]

The wide aperture affects AF speed and AF point precision and capability. Remember, particularly in the 61pt AF system, there are f/2.8 double cross type points, f/4 cross type points, f/5.6 line points, and the center expansion f/8 points. With an f/4 lens, you ALWAYS AF at f/4, no matter what you stop down to for actual shooting. The extra stop of light allows the AF system to operate more quickly and more accurately. When f/4 AF points are used, they tend to be more precise than f/5.6 points, which need larger pixels in order to sense as well as f/4 pixels.

The point of an f/4 lens isn't that you always shoot wide open (although in the evening, it isn't uncommon...I tend to be around f/8 aperture for shooting during daytime, and f/4-5.6 for shooting around sunset, for wildlife.) It's that you ALWAYS AF wide open (by design.) And yes, with an f/4 lens, when you slap on a 1.4x TC, you still AF at f/5.6, which is still better than AF at f/8, no question.

Jrista, thank you.
I actually completely forgot about the difference between f4 AF points and f5.6 ones. The high precision f2.8 AF points are referenced so much I guess I clumped all the others into the same group. (After reading multiple articles detailing all the AF points, and watching the entire B&H Canon AF seminar [ ww.youtube.com/watch?v=iAx86nblZ2g ][great video BTW], you would think that someone would remember something like that. I guess a guy can only fill his head with so much.)
That changes my perception of the TCs quite a bit. I've been assuming that you get "worse AF" when using a TC because of a combination of optical performance and some kind of interference in the circuitry, if on the other hand it's actually just due to the change in the type of AF points used, then the 600f4+1.4xTC is actually going to AF exactly the same as the 800f5.6. I was assuming the latter would have an advantage.
Indeed that does make a very good case for the 600f4, and makes the 300f2.8 more appealing now that I know it's not some mystical interference from the teleconverter making AF worse at 600mm.

A little digging brings this up

From the TDP review http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Extender-EF-1.4x-III-Review.aspx

Shooting with the Canon EF 1.4x III Extender mounted results in reduction of autofocus speed. According to Chuck Westfall (Canon USA): "As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders."

So adding an extender does specifically and purposefully slow down AF.

Maximum drive speed is determined by the body, though. The 1D X drives lenses faster than a 5D III, which drives them faster than a 7D. Yes, adding an EF TC III does reduce speed, but it is still faster with higher grade bodies than lower grade bodies.

 

[9VIII]

I'm just saying that my question has been answered, bare lenses are better (AF wise).
Which speaks very highly of the 300f2.8ISII when you still hear people say that with a 1.4xTC it performs similarly to the 400f5.6. That thing must have the fastest AF on the planet.

 

[CarlTN]

I'm just saying that my question has been answered, bare lenses are better (AF wise).
Which speaks very highly of the 300f2.8ISII when you still hear people say that with a 1.4xTC it performs similarly to the 400f5.6. That thing must have the fastest AF on the planet.

Which has the fastest AF on the planet, the 300mm?

 

[9VIII]

That's right. If the 300f2.8ISII with its AF speed cut in half is still as fast as other prime lenses already known for being blazing fast, the bare lens has got to be something incredible.

 

[jrista]

That's right. If the 300f2.8ISII with its AF speed cut in half is still as fast as other prime lenses already known for being blazing fast, the bare lens has got to be something incredible.

It is indeed something incredible. It was the first great white lens I rented...which is what got me hooked on 'em. Because of the incalculable performance of the 300/2.8 II, I am now forever slaved to buying the EF Mark II supertelephoto primes...nothing else will ever do. :\

 

[krisbell]

I know patents are often done purely for protective purposes and never see the light of day, but I would love to see these designs come true! My wallet is crying just from the mention of this patent, however :'(

Yep - my thoughts exactly. Whenever I see patent news on this site I get mixed feelings as the vast majority of patents never see the light of day and are increasingly used as a barrier to innovation - the exact opposite of their intended purpose. Patents were filed decades ago for flying saucers!

FWIW I would love to see a 300-600mm lens. I love zooms and can never have enough reach. Going for a f5.6 should help keep the size, weight and cost down a little (here's hoping!).

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The wide aperture affects AF speed and AF point precision and capability. Remember, particularly in the 61pt AF system, there are f/2.8 double cross type points, f/4 cross type points, f/5.6 line points, and the center expansion f/8 points. With an f/4 lens, you ALWAYS AF at f/4, no matter what you stop down to for actual shooting. The extra stop of light allows the AF system to operate more quickly and more accurately. When f/4 AF points are used, they tend to be more precise than f/5.6 points, which need larger pixels in order to sense as well as f/4 pixels.

The point of an f/4 lens isn't that you always shoot wide open (although in the evening, it isn't uncommon...I tend to be around f/8 aperture for shooting during daytime, and f/4-5.6 for shooting around sunset, for wildlife.) It's that you ALWAYS AF wide open (by design.) And yes, with an f/4 lens, when you slap on a 1.4x TC, you still AF at f/5.6, which is still better than AF at f/8, no question.

Jrista, thank you.
I actually completely forgot about the difference between f4 AF points and f5.6 ones. The high precision f2.8 AF points are referenced so much I guess I clumped all the others into the same group. (After reading multiple articles detailing all the AF points, and watching the entire B&H Canon AF seminar [ ww.youtube.com/watch?v=iAx86nblZ2g ][great video BTW], you would think that someone would remember something like that. I guess a guy can only fill his head with so much.)
That changes my perception of the TCs quite a bit. I've been assuming that you get "worse AF" when using a TC because of a combination of optical performance and some kind of interference in the circuitry, if on the other hand it's actually just due to the change in the type of AF points used, then the 600f4+1.4xTC is actually going to AF exactly the same as the 800f5.6. I was assuming the latter would have an advantage.
Indeed that does make a very good case for the 600f4, and makes the 300f2.8 more appealing now that I know it's not some mystical interference from the teleconverter making AF worse at 600mm.

A little digging brings this up

From the TDP review http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Extender-EF-1.4x-III-Review.aspx

Shooting with the Canon EF 1.4x III Extender mounted results in reduction of autofocus speed. According to Chuck Westfall (Canon USA): "As with previous EF Extenders, usage of Series III EF Extenders lowers AF drive speed to improve AF performance. When Extender EF 1.4X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 50%. When Extender EF 2X III is used, AF drive speed is reduced by 75%. This may seem like a drawback, but in reality subject tracking performance remains quite high when Series III Extenders are used with IS II lenses. This is due to improvements in AF precision made possible by the new microcomputer in the extenders."

So adding an extender does specifically and purposefully slow down AF.

Maximum drive speed is determined by the body, though. The 1D X drives lenses faster than a 5D III, which drives them faster than a 7D. Yes, adding an EF TC III does reduce speed, but it is still faster with higher grade bodies than lower grade bodies.

I read a comment by Chuck Wesfall, who said that AF speed difference between the 1D and non 1D cameras was due to the slightly higher voltage the 1D series runs at. Different batteries, different voltage, slightly different AF speed.

 

[CarlTN]

I read a comment by Chuck Wesfall, who said that AF speed difference between the 1D and non 1D cameras was due to the slightly higher voltage the 1D series runs at. Different batteries, different voltage, slightly different AF speed.

Entirely possible, but that means the AF motor in the lenses, can operate at different voltages. I guess it can. The 1DX's pack uses three 18650 battery cells, each is 3.7 volts. 3.7 x 3 = 11.1 volts.

 

[scyrene]

Again, as I mentioned before, I don't know many people who would even WANT to use a lens 800mm or longer for BIF. Unless the birds are sufficiently far away, but in that case you often have atmospheric effects that eliminate any benefit of using a longer lens vs. getting up and moving closer to the action. Personally, I only do BIF with 600mm f/4, and even that, on occasion, results in birds that are much too large in the frame (although that is 7D...with a FF, 600/4 would be PERFECT! I couldn't imagine using the 600/4+1.4x for BIF.)

I was thinking about this yesterday. One advantage to using longer focal lengths (for birds flying further away) is that it requires less body movement to track them as they cross the field of view. I've tried shooting gulls many times (it's possible to get close to them in flight), and I simply can't move the lens fast enough to even track them with the focus point. Further away (implying longer focal length), you can follow them with relatively subtle body movement, if that makes sense.

Atmospheric effects are a consideration, but I'd argue birds in flight allow greater leeway with detail than perched ones if the overall form (the bird's pose) and composition are good enough.

 

[Loswr]

I couldn't imagine using the 600/4+1.4x for BIF.

Not only can I imagine it, I do it routinely.


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 1.4x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/8, ISO 640

With the 2x as well…


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 2x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/11, ISO 1000

 

[Eldar]

I couldn't imagine using the 600/4+1.4x for BIF.

Not only can I imagine it, I do it routinely.


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 1.4x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/8, ISO 640

With the 2x as well…


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 2x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/11, ISO 1000

Great shots John!

 

[9VIII]

I read a comment by Chuck Wesfall, who said that AF speed difference between the 1D and non 1D cameras was due to the slightly higher voltage the 1D series runs at. Different batteries, different voltage, slightly different AF speed.

Entirely possible, but that means the AF motor in the lenses, can operate at different voltages. I guess it can. The 1DX's pack uses three 18650 battery cells, each is 3.7 volts. 3.7 x 3 = 11.1 volts.

After reading a bit about modern flashlights I learned that there is a fairly wide range that most systems will operate at.
The CPU will be heavily regulated regardless, but if you can stick any lens on a 1d and it actually operates at 11 volts, I would expect to be able to use different batteries and get the same performance.
Maybe someone willing to risk frying a camera with a battery grip could try putting three CR123's in. you would have to use dummy cells for the empty slots.

 

[CarlTN]

I read a comment by Chuck Wesfall, who said that AF speed difference between the 1D and non 1D cameras was due to the slightly higher voltage the 1D series runs at. Different batteries, different voltage, slightly different AF speed.

Entirely possible, but that means the AF motor in the lenses, can operate at different voltages. I guess it can. The 1DX's pack uses three 18650 battery cells, each is 3.7 volts. 3.7 x 3 = 11.1 volts.

After reading a bit about modern flashlights I learned that there is a fairly wide range that most systems will operate at.
The CPU will be heavily regulated regardless, but if you can stick any lens on a 1d and it actually operates at 11 volts, I would expect to be able to use different batteries and get the same performance.
Maybe someone willing to risk frying a camera with a battery grip could try putting three CR123's in. you would have to use dummy cells for the empty slots.

I won't be doing that, but you are welcome to try. Two CR123's fit into either of my LED flashlights, in place of the one 18650. But the 18650 is said to last longer...these are just Chinese made "ultrafire" 3000 mah.

 

[jrista]

I couldn't imagine using the 600/4+1.4x for BIF.

Not only can I imagine it, I do it routinely.


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 1.4x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/8, ISO 640

With the 2x as well…


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 2x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/11, ISO 1000

Wow! You have some great technique! Of course, I bet that 12fps and faster AF drive of the 1DX is immensely helpful, too!

The shot taken with the 2x is good, but the atmospheric blurring is generally why I probably wouldn't do that much. But seeing what you did with the 1.4x...if I ever get, or rent, a 1D X, I'd be willing to give it a try. I'm not sure how well a 5D III would fare. I know for a fact that my 7D doesn't handle the 600+1.4x for BIF very well...it's just too slow.

 

[mackguyver]

Neuro, those are great shots, particularly that first one where the shape of the trees and the negative space really frames the bird. Were these hand held, or (I assume, at least at 1200mm) from a gimbal?

jrista, the 7D AF blows the old AF out of the water, but the 5DIII is definitely yet another big step up from the 7D, particularly with subject tracking. Being able to lock an AF point on a bird and have it track it over 2/3 of the frame is amazing. The 6FPS frame rate is a bit of a let down after the 7D, but is still fast enough to get good action shots most of the time, which is why I sold my 7D about 6 months after getting the 5DIII. The image quality, high ISO performance, and AF more than make up the FF and FPS loss.

I just had a 1D X delivered yesterday and haven't tried it out yet, but I'm excited, especially after looking at the 1D X photo thread and Neuro's shots above

 

[expatinasia]

I couldn't imagine using the 600/4+1.4x for BIF.

Not only can I imagine it, I do it routinely.


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 1.4x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/8, ISO 640

With the 2x as well…


EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II + EF 2x III Extender, 1/2500 s, f/11, ISO 1000

Great shots, Neuro! Love the side on view (one you did not post).

 

[expatinasia]

I just had a 1D X delivered yesterday and haven't tried it out yet, but I'm excited, especially after looking at the 1D X photo thread and Neuro's shots above

I hope you do not mind me saying, but try to make the first shot something special, as the camera will blow you away.

I will never forget my first real shots with the 1D X as all I thought was "oh s**t"!

Enjoy, and congrats!!