Patent: Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS With Built-in 1.4x and 1.7x Extender

[Steve Dmark2]

Hey Guys, I think my wish was heard. I really like The developement. I Hope a 300mm f4 is ii comes Out of this with a 1.4 Telekonverter!! Please please please

 

[Chaitanya]

I dont have money nor I think carrying 400 f2.8(or 500/600 f/4) is worth the effort. I would much rather see 400 f/4 with built in 1.4x TC (or not) just for shooting mammals either in Western ghats or Himalayas.

 

[AdamBotond]

Any super telephoto prime with built in TC would be greatly appreciated. Having the 200-400 F4 L IS rented few months ago for mainly wildlife, I often found myself using using it only at the native telephoto end and at 560 by just flipping the 1,4x switch, which made obvious for me: For my uses a prime fast telephoto lens with one or (even two) stage built in TC would be much more useful than having a zoom. Also when shooting indoor it doesn't matter as much, but when you are out there in the mud, having a built in TC is priceless. No dust, no moisture introduced, quicker, optically better than conventional TCs. Actually, I wonder why Canon hasn't introduced any (other than 200-400).

 

[Vern]

Any super telephoto prime with built in TC would be greatly appreciated. Having the 200-400 F4 L IS rented few months ago for mainly wildlife, I often found myself using using it only at the native telephoto end and at 560 by just flipping the 1,4x switch, which made obvious for me: For my uses a prime fast telephoto lens with one or (even two) stage built in TC would be much more useful than having a zoom. Also when shooting indoor it doesn't matter as much, but when you are out there in the mud, having a built in TC is priceless. No dust, no moisture introduced, quicker, optically better than conventional TCs. Actually, I wonder why Canon hasn't introduced any (other than 200-400).

+1, I have the 600 f4 II, which is great for avian pics w the 1.4X III, but for larger mammals and low light, it can be too long/slow. This lens just might cover everything except the 600 + 1.4 and give me f2.8 for low light/larger critters. 600 DO w built in 1.4 that weighs ~5lbs too, please.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Whilst the 400 F2.8 does not suit my needs (used to have one) the idea of a single or double built in extender is very tempting to say the least!

Naturally there will be an increase in size, weight and price but I think that Canon should consider built in extenders on all their Big Whites if they can keep the above factors within reason.

Personally I think a single 1.7 built in extender would suit me best for F4 (or better) lenses. The combination of 1.4 and 1.7 might be very nice on F2.8 lenses though.

 

[arbitrage]

That lens would be drool worthy....not sure where to spend my 20K....600DO or this lens.....I guess we have a much better chance of seeing a 600DO....this lens could just be a pipe dream....600DO it is then!!

 

[Bennymiata]

More than likely is that you can use both converters at the same time to give you 2.1X.

 

[RGF]

I originally thought why not 2x but then it probably comes down to space. They are basically doing dual 1.4x... I mean the 1.7 is a happy medium.

Pretty interesting concept really. I suspect $13,000 msrp though.

$13,000 MSRP. We should be so lucky. I suspect at least $15,000 and could go as high as $18,000

 

[RGF]

A prime zoom? What is this witchcraft?

+1

Black magic, no make that Canon White Magic :

 

[eml58]

At Last

Since the 200-400f/4 1.4x Came out I've felt the built in 1.4x as an option on order (Nikon have something similar but not as a fixed piece) should be a standard option for all Canon's Prime Lenses.

The 400f/2.8 Mk 1 & II have been amazing lenses, this configuration has got to be an absolute winner, in my view.

 

[TAW]

Thank you Canon! I love the 200-400 and hope you continue to integrate the extender(s) into future lenses. If you produce these lenses, they will find their way into my kit. It would be nice if the extenders on these lenses could be activated via buttons on the camera / electronically instead of a lever.

Thanks for producing GREAT products!

tom

 

[drjlo]

Although Canon already has 400 F/4 DO lens, why not make the 400 f/2.8 a DO lens and make it smaller to compensate for the built-in extenders? 8)

 

[tron]

Although Canon already has 400 F/4 DO lens, why not make the 400 f/2.8 a DO lens and make it smaller to compensate for the built-in extenders? 8)

+1 but for now I guess they may be developing (or thinking or planning to develop) the 600mm f/4 DO...

 

[scyrene]

Although Canon already has 400 F/4 DO lens, why not make the 400 f/2.8 a DO lens and make it smaller to compensate for the built-in extenders? 8)

+1 but for now I guess they may be developing (or thinking or planning to develop) the 600mm f/4 DO...

Although given DO is mostly about shrinking the length of the lens, and most of the bulk of the 400 2.8 is due to the big front element, which can't be made smaller without cheating, would it be that much different? I guess all of them could be given DO eventually, but is this the best place to start (personally I'd say no, it's the physically longest lenses that need it next, if only so they fit into more bags...)

Tbh this lens sounds like a dream, but I doubt I could afford it. Perhaps they could drop the 500 f/4 (which is my current long lens, but only as a compromise). They they can revamp the 600 as DO and maybe bring out a 500 f/5.6 as a replacement for the 400 5.6 - maybe a more rounded lineup overall? Whatever they do, it's bound to involve a big price hike.

 

[tron]

Although Canon already has 400 F/4 DO lens, why not make the 400 f/2.8 a DO lens and make it smaller to compensate for the built-in extenders? 8)

+1 but for now I guess they may be developing (or thinking or planning to develop) the 600mm f/4 DO...

Although given DO is mostly about shrinking the length of the lens, and most of the bulk of the 400 2.8 is due to the big front element, which can't be made smaller without cheating, would it be that much different? I guess all of them could be given DO eventually, but is this the best place to start (personally I'd say no, it's the physically longest lenses that need it next, if only so they fit into more bags...)

Tbh this lens sounds like a dream, but I doubt I could afford it. Perhaps they could drop the 500 f/4 (which is my current long lens, but only as a compromise). They they can revamp the 600 as DO and maybe bring out a 500 f/5.6 as a replacement for the 400 5.6 - maybe a more rounded lineup overall? Whatever they do, it's bound to involve a big price hike.

Yes 600 4 DO is going to be super expensive.

 

[stein]

My 300/2.8L IS would do great with built-in 1.4x and 1.7x, I carry the 1.4xIII nearly all the time and a 1.7 would be great option for birds etc. 300 - 420/4 and 510/4,75 in one lens and no zooming..