Patent: Canon patents RF 200mm f/2L IS, RF 300mm f/2.8L IS and RF 500mm f/4L IS optical formulas

[neuroanatomist]

Weight difference of the past 25 years of select Canon EF & RF lenses.

Bonus: NIKKOR Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S

I would not be surprised that these RF lenses will be less than 2.2 kilograms when released within 20 months

- RF 500mm f/4.0L IS USM
- RF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM
- RF 200mm f/2.0L IS USM

It seems like there’s an echo on the forums today.

 

[mpmark]

I wonder if any of these lenses will use DO to further reduce weight. Moreover, I suspect that these lenses will be announced in parallel with the R1 flagship.

the answer is no, and how we know that? the published lengths. the published lengths are consistent with a 25-28cm extension in length. My assumption is the 300 and 500 will have the same design as the version III 400/600 lenses with a built in converter like the new RF 400/600 have increasing their lengths by 25cm.
The good new is that the EF version III lenses were substantially lighter so the new 300 and 500 should be as well.

 

[mpmark]

Weight difference of the past 25 years of select Canon EF & RF lenses.

Bonus: NIKKOR Z 800mm f/6.3 VR S

I would not be surprised that these RF lenses will be less than 2.2 kilograms when released within 20 months

- RF 500mm f/4.0L IS USM
- RF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM
- RF 200mm f/2.0L IS USM

IF we go by the logical here, taking the direction the 400/600 II upgrades to III and then RF those lenses saved 22-25% in weight from the verision II
From the published lengths above in this original post the new lenses are consistent with a 25-28cm increase in length for a built in EF-RF converter. But I believe the 300/500 version II will also get the same redesign of optics config as the 400/600 II did for III. So its safe to assume a 22-25% weight savings with the new 300/500 lenses.

 

[kaihp]

IF we go by the logical here, taking the direction the 400/600 II upgrades to III and then RF those lenses saved 22-25% in weight from the verision II
From the published lengths above in this original post the new lenses are consistent with a 25-28cm increase in length for a built in EF-RF converter. But I believe the 300/500 version II will also get the same redesign of optics config as the 400/600 II did for III. So its safe to assume a 22-25% weight savings with the new 300/500 lenses.

I would hope that the length increase is limited to 25-28mm, not cm.

I doubt that a 25 cm length increase would be successful in the marketplace (unless it's for planetariums).

 

[neuroanatomist]

the answer is no, and how we know that? the published lengths. the published lengths are consistent with a 25-28cm extension in length. My assumption is the 300 and 500 will have the same design as the version III 400/600 lenses with a built in converter like the new RF 400/600 have increasing their lengths by 25cm.

Your assumption appears to be incorrect (ignoring your units error). The published lengths above are consistent with lenses only 10-12 mm longer than the MkII versions of the EF lenses.

You seem to be unaware that the ‘lens length’ in a patent application is the length of the optical formula, i.e., from the sensor to the front surface of the front element. You need to subtract the flange focal distance (20 mm for RF) to estimate the length of the actual lens represented by the patent.

 

[Chig]

The RF versions of the 300mm f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 are both zooms:

RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM​

RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM​

Hopefully Canon will make a 70-200mm f/2 or even f/1.8:

RF 70-200mm f/2 L IS USM​

RF 70-200mm f/1.8 L IS USM​

Physically very similar in size and weight to the 100-300mm f/2.8 and presumably price and the ultimate portrait / indoor sports lens

Are you listening Canon ?

 

[EricN]

Are you listening Canon ?

I believe you will have a higher chance of success if you try writing a formal letter in Japanese:

キヤノンプラザ棟
3 Chome-30-2 Shimomaruko,
Ota City, Tokyo 146-0092,
Japan