Patent: Canon RF 11-24mm f/4L USM

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
10,806
3,183
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Our earlier report of a new ultra wide angle RF L lens coming in the first half of 2023 gets a related patent application for a similar optical formula, along with others. asobinet found and first reported on this patent. Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 Canon RF 9-18mm f/4 Canon RF 11-24mm f/4L USM

See full article...
 

Steve Balcombe

Too much gear
Aug 1, 2014
283
223
Interesting. Comparing the block diagrams of the EF 11-24/4L vs the 11-24 in the patent, they are very different. It looks like a completely new design, with full advantage being taken of the very short back focus.

Unfortunately the EF 11-24 was very expensive when launched, and the RF lens will no doubt follow in its footsteps and then some.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

josephandrews222

Square Sensors + AI = Better Images
Jul 12, 2013
619
1,897
65
Midwest United States
...how effective is the IBIS when the R5 is mated to the adapted EF 11-24?

I presume that none of the wide angle lenses included in the patent incorporate (in-lens) IS...

I have found the IS feature present in the EF-M 11-22 to be invaluable for a wide variety of travel photography situations...and in general, this stabilized EF-M lens has (for me) replaced the (non IS) EF 17-40mm f4 for many uses.

So I have long wondered about the IBIS capabilities of the R5, particularly for wide-angled non-stabilized EF (and now for the upcoming RF) lenses.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,155
12,979
...how effective is the IBIS when the R5 is mated to the adapted EF 11-24?

I presume that none of the wide angle lenses included in the patent incorporate (in-lens) IS...

I have found the IS feature present in the EF-M 11-22 to be invaluable for a wide variety of travel photography situations...and in general, this stabilized EF-M lens has (for me) replaced the (non IS) EF 17-40mm f4 for many uses.

So I have long wondered about the IBIS capabilities of the R5, particularly for wide-angled non-stabilized EF (and now for the upcoming RF) lenses.
I find the IBIS on my R3 to be very effective with my EF 11-24/4. That's what one would expect given that body stabilization is more effective at shorter focal lengths while lens stabilization is more effective at longer focal lengths.

Screenshot 2023-01-18 at 12.15.08 PM.png
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
The big question is...is it going to have drop in filters? Currently the Ef mount version has a huge advantage because there are ef-R mount adapters that allow a single drop in filter (ND or polariser). This is a lot more preferable then messing with gels on the rear mount slider.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,155
12,979
The big question is...is it going to have drop in filters? Currently the Ef mount version has a huge advantage because there are ef-R mount adapters that allow a single drop in filter (ND or polariser). This is a lot more preferable then messing with gels on the rear mount slider.
No room for that in the designs.

Screenshot 2023-01-18 at 12.51.53 PM.png
 
Upvote 0
I think astro shooters were probably hoping for something faster.
I guess Astro shooters are hoping for a very fast UWA prime. Even if the rumored 14-28mm F2 (or something similar) will see the light of day, a lot of people rather have an F1.4 or F1.8 prime. So even if the 11-24mm was F2.8, it wouldn't attract any astro shooters and would into an enormous lens into gigantic one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Mar 26, 2014
1,443
536
Canon might go for a halo lens like the 9-18mm f/4L so it could brag it has the widest lens with AF, or some such. Problem would be price. People might opt for an EF 11-24mm f/4L + adapter with drop in filter, esp for those who already bought a wide EF lens (EF 11-24mm, tilt shift, etc).

Loosing sales to the adapter (or worse, 3rd party adapter it would make no money on) would be an incentive to make a lens with drop in adapter. On the other hand, Canon will probably prefer to go for a lens that gives customers a choice they don't have.
 
Upvote 0
Our earlier report of a new ultra wide angle RF L lens coming in the first half of 2023 gets a related patent application for a similar optical formula, along with others. asobinet found and first reported on this patent. Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 Canon RF 9-18mm f/4 Canon RF 11-24mm f/4L USM

See full article...
Are these RF or RF-S lenses ?
 
Upvote 0
I would be interested in a RF replacement for the EF 11-24 F4 lens. 10mm would be cool and the ability to accommodate a drop in filter would be a must. I used to have the Panoflex filters for the front of the 11-24mm and they are so unwieldy. The adapter with drop in filter is such a great alternative. This range is so much fun for dramatic landscapes with compelling foreground elements. I will take the F4 especially if the patented fast UWA RF lenses come to fruition.

Bob
 
Upvote 0
Interesting. Comparing the block diagrams of the EF 11-24/4L vs the 11-24 in the patent, they are very different. It looks like a completely new design, with full advantage being taken of the very short back focus.

Unfortunately the EF 11-24 was very expensive when launched, and the RF lens will no doubt follow in its footsteps and then some.
I hope that the RF version is as rectilinear corrected as the current EF version. Looking at the recent horrendous barrel distortion on the RF 14-35 f4 and the RF 15-35...I'm not too hopeful.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,155
12,979
I hope that the RF version is as rectilinear corrected as the current EF version. Looking at the recent horrendous barrel distortion on the RF 14-35 f4 and the RF 15-35...I'm not too hopeful.
Have you compared the RF 14-35/4 output at 14mm to the EF 11-24/4 at 14mm? I have, and despite the horrendous barrel distortion of the RF 14-35 vs the nearly zero barrel distortion of the EF 11-24 at 14mm (better rectilinear correction and not at the end of its zoom range), the sharpness in the extreme corners is essentially indistinguishable.

That doesn't mean an RF 11-24/4 that requires correction of barrel distortion at the wide end will perform as well as the RF 14-35/4 after correction, but it does give reason to hope...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0