Patent: Canon RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
10,776
3,157
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Canon continues to develop optical formulas for an RF mount superzoom, something that we’ll likely see sooner than later. This patent shows an optical formula for an RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6. It’s hard to say if this is an L lens, as they tend to be larger than their non-L counterparts.
Canon RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6 embodiement:

Focal length: 24.72mm 90.83mm 290.86mm
F-number: 4.12 5.00 5.88
Angle of view: 41.19° 13.40° 4.25°
Image height: 21.64mm 21.64mm 21.64mm
Total lens length: 165.57mm 210.57mm 255.57mm
BF: 14.37mm 32.56mm 30.89mm

Continue reading...


 
When traveling with checked baggage I bring my RF 24-105 and my EF 100-400 II (and the 1.4x extender), but when I am limited to carry-on only I just go with the smaller lens. The IQ and durability limitations of the 24-240 have kept it off my list so far. If this one deals effectively with both of those concerns while providing some additional reach, it could be a serious consideration for one-bag travel.
 
Upvote 0
When traveling with checked baggage I bring my RF 24-105 and my EF 100-400 II (and the 1.4x extender), but when I am limited to carry-on only I just go with the smaller lens. The IQ and durability limitations of the 24-240 have kept it off my list so far. If this one deals effectively with both of those concerns while providing some additional reach, it could be a serious consideration for one-bag travel.

My thoughts as well. This would be a great one lens solution for landscape photography when I have to lug gear for miles in a backpack.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Nelu

1-DX Mark III, EOS R5, EOS R
CR Pro
I wish the superzoom concept would go more the other way, ie something like an RF 15-85 f/4. That would be a more useful travel lens for me than a 24-xxx
I guess it depends on what do you mean by "travel". I was doing a three-days backpacking trip in August with the 24-70 f/2.8 lens. I really would have loved to have the 24-270mm lens when we ran into the grizzly mama bear, with three cubs...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jan 28, 2019
66
67
I guess it depends on what do you mean by "travel". I was doing a three-days backpacking trip in August with the 24-70 f/2.8 lens. I really would have loved to have the 24-270mm lens when we ran into the grizzly mama bear, with three cubs...
I agree. I would take extra reach over wider angle of view on any and all conceivable trips. If I want a really wide shot I prefer to shoot a panorama at a narrower focal length as it has a much more natural look.
 
Upvote 0
Mar 26, 2014
1,443
536
I wish the superzoom concept would go more the other way, ie something like an RF 15-85 f/4. That would be a more useful travel lens for me than a 24-xxx

I would love such a lens, but wonder what chances there for such a lens.

IIRC, the experts on this site explained there are physical obstacles to designing zooms that cross the normal from wide to tele. Possibly it's easier to design one for a MILC?
 
Upvote 0