Patent: Dual internal teleconverter telephoto lens.

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
  • Jul 20, 2010
    9,725
    2,396
    Canada
    www.canonrumors.com
    Is this the next evolution of the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM 1.4x? Here is a patent showing a dual teleconverter Canon telephoto prime, an EF 400mm f/5.6.
    What’s cool about the dual teleconverters, is one is a focal length reducer, so you get the EF 400mm f/5.6 and the built-in focal length reducer converter brings the lens to an EF 300mm f/4, or at the other end, a 560mm f/8 lens.
    There has long been a desire for a replacement to the classic Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L, even if Canon just added image stabilization, but this is definitely a unique direction to take the lens on Canon’s part.
    Japan Patent Application 2019-70689 summary:
    Canon EF 400mm f/5.6

    Focal length: 391.89mm
    F number: 5.80
    Angle of view: 3.16°
    Image height: 21.64mm
    Total lens...

    Continue reading...
     
    Last edited:
    Would be a funny being! But after taking some time to look at it: A very interesting idea if you look how well the converters work with different lenses - two integrated (in terms of optical design) integrated adapters might be a three-focal-length lens with the excellent IQ of the best primes ... in one package.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 2 users
    Upvote 0

    AlanF

    Desperately seeking birds
    CR Pro
    Aug 16, 2012
    10,325
    16,784
    This multi-converter lens is cool and all, but I'd much rather see something like a sub-$10k 600mm f/5.6 for us enthusiast mortals who live down here on Earth, and don't want a zoom sigma 150-600 f/6.3
    A sub $4k 500mm f/5.6 would be my preferred choice for two reasons. First, weight and secondly wider field of view, and 500mm would help keep the price down.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 4 users
    Upvote 0

    unfocused

    Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
    Jul 20, 2010
    6,951
    5,090
    69
    Springfield, IL
    www.thecuriouseye.com
    Not sure I get the point of this lens. Same focal length and aperture as the 100-400 which takes a 1.4 converter very nicely. I suppose a fixed focal length and matched teleconverter might be marginally sharper, but not sure it would be visibly sharper in real world use. Such a lens might be lighter than the zoom, but it would also be longer. Too long to fit in my camera bag. It would make more sense if this were an R lens. Shorter, lighter, maybe faster focus and something different to excite people.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0

    RunAndGun

    EOS RP
    CR Pro
    Dec 16, 2011
    482
    168
    Kinda like these that we had in the days of 16x9/4x3 switchable TV cameras. Most of our ENG lenses had a built-in 2x extender, but for a while they added the option of adding in a .7x(I believe) element to maintain the FoV when the camera was switched from 16x9 to 4X3(the sides of the chips were just electronically cropped).

    s-l1600.jpg
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 users
    Upvote 0

    RunAndGun

    EOS RP
    CR Pro
    Dec 16, 2011
    482
    168
    You remember how old TV cameras (1950s?) had three lenses on a rotating mount? Given the RF's short film-to-flange you could probably make something like that that could mount 3 EF lenses.

    Leica's rangefinders also had a "Tri-Elmar" lens with three fixed focal lengths. I've used M for decades but literally have never touched the Tri-Elmars. I don't know if they're actually zooms that just have three zoom settings, or whether the image isn't really usabable between the specific focal lengths.

    https://www.newsshooter.com/2019/04/10/multi-turret-old-school-meets-new-school/
     
    • Wow
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0

    Antono Refa

    EOS R
    Mar 26, 2014
    1,416
    509
    Ok, just give me 50mm that becomes 70mm and 35mm.

    A question to those who understand lens design - would the lens reducer work the same with a 50mm lens?

    My limited understanding is it's easy to add a focal length reducer in this case because 400mm / 5.6 is larger than a full frame sensor's diagonal, similar to what's done with speed boosters from FF lenses to crop bodies. My understanding is repeating the trick with a 50mm would require it to have a much larger power of coverage, similar to the TS-E 45mm (though without the mechanics to tilt and shift it, which isn't trivial).
     
    Upvote 0

    BobG

    EOS M50
    Jul 2, 2014
    28
    12
    I would have “settled” for a 400/2.8 with 1.4x builtin, as a replacement for my 400 mk II. The 200-400 is too slow for some of the events I cover.

    If a reducer could be added, enabling 280(?) f/2, that would be absolutely mind-blowing!

    $20k or thereabouts, but worth every penny...
    why so expensive ?
    The basic 400F5.6 is £1200, adding a couple of inbuilt converters at £450 each would take it to the same price region as the 100-400 Mk 2. This would make a decent birders lens.
     
    Upvote 0