Patent: EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;clear:right; float:right; margin-left:10px; margin-top:10px;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/patent-ef-100-400-f4-5-5-6l-is/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float:right; margin-left:10px; margin-top:10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/patent-ef-100-400-f4-5-5-6l-is/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div style="clear:right; float:right; margin-left:10px; margin-top:10px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/06/patent-ef-100-400-f4-5-5-6l-is/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Another patent

</strong>This is probably the third separate patent I have seen for an EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS over the last 24 months. A zoom ring version does exist in the wild. We’re told the push/pull is finished and we’ll get a properly sealed 100-400. The cost will be north of $2500 USD and we could finally see it announced before the end of the year. Also appearing in the patent is a 70-300.</p>
<p><strong>The breakdown below is Google translated</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><span>Patent Publication No. 2013-105053</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Publication date 2013.5.30</span></li>
<li><span>Filing date 2011.11.15</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 1</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 4.01</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 72.48-135.49-290.86mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno. 4.58-4.94-5.85</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 16.62-9.07-4.25 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 21.64mm</span></li>
<li><span>143.42-175.48-201.87mm overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 39.98mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 3</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 3.75</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 104.16-166.66-391.00mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno. 4.60-5.20-5.80</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 11.73-7.40-3.17 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 21.64mm</span></li>
<li><span>221.48-252.31-300.68mm overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 70.65-87.69-113.37mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Canon</span><span> patent</span>
<ul>
<li><span>I want to put in the first group the anomalous dispersion optical element</span></li>
<li><span>It is possible correction and lateral chromatic axial chromatic aberration, but spherical aberration of color and field curvature occurs</span></li>
<li><span>By optimizing the placement, the correction and field curvature, the spherical aberration of the color of g-line</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2013-06-13" target="_blank">EG</a>]</strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[RGF]

Interesting about 70-300. The current 70-300 is a great lens; light weight and reasonable sharp. Wonder what the Canon-gods have in store for us.

It would great if the new 100-400 is on par with the 70-300 or even better, close to the 70-200. Though I suspect a 4x zoom will be hard to make as sharp as the 70-200 (which is 2.8x zoom).

 

[tron]

It would great if the new 100-400 is on par with the 70-300 or even better, close to the 70-200. Though I suspect a 4x zoom will be hard to make as sharp as the 70-200 (which is 2.8x zoom).

As long as it will be best at 400mm fully open...

 

[AvTvM]

at least in the patents one can see by how much Canon (and other lens makers) screw us by providing the focal lengths written on the lens!

no need to waste research on yet another boring, slow, consumer 70-300.
Just get on with that 100-400 II.

 

[Loswr]

Where's Example 2??

We’re told the push/pull is finished and we’ll get a properly sealed 100-400.

The inference is that a push-pull lens is not 'properly sealed.' However, for the similarly-designed push-pull 28-300L, Canon states that the, "Tight seal structure ensures excellent dust-proof and drip-proof performance." So there's no reason we couldn't get a properly sealed push-pull 100-400L...

 

[jrbdmb]

at least in the patents one can see by how much Canon (and other lens makers) screw us by providing the focal lengths written on the lens!

no need to waste research on yet another boring, slow, consumer 70-300.
Just get on with that 100-400 II.

By that way of thinking, this other lens is just a boring, slow, consumer 100-400.

I think you need to man up and get the 200-400 1.4x. That one is definitely not a consumer lens.

 

[AvTvM]

The inference is that a push-pull lens is not 'properly sealed.' However, for the similarly-designed push-pull 28-300L, Canon states that the, "Tight seal structure ensures excellent dust-proof and drip-proof performance." So there's no reason we couldn't get a properly sealed push-pull 100-400L...

Don't know how difficult it may be to weatherseal push-pull zooms. Not interested in those.

What I am observing however, is that Canon is withholding wheathersealing in anything other than expensive Luxury products. In reality, wheathersealing of DSLRs and lenses is really simple and does not cause significant additional R&D and production costs. As demonstrated by Pentax over and over again. All it takes is a few O-rings in the right places:

That's what cheap kit-lenses look like at Pentax these days:

http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/Pentax-K-50-Wetterfest-und-robust [and sorry, got it in German only at the moment]

 

[Malte_P]

double the price.. as expected.

 

[lol]

I really didn't care about a mk2 as I assumed they're almost certainly going to make it a twister. But if they're going to do another push-pull... I feel my wallet twitching!

 

[t.linn]

Don't know how difficult it may be to weatherseal push-pull zooms. Not interested in those.

What I am observing however, is that Canon is withholding wheathersealing in anything other than expensive Luxury products. In reality, wheathersealing of DSLRs and lenses is really simple and does not cause significant additional R&D and production costs. As demonstrated by Pentax over and over again. All it takes is a few O-rings in the right places:

That's what cheap kit-lenses look like at Pentax these days:

http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/Pentax-K-50-Wetterfest-und-robust [and sorry, got it in German only at the moment]

I think we've seen example after example over the last few years that suggest Canon's philosophy is to give consumers as little as they can get away with and still move product. Exhibit A: the T5i; Exhibit B: the 50D, complete with video capabilities that were disabled prior to release.

Now, before anyone says anything, I'm not saying this isn't their right. It is something to be aware of before jumping on the Canon bandwagon. Pentax, for example, offers more for your dollar but if you want to use a high end tilt-shift lens or an elaborate Speedlite system Pentax may not be the best choice.

 

[t.linn]

double the price.. as expected.

If this thing comes in at $2,500 I'd be relieved given what Canon has been doing lately with pricing. (Of course, the quote is "north of" $2,500.)

 

[crasher8]

Last time I checked, 2500 isn't double 1500.

 

[brad-man]

I was under the impression that the new 100-400 was to have a max ap @ 4, not 4.5. I know this is picking nits, but with such an increase in price, I want all I can get. Obviously IQ will be the ultimate determining factor (other than price) on whether I upgrade or keep my current beloved copy.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

With a FF kit, this would be a tempting upgrade path from the 70-300L to get a bit more reach...but at that price point it might just make more sense to grab a 70D (when it comes out) and use the 70-300 with it when I need maximum reach (I consider it an outdoor lens anyway - I don't use it inside where FF quality makes the biggest difference)...figures.

 

[crasher8]

Last time I checked, 2500 isn't double 1500.

It is double the refurbished price from Canon, shipped.

There's always a smarta$$

 

[Loswr]

There's always a smarta$$

Watch it, crasher7 crasher8 crasher9.

 

[Loswr]

With a FF kit, this would be a tempting upgrade path from the 70-300L to get a bit more reach...

I'd say that will depend on the physical specs of the new 100-400L. While I'd appreciate a step up in IQ and IS, I find that the current 100-400L delivers excellent images. But I'm still considering (and will likely purchase soon) the 70-300L as a travel lens.

 

[sdsr]

Pentax, for example, offers more for your dollar but if you want to use a high end tilt-shift lens or an elaborate Speedlite system Pentax may not be the best choice.

Whether Pentax offers "more for your dollar" rather depends on what you want. If you care about accurate, really fast and quiet focusing, or a good selection of long zooms, for instance, they give you less. Weather sealing (not many of their lenses are), great ergonomics and a superb sensor (I used to own a K-5; I gather its successor is even better) are all very well, but....

 

[crasher8]

There's always a smarta$$

Watch it, crasher7 crasher8 crasher9.

All this talk of Mods made me listen to Quadrophenia

 

[tron]

With a FF kit, this would be a tempting upgrade path from the 70-300L to get a bit more reach...

I'd say that will depend on the physical specs of the new 100-400L. While I'd appreciate a step up in IQ and IS, I find that the current 100-400L delivers excellent images. But I'm still considering (and will likely purchase soon) the 70-300L as a travel lens.

Regarding 70-300 I will be interested in your opinion when/if you get it. I already have two 70-200 lenses (70-200 2.8L IS II and 70-200 4L IS) I intend to keep. A third one in the same more or less focal range would be too much.The f/4 is an excellent travel lens. Light and sharp. In addition I do not like the reverse use of zooming and focusing rings in 70-300 ...

On the positive side I would not have to bring my 300 4L and there are bags that you can put the 70-300 lens vertically - but not the 70-200 f4 - and save a lot of space!!!

Choices...