Patent: EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM

[Canon Rumors]

<p>A patent for a new supertelephoto zoom optical formula for the EOS M system has surfaced in the form of an EF-M 70-400 f/4.5-7.2 STM.</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Patent Publication No. 2014-228734 (Google Translated)</strong>
<ul>
<li>Published 2014.12.8</li>
<li>Filing date 2013.5.23</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Example 3
<ul>
<li>Zoom ratio 5.58</li>
<li>The focal length f = 69.59-251.52-388.00mm</li>
<li>Fno. 4.68-6.30-7.00</li>
<li>Half angle ω = 11.11-3.11-2.02 °</li>
<li>Image height 13.66mm</li>
<li>Overall length of the lens 155.01-227.97-240.02mm</li>
<li>BF 15.81-37.15-46.87mm</li>
<li>Inner focus</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-12-10" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[HaroldC3]

Please tell me they aren't developing this lens...I thought 6.3 on the long end was bad enough but 7.2 is not good.

 

[Loswr]

Agree that f/7.2 isn't great, especially for APS-C. The retracted lens is 6" long, not bad for a zoom that goes to 400mm.

I wonder if this will be sold in the US?

 

[dcm]

Trying to imagine BIF with this lens on an M

 

[hoodlum]

At least this would suggest Canon is working on a more serious EOS M body with built-in EVF.

 

[9VIII]

Looks like a great lens.

This should be amazing compared to the small aperture and manual focus mirror lenses out there.

 

[Tyroop]

I agree with hoodlum. I was using my EF 400mm f/5.6L recently with the EOS M, and holding the combination at arm's length to compose and focus really isn't ideal. With long lenses you need to brace the camera and get it up to eye level. An EVF option would be a lot better.

Regarding Neuro's comment about being able to buy it in the States if it materialises, I simply can't understand Canon's marketing strategy. I am a big fan of the EOS M, but living in southern Thailand I was unable to get hold of the EF-M 11-22mm and had to drive down into Malaysia, where it is sold, to buy one.

So far, I haven't seen the EF-M 55-200mm in this region at all, although it is a lens I would probably buy if I could get hold of it. I can't understand why certain products are only sold in certain regions when people who live in the 'wrong' places want to buy the products.

Regarding this new EF-M 70-400 patent, it isn't something that interests me greatly. I am happy to have two systems for different needs. I use the EOS M for everyday use and street photography - no great speed or incredibly quick focusing required. I use it for everyday photos of the kids and photos for my website.

Occasionally, if I get the chance, I might go out birding with a long lens, but then I will want the speed and focusing capabilities of a DSLR system. Different tools for different jobs because no one camera system is suitable for every occasion.

These days, the lens that stays on my M most of the time is the 11-22mm. I love the wide angle, but there are also times when I could use a bit more focal length. An EF-M lens that starts off at 10mm or 11mm and extends to around 100mm would be ideal. Any lens over 200mm doesn't really interest me for the current M.

If it was made more like a DSLR - EVF, responsive, fast focusing, etc - it might be a different story, but so far no M body like that exists.

 

[Jamesy]

It is encouraging to see more development of the M system by Canon - I can't wait to see what the M3 will bring. The BMW version was nice so I am expecting BIG things from Canon ;D

 

[marchjohn]

When do you think we are going to see this next M camera?

I really want to buy it!

PS: how can I change the camera listed under my username? I don't even own a SX60 HS

 

[WoodyWindy]

Did anyone besides me notice what was NOT on this lens? Namely Image Stabilization. Could this possibly imply some form of in-body stabilization for the next M?

 

[Antono Refa]

I guess Canon realizes EOS M owners want small lenses, and is considering making tele lenses slow to get there.

That, or Canon just beefs up it's IP portfolio.

 

[AvTvM]

Not interested in the lens, but i also take it as a sign, that a samsung NX1-style EOS-M "Pro" is coming. Evf, good af, good performance, 7d II sensor plus larger body, better grip for all those whining about mirrorless cameras being "too small to handle". ;D

I still predict 2, maybe even 3 new M bodies:
• eos m "pro" - samsung nx1/fuji xt1 competitor
• eos m3 - upgrade from m2 - as small as possible, no evf
• eos m3 "plus" - sony a6000 competitor, small, with evf
All three would sell well ... If specced abd proced competitively.
If indeed released ... End of dslr rebels imminent

 

[bf]

I could not find it with Google patent search. Where do they patent it?

 

[Maximilian]

An EF-M with that focal length and no IS?
Seems strange to me.

and an F7.2? Phew! Not my world.

Maybe there is something else with IS and with some F6.3...

 

[dufflover]

Whilst the f-number itself is not a fixed step thing, it is when it comes to a setting on Canon cameras, so I would expect such a lens (highly doubt it'll get developed) would have a max zoom aperture setting of f/8?

I've had similar (unwieldy/bad) experiences with using an M with longer lenses at arms lengths, however using long lenses with the 70D swivel screen and DPAF is quite nice for low angle and decent enough for static subjects, obviously not BiF. Both features something the next EOS-M everyone expects after the DPAF tech was released (ok ok so the M2 didn't do much lol).

For whatever reason there is something worth patenting in there ...

 

[AvTvM]

I could not find it with Google patent search. Where do they patent it?

Japan? -> cr quotes Egami as source: http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-12-10

 

[baervan]

Not interested in this lens at all, but it then means that the system is alive! cross fingers for the next M!

 

[Chapman Baxter]

I'll be interested to learn the price of this lens. I contemplated getting the EF-M 55-200mm but I think it's very overpriced (in the UK at least). I ended up getting an EF-S 55-250mm for less than half the price of the EF-M,, to use specifically to use with the M. (I have a 70-200mm ii but the weight of that would defeat the lightweight purpose of the system).

 

[lw]

People are adding 2 and 2 together and making 5.

This is a patent for the optical design of a lens. Not a spec for a product.
Hence it isn't that significant that it doesn't appear to have IS. It is just a patent.

Nor anywhere in the patent does it even mention an EF-M mount or the EOS M system - its just a patent, not a product...

Only the rumour sites are putting 2 and 2 together and deciding it might be an EF-M lens.

It may be true of course - but folks need to remember, its just a patent.

 

[NorbR]

Where does that 7.2 even come from? The actual f-number mentioned in the patent is 7.0, and the more traditional 1/3-stop denomination would be 7.1 (although usually manufacturers tend to round *down* rather than up of course ... I wouldn't even be surprised to see Canon round 7.0 down to 6.3)

In any case, always good to hear mentions of new EF-M lenses, but this is not something that interests me much at first glance. Nothing against slow tele lenses in general, but 200mm is long enough and hard enough to handle on the M, I can't imagine having much use and/or much fun with 400mm ...