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

[Loswr]

some being the operative word

Where is the...

all of which are claimed as patents for EF-M lenses

Yet none of the lenses they have released since the EOS M's launch have any corresponding patent filing...
Where is the patent filing for the EF-M 11-22, or EF-M 55-200 ?

Obviously not all patents become products, nor are all products preceded by a patent. That's true across all industries.

 

[AvTvM]

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.

It's plenty good enough for daylight wildlife photography. Don't want it? Don't buy it!

yea ... but with the current EOS-M bodies you'll first need to use a tranquilizer gun on the wildlife ... ;D
well, for zoo animals dozing in bright sunshine it should be sufficient ...

 

[jefflinde]

I really hope this lens gets made. I think it is the perfect addition to the current line up. if i wanted a really fast super-tele lens i would get one of the numerous existing lenses. but for people who use the M as it is intended this lens would be great. Let face it, the M is not a DSLR replacement but a camera to expand the capabilities of point and shoots.

 

[MrMeursault]

Does this mean future EF-M cameras will be able to competently autofocus to f/8. Does this mean I will be able to use my 600mm f/4 (ok I don't really own it) with 2.0x teleconverter on an APS-C mirrorless style body (with adapter of course) for a 1920mm effective field of view?

 

[Loswr]

Does this mean future EF-M cameras will be able to competently autofocus to f/8. Does this mean I will be able to use my 600mm f/4 (ok I don't really own it) with 2.0x teleconverter on an APS-C mirrorless style body (with adapter of course) for a 1920mm effective field of view?

No mirror means no dedicated phase AF sensor. DPAF works at f/11 (f/5.6 lens + 2x TC).

 

[mackguyver]

f/7.2 @ 400mm (640mm effective FL), apparently with no IS, using the LCD as a viewfinder, all while holding a small body at arms length.

That doesn't sound like a good idea to me...

 

[dcm]

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?

The retracted EF-M 55-200 is 4" long and f/6.3 at 200 so this would be quite a feat. Appears they kept the size down to fit with the style of the M, this could be real interesting if its a similar price. As others have noted, you really can't handhold this on the current body anymore than you can with any other long lens. Hopefully this is the harbinger of a new body with some type of view finder and better autofocus capabilities.

 

[dcm]

BTW: the patent also includes some other variations: a pair of 55-250mm f/4.7-6.5 and a 55-300mm f/4.7-6.5 that are closer to the 4" length of the 55-200mm when closed and 6"-7" extended.

 

[AvTvM]

Exactly. One of the many advantages of mirrorless systems.
Equally important: an electronic viewfinder displays a visible image to look at even in very low light and at f/8 or f/11 ... as opposed to optical viewfinders. In conjunction with ever better hi-ISO capable sensors mirrorless cameras are already expanding imaging capabilities beyond what is possible with mirrorslapping cameras.

Samsung NX1 is a good example for that. At 15fps it is faster than the 7d ii, has a better sensor, and the on-sensorhybrid AF-system appears ti be at least on par with 7d ii as well. Just wait a little until the announced samsung 300/2.8 becomes available and possibly tele-extender 2.0x .. We are lokoing at the first mirrorless entries that are vapable to challenge, match and soon surpass DSLRs in the very field of photography that naysayers eanted to make us believe mirrorslappers could not be beat for many years to come: fast action, long tele stuff, wildlife, air shows, BIF ...

More mirrorless goodness is in the pipeline ... Sony A9 ... might be really really good. Looking forward to see what comes next.

 

[mangobutter]

I don't understand the need or obsession with an EVF on a camera like the EOS M. I'd never use it. No way I'm holding a tiny slippery rectangle shaped camera up to my eye. It wouldn't help much. Just brace yourself if you need stability. If I'm going through all the trouble to hold a camera up to my face and suddenly appear to everyone that I'm taking a picture, then i've defeated the whole point of owning such a camera. I absolutely love the EOS M the way it is and I always hand hold pics shot with my 70-200 F4 on the M @ 200mm (320mm). They come out pretty sharp. I'll attach some casual shots.

These are Facebook compressed photos, mind you. The actual versions are much sharper:

 

[AvTvM]

nice pics. But I don't think the subjects in either of the 2 images would have behaved differently had you taken the camera to the eye to capture the image. ;D

And even when a digital camera does has a viewfinder, there is no obligation to use it for every capture. One can still stick with LCD and "stretched-out arms snapshooter salute".

 

[slclick]

I just noticed B&H has the EF-M adapter kit discontinued and that they are selling the adapter alone on sale in a white box only. I've seen subtler signs of a big change!

 

[Loswr]

I just noticed B&H has the EF-M adapter kit discontinued and that they are selling the adapter alone on sale in a white box only. I've seen subtler signs of a big change!

Various flavors of EOS M kits have been discontinued and then relisted at B&H for a couple of years now.

A while back, Amazon UK had the 6D listed as discontinued.

 

[slclick]

I just noticed B&H has the EF-M adapter kit discontinued and that they are selling the adapter alone on sale in a white box only. I've seen subtler signs of a big change!

Various flavors of EOS M kits have been discontinued and then relisted at B&H for a couple of years now.

A while back, Amazon UK had the 6D listed as discontinued.

Good point, thanks