Patent: Lots of Big White Lens Patent Applications Surface

[Canon Rumors]

New patents for supertelephoto optical formulas have appeared at the USPTO.</p>
<p>The range of formulas is quite vast, all the way from a new EF 300mm f/2.8L IS to a new EF 800mm f/5.6L IS design.</p>
<p>We do think there will be some new “big white” lenses announced in the next 12 months, not including the EF 600mm f/4 DO IS. We’ve heard from at least one person that Canon may take the EF 200mm f/2L IS back to its f/1.8 roots. Though the latter hasn’t yet been confirmed.</p>


<p><a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-ef-lenses-rumours-and-news/">Northlight-Images uncovered a lot of the patent applications</a>, you can view them all here over at the USPTO. [<a href="http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20170351113">1</a>, <a href="http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20170351089">2</a>, <a href="http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20170351060">3</a>, <a href="http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20170351059">4</a>, <a href="http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20170351058">5</a>]</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[RGF]

Not sure how much better Canon can make their current line of Super Teles.

Of course they could make them lighter but to make them really lighter, they will need to go to DO optics.

They could add a drop in 1.4 or better yet drop in 1.2, 1.4, or combine them to get 1.7 extender.

And yes a bit sharper, bit more contrasty, but unless they come up some really great miracle I think stick with my current 600 II.

 

[Chaitanya]

Would really love to see 500mm f/5.6 IS L or 400mm f/4 IS L someday.

 

[ScottyP]

Maybe improvements could be made to the design not so much to improve optics but to make them cheaper to manufacture so they could be sold for less. (And/or for a greater profit). Lots of products get redesigns that do nothing for performance but instead streamline the production process.

 

[RGF]

Maybe improvements could be made to the design not so much to improve optics but to make them cheaper to manufacture so they could be sold for less. (And/or for a greater profit). Lots of products get redesigns that do nothing for performance but instead streamline the production process.

Have to be significant cost savings in manufacturing. I don't know how much it costs to set up new lens but take a guess, $500M to $1MM?? If they saved $250 on COGS they would need to sell a lot of lens.

 

[IglooEater]

Maybe improvements could be made to the design not so much to improve optics but to make them cheaper to manufacture so they could be sold for less. (And/or for a greater profit). Lots of products get redesigns that do nothing for performance but instead streamline the production process.

Have to be significant cost savings in manufacturing. I don't know how much it costs to set up new lens but take a guess, $500M to $1MM?? If they saved $250 on COGS they would need to sell a lot of lens.

I think that’s true enough, but Sigma has demonstrated clearly enough that there are savings to be made somewhere. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=745&Camera=453&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1086&Sample=0&CameraComp=453&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0 (Like $3,000 a piece on these high end lenses)
I have the feeling (just a feeling ) that if a new 500mm had been released by Canon at the Sigma’s price, people would have been all over it. As it stands there is not a single review of it on bh, possibly pointing to limited enthusiasm.

 

[IglooEater]

For purely theoretical, emotional, and geeky reasons, I’d not hate to see the 200mm become a 1.8 IS ;D

 

[BeenThere]

Maybe improvements could be made to the design not so much to improve optics but to make them cheaper to manufacture so they could be sold for less. (And/or for a greater profit). Lots of products get redesigns that do nothing for performance but instead streamline the production process.

Have to be significant cost savings in manufacturing. I don't know how much it costs to set up new lens but take a guess, $500M to $1MM?? If they saved $250 on COGS they would need to sell a lot of lens.

I think your guess at set-up costs ($500M) are a bit off. If selling for $10K a pop, Canon would have to sell 50,000 lenses to gross enough (at retail, not profit) to break even on set up alone. Not reasonable.

 

[AlanF]

Maybe improvements could be made to the design not so much to improve optics but to make them cheaper to manufacture so they could be sold for less. (And/or for a greater profit). Lots of products get redesigns that do nothing for performance but instead streamline the production process.

Have to be significant cost savings in manufacturing. I don't know how much it costs to set up new lens but take a guess, $500M to $1MM?? If they saved $250 on COGS they would need to sell a lot of lens.

I think your guess at set-up costs ($500M) are a bit off. If selling for $10K a pop, Canon would have to sell 50,000 lenses to gross enough (at retail, not profit) to break even on set up alone. Not reasonable.

At $1MM , by the same maths they would have to sell 100M lenses to break even.

 

[James Larsen]

Would really love to see 500mm f/5.6 IS L or 400mm f/4 IS L someday.

There is the 400mm f/4 DO IS you know, right?

 

[jhpeterson]

Maybe improvements could be made to the design not so much to improve optics but to make them cheaper to manufacture so they could be sold for less. (And/or for a greater profit). Lots of products get redesigns that do nothing for performance but instead streamline the production process.

Have to be significant cost savings in manufacturing. I don't know how much it costs to set up new lens but take a guess, $500M to $1MM?? If they saved $250 on COGS they would need to sell a lot of lens.

I think your guess at set-up costs ($500M) are a bit off. If selling for $10K a pop, Canon would have to sell 50,000 lenses to gross enough (at retail, not profit) to break even on set up alone. Not reasonable.

I believe the poster meant $500,000 to $1,000,000 for set up costs, a much more realistic figure. If savings were on the order of $250 per lens, they'd still need to sell lots, but only a few thousand to recover their costs.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Canon has stopped servicing the IS Version I big whites (except 800mm) so its time to obsolete the version II lenses.

 

[Ryananthony]

Canon has stopped servicing the IS Version I big whites (except 800mm) so its time to obsolete the version II lenses.

That stopped me from picking up a first version 300/2.8IS. I would have confirmed before purchase, but you saved me some time. Thanks you.

 

[[email protected]]

Pretty certain they're going to refresh the 500mm II, as I picked one up used yesterday, effectively green-lighting Canon.

BTW, I perused the patent documents. These aren't just lens formulae. They are actual claims to new ideas dealing with obscure things (at least to me). Hope it means interesting stuff to come.

 

[makistza]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-sX2Y0W8l0

 

[sportskjutaren]

I would absolutely love to see a 400/2,8 with a built in 1,4 TC.
Considering the 200-400 with a built in TC.
It would be a logical update to the 400/2,8L IS II.
To me it would be perfect for soccer/football.

With both the Olympic games and the Fifa world cup i´m pretty sure that we will something interesting coming in the coming months.