svg+xml;base64,PHN2ZyB2aWV3Qm94PScwIDAgNzI4IDQ2MicgeG1sbnM9J2h0dHA6Ly93d3cudzMub3JnLzIwMDAvc3ZnJz48L3N2Zz4= - Patent: Canon continues development of EF supertelephoto lenses

    Patent: Canon continues development of EF supertelephoto lenses

    By 33 Comments1 Min Read Canon Patents

    In a patent uncovered by Canon News, it appears Canon is continuing the development of EF telephoto lenses. This patent is related to the focusing speed of the lenses as well as the reduction in aberrations.

    Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM

    • Focal length: 294.00mm
    • F number: 2.91
    • Half angle of view: 4.21°
    • Image height: 21.64mm
    • Total lens length: 276.40mm  
    • BF: 65.35mm 

    Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM

    • Focal Length: 392.00mm  
    • F number: 2.90
    • Half angle of view: 3.16°
    • Image height: 21.64mm  
    • Total lens length: 371.25mm  
    • BF: 69.92mm  

    Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS USM

    • Focal Length: 490.00mm  
    • F-number: 4.12
    • Half angle of view: 2.53°
    • Image height: 21.64mm  
    • Total lens length: 410.77mm  
    • BF: 66.03mm  

    Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS USM

    • Focal length: 588.00mm  
    • F-number: 4.12
    • Half angle: 2.11°
    • Image height: 21.64mm  
    • Total lens length: 474.78mm  
    • BF: 80.59mm  

    Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM

    • Focal length: 784.00mm  
    • F-number: 5.80
    • Half angle: 1.58°
    • Image height: 21.64mm  
    • Total lens length: 484.53mm  
    • BF: 75.94mm

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    33 comments

    1. I'm not so sure this means Canon is continuing R&D of EF lenses. Possibly R&D was stopped and announcement was made while the patent filing and publishing bureaucracy was in the works. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon decided to release a new 1Dx mkIII & new super teles so the market would be satisfied while it developed a new sports RF camera & lenses.
    2. I'm not so sure this means Canon is continuing R&D of EF lenses. Possibly R&D was stopped and announcement was made while the patent filing and publishing bureaucracy was in the works. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon decided to release a new 1Dx mkIII & new super teles so the market would be satisfied while it developed a new sports RF camera & lenses.

      The 400mm and 600mm are a year old, so maybe they'll just release the 300, 500 and 800?
    3. I have the 500/4 II, which is absolutely a stellar lens. But for my shooting, I rarely use it. I tend to walk around when shooting nature (mostly birds) and thus find, despite its reduced image quality, my Sigma 150-600 is about the best tool for that job. Relatively light and zoomable.

      These new lenses, with the weight back closer to the camera body, would be a welcome upgrade. Although the 600/4 III is lighter than my 500 already.

      Now, apply that design technology to something like the 200-400 f/4 with the 1.4X built in and my might have a very high quality, manageable birding/walkabout lens.
    5. DSLR's are far from being dead, why should development of EF lenses be discontinued?
      I'm guessing the top tier pro lenses (ie over $5K) will remain in the EF development portfolio until Canon has a pro (sports / wildlife) mirrorless body offering. At the moment, I can't see many sports guys jumping over to the Rf mount when the Eos R is the only semi-pro body available. The 1Dx range is still king in Canon world.
    6. I have the 500/4 II, which is absolutely a stellar lens. But for my shooting, I rarely use it. I tend to walk around when shooting nature (mostly birds) and thus find, despite its reduced image quality, my Sigma 150-600 is about the best tool for that job. Relatively light and zoomable.

      These new lenses, with the weight back closer to the camera body, would be a welcome upgrade. Although the 600/4 III is lighter than my 500 already.

      Now, apply that design technology to something like the 200-400 f/4 with the 1.4X built in and my might have a very high quality, manageable birding/walkabout lens.
      My shooting style with nature and birds is the same as yours. It's a pity for us that they are not going in for some lightweight f/5.6 primes. I've added a Nikon 500/5.6 PF to my gear (couldn't resist a bargain) and it's a joy walking around with a 1.46kg lens, even lighter than my much loved 100-400mm II.
    8. My shooting style with nature and birds is the same as yours. It's a pity for us that they are not going in for some lightweight f/5.6 primes. I've added a Nikon 500/5.6 PF to my gear (couldn't resist a bargain) and it's a joy walking around with a 1.46kg lens, even lighter than my much loved 100-400mm II.

      I'd really like Canon to answer the Sigma/Tamron 150-600, even if it's 200-600. The 200-400 f/4 with the built in teleconverter is very good and very convenient, but more costly than I'm willing to pay. It's definitely a better lens than my Siggy, but I'm not a pro and am not making any money to speak of with my photos.

      Nikon has, I think, a 200-500 f/5.6 lens. That extra 1/3 stop is welcome, even if it isn't much. Helpful when using a crop sensor where ISO 12,800 is pretty doggone rough.
    9. I'm guessing the top tier pro lenses (ie over $5K) will remain in the EF development portfolio until Canon has a pro (sports / wildlife) mirrorless body offering. At the moment, I can't see many sports guys jumping over to the Rf mount when the Eos R is the only semi-pro body available. The 1Dx range is still king in Canon world.

      I don't anticipate a great difference in the optical design between an EF and RF lens at these long focal lengths. The EF lenses have a pretty long distance between the back element and the sensor as it is. Simply redesigning the mount ought to be suitable.

      Or, making an EF-RF adapter with a 1.4X teleconverter function built in. Best of both worlds!
    10. I'd really like Canon to answer the Sigma/Tamron 150-600, even if it's 200-600. The 200-400 f/4 with the built in teleconverter is very good and very convenient, but more costly than I'm willing to pay. It's definitely a better lens than my Siggy, but I'm not a pro and am not making any money to speak of with my photos.

      Nikon has, I think, a 200-500 f/5.6 lens. That extra 1/3 stop is welcome, even if it isn't much. Helpful when using a crop sensor where ISO 12,800 is pretty doggone rough.
      In practice as far as noise is concerned, the front diameters are 95mm for both the 500/5.6 and 600/6.3 and so they let in the same amount of light.
    11. In practice as far as noise is concerned, the front diameters are 95mm for both the 500/5.6 and 600/6.3 and so they let in the same amount of light.

      However, at f/6.3 as opposed to 5.6, you need to either reduce shutter speed 1/3 of a stop or increase ISO 1/3 of a stop to expose identically.

      Not really an issue on a bright day, but in the darkness of the forest, you start pushing things a bit.
    12. However, at f/6.3 as opposed to 5.6, you need to either reduce shutter speed 1/3 of a stop or increase ISO 1/3 of a stop to expose identically.

      Not really an issue on a bright day, but in the darkness of the forest, you start pushing things a bit.
      As far as noise is concerned, it's not just a case of simply comparing f-numbers when different focal lengths are concerned. It's a similar situation to say having an f/4 50mm lens on a crop and an f/4 80mm lens on a FF. Fill the frame of each with the same scene and shoot at the same shutter speed and although both have the same f number, the crop receives only 1/2.56 of the amount of light falling on the sensor and so the noise is greater. The FF will have the same signal/noise at 1.4 stops higher iso and so you can shoot the same scene at 1.4 stops more of shutter speed and get the same quality of image.
    13. Or, making an EF-RF adapter with a 1.4X teleconverter function built in. Best of both worlds!
      This would be wonderful, and sell by the truckload - but probably cannibalise the individual adaptor and teleconverter sales!
    14. ...making an EF-RF adapter with a 1.4X teleconverter function built in. Best of both worlds!

      I second this idea. I really hope that Canon does release such a product in the next few years. As far as I'm concerned this would pretty much eliminate the need to make RF mount superteles.
    15. I second this idea. I really hope that Canon does release such a product in the next few years. As far as I'm concerned this would pretty much eliminate the need to make RF mount superteles.

      Wasn't there a rumor of a mount that would accept both RF and EF lenses without an adapter? If so, your theory above would make sense.
    16. I'm not so sure this means Canon is continuing R&D of EF lenses. Possibly R&D was stopped and announcement was made while the patent filing and publishing bureaucracy was in the works. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon decided to release a new 1Dx mkIII & new super teles so the market would be satisfied while it developed a new sports RF camera & lenses.

      Totally agree with your comment. These are patents that could have been in process for more than a year. Once they started the process, Canon would probably have continued so they can claim prior art and derivative patents for the RF Big Whites. I wish it was true because I would love to have a new 200-400 that is 1.5-2lb lighter. That is assuming the patents cover the 200-400 or that patents is till in the works. The 300mm II & 500mm II is already pretty light, so I don't think you would see as drastic a weight reduction as the 400 & 600. The 800 could definitely benefit.
    17. I second this idea. I really hope that Canon does release such a product in the next few years. As far as I'm concerned this would pretty much eliminate the need to make RF mount superteles.

      If you look at the 200-400 with the switch to engage the TC, I think it might be possible to create a similar switchable TC for the EF-RF adaptor. I haven't measured this out and I don't have the R + adaptor to measure. The EF-RF adaptor might be a little shorter, but I don't remember from the few times I have played with the camera. .
    18. Where is the 500 f/4? Do they assume we all prefer the 600 f/4. I assume it’ll only come in RF mount, which is fine, just praying for say a 7DII mirrorless RF replacement sooner rather than later or hoping the Rs can do at least 6fps with tracking and has excellent AF.
    19. Where is the 500 f/4?

      Third sample from the top is a 500mm f/4L IS USM. The 600mm f/4L mkII was released the same year as as the 500mm f/4L mkII, and the mkIII was released last on September of last year.

      Maybe those are signs a 500mm f/4L mkIII will be released soon as well.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment