Canon continues to work on focal length reducers.
What's a focal length reducer you ask?
It's an adapter that reduces the focal length of a lens and at the same time increases the maximum aperture, basically the opposite of teleconverters.
Canon has yet to release such a product, but we suspect this type of converter could benefit the EOS M system as well as an upcoming APS-C EOS R body.
Below are a bunch of focal length reduced optical formulas from Japan patent JP-A-2019-003074
Specification and lens arrangement of master lens 1 (18-55mm, F2.8)
- Zoom ratio: 3.05
- Focal length: 17.50 – 53.3 mm
- F number: 2.80 – 2.80
- Half angle of view: 36.65 – 13.71
- Image height: 13.02 – 13.02mm
- Lens length: 148.81 – 172.70mm
- Back focus: 35.51 – 40.31mm
Specification and lens arrangement of master lens 1 with reducer 1
- Focal length: 11.36mm
- F number: 1.82
- Half angle of view: 36.67
- Image height: 8.46mm
- Lens length: 142.26mm
- Back focus: 2.00mm
Specification and lens arrangement of master lens 2 (34mm, F1.4)
- Focal length: 34.20mm
- F number: 1.45
- Half angle of view: 32.32
- Image height: 21.64mm
- Lens length: 129.16mm
- Back focus: 39.35mm
Specification and lens arrangement of master lens 2 with reducer 5
- Focal length: 23.92mm
- F number: 1.02
- Half angle of view: 32.33
- Image height: 15.14mm
- Lens length: 125.59mm
- Back focus: 2.00mm
Not that they couldn't do this with an APS-C R with a R to R focal length adapter, but I don't think these specific patents apply.
Probably won't be cheap adapters, if they come to market. And they really blur the lines between APS-C and FullFrame.
Anyway, these adapters look really strange. Why does the lens length decrease when used with the reducer? And does the reducer sit inside the camera mount to enable this 2mm back focus distance or am I missing something there.
I would have thought that producing such adapters wouldn't be too hard for Canon, seeing that the Metabones ones seem to be quite good and Canon has great Teleconverters, which are similar in principle in my mind. Honestly I'm surprised this generates so little interest on this forum.
...and slimmer...can I have both?
Also ..Can I combine this with the Fountain of Youth?
For my 8" f/10 Maksutov Cassegrain, I have a choice of a 0.63X, 0.50X , 0.40X, 0.33x and a 0.25X.
For my refractor, a 0.8X reducer/field flattener has been available 30 years.
I guess Cannon could see the writing in the magazines and figured "We should do something to make it look like we know what we are doing."
so this turbo converter is shrinking glass .should work good cause when teleconverter makes lens errors bigger ,shrinker makes them smaller :p
I wonder could they make converter what makes possible to use hasseblad lenses on full frame canon or even big camera lenses?
I dont like how wide angles makes foregound big and backround smaller ,shrink glass would be lot nicer for landscapes
Well i guess canon wont do it cause they want peoples use canon lenses ,not hasselblads :p
hmm maybe canon could make 50mm lens with excellent 6x4cm picture field and inbuild shrinker glass . 3x panorama would be 10x6cm o_O
For landscapes, that would mean a very huge lens. Still, a swarm of drones could probably do it.
thats why i want 50mm lens
I have a adapter but no longer have Hassleblad lenses. They were not that great when I was using the center portion of them, but with a reducer, that might change. They are much better when used on MF film or sensors.
I guess that a person could experiment by putting one on a aps-c body with the converter and see, someone has surely tried this.
If M5 mark 2 got ibis and pixel shift it wont be even low megapixel