Close Menu

    Patent: Canon RF 120-700mm f/4.5-8 optical formula

    By Updated:61 Comments1 Min Read Canon Patents
    patent120700 - Patent: Canon RF 120-700mm f/4.5-8 optical formula

    Northlight has uncovered a patent showing optical formulas for more super-telephoto zoom lenses for the RF mount. The Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM will be officially announced soon, but does Canon have plans for an even longer zoom lens for the EOS R system?

    Canon RF 100-600mm f/4.5-7.1

    • Focal Length: 103mm – 248mm – 600mm
    • F-Number: 4.6 – 5.8 – 6.8
    • Half Angle of View: 11.86° – 4.98° – 2.07°
    • Image Height: 21.64mm – 21.64mm – 21.64mm
    • Lens Length: 241mm – 305mm – 331mm
    • Backfocus: 17mm – 37mm – 97mm

    Canon RF 120-700mm f/4.5-8

    • Focal Length: 123mm – 293mm – 700mm
    • F-Number: 4.6 – 5.8 – 8.0
    • Half Angle of View: 9.98° – 4.22° – 1.77°
    • Image Height: 21.64mm – 21.64mm – 21.64mm
    • Lens Length: 246mm – 322mm – 370mm
    • Backfocus: 14mm – 44mm – 107mm
    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    61 comments

    1. That would be an awesome lens. Would be up against the 150-600 lenses that Sigma and others make. Although based on how angry some pople got about the 100-500 being f7.1 they may actually explode seeing this is f8.
    2. I would love to have a supertelefoto zoom lens for the RF mount that is comparable or better than the Sony 200-600. I hope it comes for less than $2000 and is under 2,5kg.
    3. f/8 at 700mm is very acceptable to me as a compromise between aperture/focal length and size/weight. It should take a 95mm filter and be just under 2kg in weight, and most likely f/5.6 at 400mm. I'd go for this like a shot if the IQ is up to current 100-400mm IQ.
    5. I'm loving these RF supertele options.... I mean, the 100-500mm was tempting enough... but similar options extended to 600mm and even 700mm.... o_O

      Though obviously not confirmed if the above-mentioned-spec-lenses will ever see the production-light-of-day.... if they do... I would have to seriously consult my normal cash-flow situation and consider cuts to non-essentials like food and toilet-paper in order to buy one of these babies! :love:
    6. Seems odd to start the zoom range at 120 instead of 200 or even 300. If I'm going long then I generally don't need a short end.

      And as for RF mount; it's only Canon's decision that such OEM lenses weren't available on EF, not a technical restriction. Other than AF at f/8, which the later APS-C DSLRs could actually do.
    7. f/8 at 700mm is very acceptable to me as a compromise between aperture/focal length and size/weight. It should take a 95mm filter and be just under 2kg in weight, and most likely f/5.6 at 400mm. I'd go for this like a shot if the IQ is up to current 100-400mm IQ.
      I don't think it will be f/5.6 at 400mm. The tables seem to indicate f/5.8 at 248mm and 293mm for the 600 and 700, respectively.
    8. f/8 should not be considered a problem. A 1.4x on a 100-400 only gives us 560mm at f/8! The R series does not have the focus limitations of f/8 that previous generations of DSLRs had.

      Sigma and Tamron go to 600mm with only a 1/3 stop increase (f/6.3) but they suffer from slower focus and reportedly the IQ is not as sharp as the 100-400 ii. Maybe this slight increase in aperture will be balanced by a reduction in weight!
    10. Seems odd to start the zoom range at 120 instead of 200 or even 300. If I'm going long then I generally don't need a short end.

      And as for RF mount; it's only Canon's decision that such OEM lenses weren't available on EF, not a technical restriction. Other than AF at f/8, which the later APS-C DSLRs could actually do.
      If you don't need a short end, then a prime is best.
    11. oh man this would be sweet...what do you guys think:

      2000-3000$ or 10k+ like the 200-400EF lens?

      -Brian
      The 200-400mm is a constant aperture lens, which I think is what makes it so expensive. I don't think this lens will be in the $10k range.
    12. we'll after shooting with the original 100-400, the 300 f/4 and then finally the 100-400ii over the last 20 years I finally moved to a 300 2.8ii with 1.4 TC. Although the price is premium I've found myself with the shooting I do to need at least no less then F/4 or lower to get steady shots.

      These new lenses will be great in good light for most but I find the light gathering a bit low for my needs. I am really happy with my decision, a 420mm f/4 combo is seriously impressive even compared to my 100-400ii which was a great lens. This combo is sitll hand hold able all day for me atleast. The results makes the cost of switching to it less painful lol.
    14. Patents that don't get turned into products or licensed to someone else to make into a product are just legal tools to prevent anyone from making that product at all. >:(
    18. These look likely to have been patented on the path to the development of the RF 100-500 - can't see any chance that either of the lenses on this patent will see it to market so soon after the 100-500.
    19. Hopefully, these will maybe be more "budget Lenses" for the RF super-telephoto line. Because I can def thnk a 200-400 F/4 RF Lens or a new 200-600 RF lens being more of the premium super-telephoto zoom lens

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment