Canon Patents

Patent: Canon RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6

Canon continues to develop optical formulas for an RF mount superzoom, something that we’ll likely see sooner than later. This patent shows an optical formula for an RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6. It’s hard to say if this is an L lens, as they tend to be larger than their non-L counterparts.

Canon RF 24-300mm f/4-5.6 embodiement:

  • Focal length: 24.72mm 90.83mm 290.86mm
  • F-number: 4.12 5.00 5.88
  • Angle of view: 41.19° 13.40° 4.25°
  • Image height: 21.64mm 21.64mm 21.64mm
  • Total lens length: 165.57mm 210.57mm 255.57mm
  • BF: 14.37mm 32.56mm 30.89mm

Antono Refa

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
907
160
As if the 24-240 wasn't bad enough.
I haven't read the reviews of the RF 24-240mm and EF 28-300mm side by side, but IIRC the later's IQ justifies the 2.7x price difference. The later is an upgrade of the EF 35-350mm, so apparently it makes a profit, and might make one on RF as well.
 

Daner

EOS T7i
Aug 15, 2017
62
47
Stockholm
When traveling with checked baggage I bring my RF 24-105 and my EF 100-400 II (and the 1.4x extender), but when I am limited to carry-on only I just go with the smaller lens. The IQ and durability limitations of the 24-240 have kept it off my list so far. If this one deals effectively with both of those concerns while providing some additional reach, it could be a serious consideration for one-bag travel.
 

RobbieHat

EOS T7i
Feb 4, 2015
57
44
54
Rocklin, CA/The Sea Ranch, CA
When traveling with checked baggage I bring my RF 24-105 and my EF 100-400 II (and the 1.4x extender), but when I am limited to carry-on only I just go with the smaller lens. The IQ and durability limitations of the 24-240 have kept it off my list so far. If this one deals effectively with both of those concerns while providing some additional reach, it could be a serious consideration for one-bag travel.
My thoughts as well. This would be a great one lens solution for landscape photography when I have to lug gear for miles in a backpack.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daner

Nelu

5D Mark IV, 1Dx, EOS R
I wish the superzoom concept would go more the other way, ie something like an RF 15-85 f/4. That would be a more useful travel lens for me than a 24-xxx
I guess it depends on what do you mean by "travel". I was doing a three-days backpacking trip in August with the 24-70 f/2.8 lens. I really would have loved to have the 24-270mm lens when we ran into the grizzly mama bear, with three cubs...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bahrd

shawn

EOS M50
Jan 28, 2019
35
40
I guess it depends on what do you mean by "travel". I was doing a three-days backpacking trip in August with the 24-70 f/2.8 lens. I really would have loved to have the 24-270mm lens when we ran into the grizzly mama bear, with three cubs...
I agree. I would take extra reach over wider angle of view on any and all conceivable trips. If I want a really wide shot I prefer to shoot a panorama at a narrower focal length as it has a much more natural look.
 

Antono Refa

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
907
160
I wish the superzoom concept would go more the other way, ie something like an RF 15-85 f/4. That would be a more useful travel lens for me than a 24-xxx
I would love such a lens, but wonder what chances there for such a lens.

IIRC, the experts on this site explained there are physical obstacles to designing zooms that cross the normal from wide to tele. Possibly it's easier to design one for a MILC?
 

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
I used to be a superzoom fan but the RF 70-200 does the job with one pocket-sized wide prime like the RF 35mm 1.8. Or as wide as needed.

The 24-240 cost $500 as kit lens with RP and gets little use unless light is good and lens changing isn’t desired.