Another detailed patent for an RF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS lens has appeared, the first one came as part of a patent for an RF 100-400mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM.
The 70-300mm zoom lens has always been a part of the budget telephoto zoom lens lines of various manufacturers, and it makes sense that we'll see one for the RF mount, and likely sooner than later.
Japan Patent Application 2019028212
- Focal length: 71.53mm 132.28mm 293.70mm
- F-number: 4.16 5.18 5.83
- Half-field angle: 16.83° 9.29° 4.21°
- Image height: 21.64mm 21.64mm 21.64mm
- Lens total length: 179.52mm 216.99mm 250.81mm
- BF: 48.94mm 22.62mm 18.05mm
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.
I think it's likely.
The current EF 75-300 is a horrible lens, but it's cheap and already designed. These days there are far better options, 55-250 for crop and 70-300 for FF.
The EF 70-300 IS II USM is an amazing lens at a reasonable price. The EF 70-300L is a bit of an oddball, and these days I don't think it makes sense compared to the amazing 100-400L II.
Again just one RF 70-300mm.
The size, weight and zoom range of the 70-300mm L works very well for me (on my 80D and 7D).
I bought it soon after it was available, and I love that lens. My copy has great optics.
Being so portable makes it such a great lens for a variety of purposes. A similar RF model would serve me well when I move to mirrorless.
If you don't need the 300-400mm focal lengths, the 70-300 is so much smaller and lighter. Even worth getting both and only take the heavier 100-400 when you really need it
So with the RF compared to the EF 70-300 IS II USM (+44mm EF flange) you'd get the following length:
RF: 179.52mm
EF: 189,5 mm
RF: 250.81mm
EF: ~ 262 mm (measured from picture as I have no exact values available)
I could live with two of them: one "non-L" and one "L".
First one comparable to the EF 70-300 IS II USM, maybe with STM if that works well.
Second one with better mechanical built, sealings, USM, more complex optical formula and therefore better IQ.
So everybody could get what they can afford.
Otherwise agreed.
I agree. The 70-300L is great for taking on a trip etc. then something (not obscenely) expensive that gives you 400 to 600 for wildlife would be kind of cool.