Canon Patents

Patent: Lots of small, light and fast EF prime lenses

Canon is obviously still doing development on the EF lens mount. As the mount is likely going to live on for both DSLR users as well as cinema applications, as Canon’s cinema cameras also come in EF mount. That will likely continue for years to come, as the transition to the RF mount will likely take 5-10 years for mass acceptance.

From US Patent US Patent Application 20190101732:

  • Canon EF 16mm f/1.4
  • Canon EF 20mm f/1.4
  • Canon EF 14mm f/1.8
  • Canon EF 16mm f/1.8
  • Canon EF 17mm f/1.8
  • Canon EF 19mm f/1.8

aceflibble

EOS RP
May 8, 2015
296
62
Obligatory reminder, before people get carried away, that patents =/= products definitely in production.

Looking through the patents there's nothing to suggest these would be "small" if they were to enter production. You're looking at a minimum filter thread of 62mm, for example. Given the size of existing Canon primes of similar focal length but smaller maximum aperture, and the measurements outlined in the patent, one would expect these to be quite large. Of course it could be that they are reusing an RF design and have simply made a duplicate patent with the EF mount for the sake of ensuring they have the rights to the design for all mount sizes, but then that would mean there would be no such lenses being made in an EF mount at all. (And therefore nothing to get excited about, since we know fast wide primes are headed to RF anyway.)

I'd certainly like a new Canon EF prime in the 18-21mm range, of any aperture, but there's too much in this patent to suggest that these lenses aren't going to progress beyond the paper stage.
 

Wy Li

I'm New Here
Sep 24, 2018
9
13
Hmm, 14, 16, 17, 19mm f1.8. Seems like I could just take a step forward or backwards and get the same "zoom".
 

pixel8foto

EOS M50
Jan 27, 2015
49
6
UK
www.joelgoodman.net
Hmm, 14, 16, 17, 19mm f1.8. Seems like I could just take a step forward or backwards and get the same "zoom".
I don't think anyone imagines they'll all be released as part of a single range at the same time. Moving isn't zooming, is it? You assume you have the facility to take a step forward or backwards every time and that you're not fussed about the different perspective that moving rather than changing focul length will bring. The difference between 14 and 16mm is significant. Apart from that, yes.
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,584
399
Germany
A lot of glass and therefore optical effort included in these patents.
If - yes, if - any of those comes true this pretty surely will be an L lens, also when you look at the max. aperture.
I haven't seen a (non-L) WA/UWA lens with f-numbers smaller than 2.0 for years.
 
Last edited:
Mar 15, 2018
37
38
United States
Has anyone heard of new EF-S glass? Much of what's out was built for late-2000s 8-18 megapixel Rebels and could really use a refresh. The 17-55 f2.8 is as good a place to start as any. It's a safe bet Canon sells a lot more crop bodies than all the full frame DSLR and mirrorless put together.
 

camerabug

1D Mark IV
Jul 10, 2011
83
16
The other end of the lens
It's still a wait and see game on EF mounts & DSLR's. There hasn't been anything released to speak of since the 2 ML's have been released along with RF glass. There's talk about 1Dx Mark III but otherwise, all has been VERY quiet.
 

QuisUtDeus

EOS 80D
Feb 20, 2019
115
80
Has anyone heard of new EF-S glass? Much of what's out was built for late-2000s 8-18 megapixel Rebels and could really use a refresh. The 17-55 f2.8 is as good a place to start as any. It's a safe bet Canon sells a lot more crop bodies than all the full frame DSLR and mirrorless put together.
My bet is the fact that most EF-S buyers buy the kit and could weld on the lens makes it hard to justify the development expense. The fact that the next-biggest group is likely the sports/ wildlife shooters who can use FF glass makes it even harder. The steady march downwards of the price of FF might just make it unviable - is the "step-up" purchase from a T7i going to be an 80D + 17-55 instead of a 6D2 (or RP) + 24-105? Yes I know there's a price difference there, but the smaller that price difference is, the fewer people who will be there to amortize the development cost across. The RP will in all likelihood get price cuts, and when a 24-105 3.5-6.3 is available as a kit...
 
Mar 15, 2018
37
38
United States
My bet is the fact that most EF-S buyers buy the kit and could weld on the lens makes it hard to justify the development expense. The fact that the next-biggest group is likely the sports/ wildlife shooters who can use FF glass makes it even harder. The steady march downwards of the price of FF might just make it unviable - is the "step-up" purchase from a T7i going to be an 80D + 17-55 instead of a 6D2 (or RP) + 24-105? Yes I know there's a price difference there, but the smaller that price difference is, the fewer people who will be there to amortize the development cost across. The RP will in all likelihood get price cuts, and when a 24-105 3.5-6.3 is available as a kit...
You might be right, but there must be a ton of people on 80d's with an EFS lens collection, and many of them would get a 90d/7dIII and upgrade their glass if this were an option.

I had a T2i for 7 years and just last week picked up a refurb 80d from canon for $700. I was really thinking about getting into full frame, a 6d or d750, or another system altogether, Fuji xt-30 looks great, but it's so hard to justify, even with my basic EFS lens collection (10-18, 18-50, 55-250, 24mm 2.8 and 50mm 1.8, all STM). To recreate the range of these lenses on full frame would take a couple thousand dollars more, on top of a $1200-2k body, and their resale value wouldn't even get me 25% of the way there. So I bit the bullet on an 80d and I have to say, it's very solid. Plenty there for me to work with to develop my skills, especially in video. Would really like to stay with Canon glass, but I think I'll be picking up a Sigma 18-35 sometime soon.
 

Wy Li

I'm New Here
Sep 24, 2018
9
13
I don't think anyone imagines they'll all be released as part of a single range at the same time. Moving isn't zooming, is it? You assume you have the facility to take a step forward or backwards every time and that you're not fussed about the different perspective that moving rather than changing focul length will bring. The difference between 14 and 16mm is significant. Apart from that, yes.
Well, I'd walk instead of buying 4 closely spaced focal length lens. I'd get the 14mm and walk forward or crop. Of course, I'm the frugal type. :)
 

flip314

EOS RP
Sep 26, 2018
225
298
You might be right, but there must be a ton of people on 80d's with an EFS lens collection, and many of them would get a 90d/7dIII and upgrade their glass if this were an option.
The 80D is only 3 years old. I know that lately the xxD series has refreshed every 3 years or so, but nobody who owns an 80D should really be desperate to upgrade to a 90D. The 7dIII may be arguable, if they did want the higher FPS/better AF spread. But I can't imagine what a 90D could have that would be revolutionary over the 80D
 

David - Sydney

EOS T7i
Dec 7, 2014
52
19
www.flickr.com
Hmm, 14, 16, 17, 19mm f1.8. Seems like I could just take a step forward or backwards and get the same "zoom".
yes, walking works for close up but not for astro/wide angle nightscape photography. 200mm-> 300mm is 4 degrees difference in angle of view but 14-16mm is 7 degrees.... fitting in a lot more sky/stars. Sigma is the only 14mm f/1.8 available and is ~USD1600. Be good to have some competition assuming that the coma is well controlled. Canon's closest is 14mm f2.8L (from 2007) and it is hard to imagine that the F1.8 would be cheaper than the f2.8's USD2k let alone competing with the Sigma