svg+xml;base64,PHN2ZyB2aWV3Qm94PScwIDAgNzI4IDQ2MicgeG1sbnM9J2h0dHA6Ly93d3cudzMub3JnLzIwMDAvc3ZnJz48L3N2Zz4= - Patent: Non-L RF Mount zoom lenses

    Patent: Non-L RF Mount zoom lenses

    By Updated:41 Comments1 Min Read Canon Patents
    • Northlight has uncovered a USPTO patent showcasing some telephoto zoom lenses for the RF mount. These lens designs appear to be fairly simple and might suggest they're not L zooms.

    The Canon EOS R system will obviously need some less expensive glass, and announcing a non-L RF 70-300 alongside an entry-level EOS R system camera would make a lot of sense.


    Optical formulas included in this patent:

    • RF 70-300mm f/4-5.6
    • RF 100-400mm f/4-5.6
    • RF 50-240mm f/4-5.6

    I'd wager on the RF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 being a non-L telephoto zoom that will hit the market for the RF mount. I think Canon would keep the RF 100-400mm for an L zoom down the road.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    41 comments

    2. Continue reading...
      The 50-240 could be a lens paired with a cheaper 18-55 that is full frame. This would make sense if the sensor used in a cheaper R system camera was smaller than full frame. The more I think of the idea that all lenses are full frame compatible makes an enticing upgrade path possible for those who buy a non full frame R mount camera. Even if they never actually do that the fact that it could be done is a good incentive versus systems that don't offer that.
    8. The 100-400mm II has been very heavily discounted for a while now. Maybe it's to be more competitive but is there the possibility that a III is on the cards?
      This lens has been so popular, and for good reasons, that component costs and recovery of initial investment may be allowing Canon to reduce retail pricing.
    10. Wrote too soon about the lack of Olympus Telephoto lenses, they have just announced one https://www.olympus-global.com/news/2019/nr01035.html
      M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO with a built in 1.25xTC and an external 2xTC, available next year.
      1000mm ff equivalent reach w/o the teleconverter in a hand holdable lens. This will be interesting for sports and wildlife when paired with the new micro 4/3 camera. If one doesn’t need large prints (and only a few really do), this will be a great combination. For me, I would have to completely give up my Canon gear to afford changing over to Olympus. That would be difficult. :unsure:
    11. It's not equivalent reach, it's equivalent field of view. MFT is a low mpx sensor with 3.3µ pixels. The 5DSR has pixels that are only 24% bigger. So, in practice the equivalent reach of 400mm of the Olympus is 496mm on the 5DSR and 500mm with the TC is 624mm. So, a Sigma or Tamron 150-600mm on the 5DSR would give nearly the same long telephoto reach and twice the field of view.

      Edit - oops I meant to put the Olympus post in the Olympus thread. I'll repost there. Apologies.
    12. I know I might be in the minority on such a lens (and I know this post is about non-L RF lenses) but I would like to see a mid-range zoom, 55-135 f2 or 2.8 lens. I shoot a lot of floor gymnastics with my 70-200 and could use a a wider FOV when the gymnasts come on the close side of the floor. We shoot exclusively in portrait mode and since the routines are so short and fast pace, it is next to impossible to change grips and switch to landscape.
    13. It's not equivalent reach, it's equivalent field of view. As I wrote above, MFT is a low mpx sensor with 3.3µ pixels. The 5DSR has pixels that are only 24% bigger. So, in practice the equivalent reach of 400mm of the Olympus is 496mm on the 5DSR and 500mm with the TC is 624mm. So, a Sigma or Tamron 150-600mm on the 5DSR would give nearly the same long telephoto reach and twice the field of view.
      Good point.
    15. Don't forget the original EF 50-200 f/3.5-4.5 lens was a full-frame lens.

      Yes. An RF 50-240 lens could be a good consumer travel lens for a lower cost R body. Might even be sold as a kit lens option.
    16. To me it would be very important what IQ and what AF performance those would deliver.

      I would like to see Canon keep IQ very good on all RF as well as EF and M lenses. Like the did with the FD series lenses which for the most part were very good even if not L lenses.
      Then save L for rugged construction and weather sealing for heavy pro abuse.
      This would be a huge step in the right direction for Canon as all their lenses would be great optically just the mechanics, build and sealing will be less robust to save money.
    17. I would like to see Canon keep IQ very good on all RF as well as EF and M lenses.

      I don't think Canon have released a truly BAD lens regardless of target market for a long time. Their cheapest EF lens, the 50mm f/1.8 STM is a superb optical performer for example.
    18. I don't think Canon have released a truly BAD lens regardless of target market for a long time. Their cheapest EF lens, the 50mm f/1.8 STM is a superb optical performer for example.
      I think this is true of the entire industry, except perhaps for Tokina. The biggest sin Canon tends to commit is releasing a rev of a lens many years after the original, and/or a rev that's just about the same as the previous one. They haven't been putting out EF 50mm F/1.4-type crud in quite some time.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment