Coolest thing is that in this translation some of them have groups of elements as we'd expect, but one has 10 sheets in 7 groups, and another has 15 pieces in 10 groups. Maybe sheets and pieces use exotic glass.
omarlyn wrote:
Over the the years there have been many hundreds of similar patents...patents by themselves are not any indicator of forth coming products.
Omar
...then you get threads like these popping up all over the place concluding that since patents had been filed there is sure to be definitive updates/releases within a years time. If anyone knew anything about patents they would understand that the product may never exist.
Breitling65 wrote:
Very reputable info in this link ... Why would Canon update 200/F2 or 85/1.2 and not older lenses like 35L for example?
Weight reduction, reducing manufacturing cost or time, implementing version 2 super tele technology onto the 200/2 lens.
It could also be a way to prevent competitors from using an identical lens design.
R&D is costly and filing a patent is relatively cheap.
I am a bit disappointed that Canon did not file a patent for a faster 135mm. Would be nice to have 1.8, 1.6 or even 1.4. One can never have too fast a glass.
ts true that most patents never appear in production products.
In this case, however, the patent may already be included in the recently announced Canon EF Cine lenses. Those lenses were believed to be just modified versions of the existing EF lenses, but now, I am thiinkiing they may, in fact have the IQ improvements described in the patent.
I've read the patent and tried to compare it to the new EF cine lenses, but there is no detailed info about their construction. We may never know for sure, but there is a good possibility. however, its merely that I see nothing in the patent that would preclude it from already being incorporated in those lenses, and nothing I've found says it is in them.
If thats true, we will likely be seeing new versions coming out over the next two years or so.
...one reason for registering patents is to prevent competition from doing things a certain way, and then if they do, to sue them, contract the patent or sell it. Why go to the trouble of making something when you can make money with stuff written on paper?
If a new 135 remains f/2, how could Canon improve it except by adding IS?
If the rumors are true, I'd like to see a 50 f/1.4 with decent low-light performance, and it would also be nice if the 35 f/1.4, which is great in low light, could be made less hinky with CA wide open in good light.
Why would Canon update 200/F2 or 85/1.2 and not older lenses like 35L for example?