Check this patent out:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=lbTIAAAAEBAJ

Could be something like a 14-24L zoom maybe? Hard to say but the specs suggest something along those lines. Diagram-wise its' quite close to the 14L and 17-TSE, but it doesn't match either one, and they specifically show a couple of zoom implemenations...

Something to think about...

-Ed

excellent find ! 14-24 it's a good guess i'd say

Maybe this has something to do with Canon's move to improve their wide angle lenses over the last couple of years.

A 14-24 would be very nice though.

I wouldn't be surprised if they had one in the works...it would make sense.

There's also the possibility it could be an EF-S lens too... though hopefully it would be full-frame. the specs suggest Fullframe...

Very cool! It will be interesting to see how long it will take to get it into production. If it can match the Nikon 14-24, they can already count on at least one pre-sale!

Ed Sawyer wrote:
There's also the possibility it could be an EF-S lens too...

that would be sad.

O, please don't make this EF-S.
I'll kick my wide angle right out if this apear on the market, but I can't mount a EF-S

I'm hoping it will be full frame and affordable, whatever that means. OTOH, if the memory module designated as Item 23 on Figure 11 is a CF card, then it's probably for a credit card-sized P&S. Just kidding...

P.S. Ed, do you spend a lot of time browsing optical system patents?

16-35 out
14-24L and 35L in
and for everything else there is MasterCard

Why would they refer to the long end as "Telephoto end"? And does fig. 2+4 on this link determine the FL (10-33[32.63]mm) or am I reading it wrong?

jcolwell wrote:and affordable

I wouldn't hold my breath!

fotojeroen wrote:
O, please don't make this EF-S.
I'll kick my wide angle right out if this apear on the market, but I can't mount a EF-S

I don't think we'll have to worry about this being an EF-S lens. My thoughts are that the 10-22 is perfectly fine and crop users are happy with it and it wouldn't make sense for Canon to narrow the FL to 14mm. ...just my 2 cent.

Now for a 14mm-24mm f2.8L IS (although who needs IS for such a short FL) the cost is my concern!!!! I need something wider for my MkIII, cheaper and wider then the 16-35mm, and faster then the 17-40mm f4.

Ed Sawyer wrote:
There's also the possibility it could be an EF-S lens too... though hopefully it would be full-frame. the specs suggest Fullframe...

That's possible, but with the very good 10-22 already out there, this would be somewhat redundant. A full-frame 14-24 or 12-24 or whatever would be beneficial to all the 1-series and 5-series users as well as those with an APS-C body. One size fits all.

Tom_W wrote:
That's possible, but with the very good 10-22 already out there, this would be somewhat redundant.

Well..a lot of the EF-S line seems redundant.

With a 12-24, my 5D + 17-40 would be relegated to Travel Cam duty only.

This would be awesome and make the Mk IV even more appealing.

M Vers wrote:
Tom_W wrote:
That's possible, but with the very good 10-22 already out there, this would be somewhat redundant.

Well..a lot of the EF-S line seems redundant.

True, but a lot of it is to replace previous lenses. The 15-85 is replacing the 17-85. The original 18-55 was replaced with a Mk II. Then again, there are at least 3 18-XX lenses at this time, along with the 17-55 and the new 15-85. So, I suppose that they could duplicate the 10-22, though it would seem much more useful if they produced a nice ultrawide full-frame zoom that could benefit both formats.

I know that as the owner of a 5D2 and a 7D, that would make me happy!

brad_s wrote:
fotojeroen wrote:
O, please don't make this EF-S.
I'll kick my wide angle right out if this apear on the market, but I can't mount a EF-S

I don't think we'll have to worry about this being an EF-S lens. My thoughts are that the 10-22 is perfectly fine and crop users are happy with it and it wouldn't make sense for Canon to narrow the FL to 14mm. ...just my 2 cent.

Now for a 14mm-24mm f2.8L IS (although who needs IS for such a short FL) the cost is my concern!!!! I need something wider for my MkIII, cheaper and wider then the 16-35mm, and faster then the 17-40mm f4.

Considering the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 (no IS) is pushing $2k, I don't think this would be cheaper than the existing 16-35.

if it's 2.8 and lacks the distortion issues of the 16-35 II, i'll drop 2k on it no problem.

You guys are so gear horny