# Patent: EF-S 17-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 5, 2014)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=15726"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=15726">Tweet</a></div>
<p>Another lens patent has shown up today. This time an EF-S 17-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. Perhaps it’ll be a new kit lens this year and will replace the current 18-55 IS STM. However, this may also be a hold over from last years kit lens update.</p>
<p><strong>Description and self-interpretation of the patent literature</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><span>Patent Publication No. 2014-21258</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Publication date 2014.2.3</span></li>
<li><span>Filing date 2012.7.18</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 2</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 2.92</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 18.50-32.89-54.00mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno. 3.49-4.39-5.80</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 36.44-22.55-14.20 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 13.66mm</span></li>
<li><span>119.77-110.06-120.23mm overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 37.98-52.51-74.3mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 3</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 3.09</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 17.50-32.05-54.00mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno. 3.47-4.38-5.80</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 37.97-23.08-14.20 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 13.66mm</span></li>
<li><span>119.55-108.81-118.68mm overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 36.59-51.53-73.93mm</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Canon</span><span> patents</span>
<ul>
<li><span>4-group zoom of positive and negative positive negative</span></li>
<li><span>Inner folder – Kas (Group 3)</span></li>
<li><span>The fourth lens unit can also be used for anti-vibration</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2014-02-05" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 5, 2014)

1 millimeter to more at the wide angle? I wish I had more this option, but might well have constant F4 aperture.


----------



## preppyak (Feb 5, 2014)

And people say Canon isn't innovating...


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 5, 2014)

15mm.

Got to start at 15mm.

Replace the old 24-85/3.5-4.5 that was developed for film.

15-55/3.5-5.6 IS

15-60/2.8L IS

15-135/4-5.6 IS

Tap. Tap. Tap. Is this thing on???


----------



## wsmith96 (Feb 5, 2014)

I don't get this lens. I could see if it were a constant aperture....

who knows.


----------



## dufflover (Feb 5, 2014)

I don't think the EF-S kit lens will be anything larger than it already is which I imagine a 18-55mm f/4 lens might require. Guess they're keeping the 17-55mm as the next (official Canon) step up for a constant aperture short zoom.


----------



## rs (Feb 5, 2014)

Mathematically, example 3 at 17.5mm (wide) should be rounded up to 18mm, not down to 17. If this lens ever does make the day of light, I suspect both the engineers and marketing department would be in favour of calling it an 18-55 lens.


----------



## Maximilian (Feb 5, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> Another lens patent has shown up today. This time an EF-S 17-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. Perhaps it’ll be a new kit lens this year and will replace the current 18-55 IS STM.


I can't see a (Canon) reason why we should see another kit lens.
The 18-55 STM has just been released and as far as I have read and heard, people are pleased with its performance (price/performance, IQ, AF speed).


> However, this may also be a hold over from last years kit lens update


So I am much more willing to belive in this opinion. 
Of course, a little bit more wide angle is always fine.
But for everybody who is hoping for 15 mm to start with, the 15 - 85 already exists, although not for a starter price.


----------



## Woody (Feb 5, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> 15mm.
> Got to start at 15mm.
> Replace the old 24-85/3.5-4.5 that was developed for film.



For 35mm film, 15 mm goes into the ultrawide regime. The replacement for 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 is already out: 24-70 f/4 IS and 24-105 f/4 IS.

As for FF ultrawides, I am still hoping for 16-50 f/4 IS from Canon. Of course, 15-50 f/4 IS will be even better.


----------



## noncho (Feb 5, 2014)

18-55 IS STM is good enough - CANON we don't need new kit lens every year!
What about EF-S 40-120 2.8 IS, what about EF-S 15-50 2.8 IS, what about some new primes/pancakes for crop and M...
Or you are waiting Sigma to kick your *** again...


----------



## canonic (Feb 5, 2014)

Bring a new sensor with standard DR and you are a "innovating" company. No wait ... buy the sensor from sony and you will be a insightfully company, Canon. 
Or, just continue to show us how many patents you have ... Canon.


----------



## Woody (Feb 5, 2014)

canonic said:


> Bring a new sensor with standard DR and you are a "innovating" company. No wait ... buy the sensor from sony and you will be a insightfully company, Canon.
> Or, just continue to show us how many patents you have ... Canon.



+1. Tired of Canon's multiple patents with few realization. Canon wants to produce most of the components in their cameras on their own... but clearly their limits are showing... they should just buy Sony sensors. In the early days, they used to have Sony CCDs in their compact cameras...


----------



## zim (Feb 5, 2014)

The only way it would make sense for Canon to use Sony sensors would be to buy Sony’s imaging division (or whatever the bit that makes those sensors is called) To be reliant on a company you have no real control over in that industry in this economic climate doesn’t sound like something Canon would or should do.
Anyway a bit OT, it's only a kit lens!


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 5, 2014)

Woody said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > 15mm.
> ...



As should have been obvious, I was talking about a standard zoom for 1.6-crop.


----------

