# Patent - EF 300 f/4L IS II



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 25, 2011)

```
<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/05/patent-ef-300-f4l-is-ii/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/05/patent-ef-300-f4l-is-ii/"></a></div>
<strong></p>
<div id="attachment_6580" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 310px"><img class="size-medium wp-image-6580" title="300patent" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/300patent-300x134.png" alt="" width="300" height="134" /><p class="wp-caption-text">EF 300 f/4L IS II</p></div>
<p>Canon patent for EF 300 f/4L IS II</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Patent Publication No. 2011-70032</li>
<li>Published 2011.4.7</li>
<li>Filled 2009.9.25</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Specifications</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Focal Distance: 294</li>
<li>Fno: 4.14</li>
<li>Half angle of view:4.08</li>
<li>Image Height: 21.64</li>
<li>Lens Length (mm): 225</li>
<li>Back Focus (mm): 83.12</li>
<li>Aspherical: 1</li>
</ul>
<p>Needed? Not really. However the 300 f/4L IS is a great performer and a decent seller for Canon. Adding updated IS to the lens would make most buyers very happy. Not sure it would be upgrade worthy.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/129188-USA/Canon_2530A004_Telephoto_EF_300mm_f_4_0L.html?BI=2466&KBID=3296">Canon EF 300 f/4L IS $1399 at B&H</a></p>
```


----------



## awinphoto (May 25, 2011)

Is it just me or the Fno's not quite what they are claiming to be? This lens, for instance is 4.14 but advertised as F4... similar with the 35mm patent and 24mm patent? The 50mm appears to be 1.3 but advertised as F1.4. With these minor differences, when the cameras metering system calculates the exposure on what the lens SHOULD be letting through, (especially since the lenses are wide open when they are metering and focusing and not stopped down) then it seems to me some of the lenses would be a hair darker and lighter than you would expect once you shoot the scene.


----------



## c-law (May 25, 2011)

You'll also notice that almost all the focal lengths are out. This one is actually 294mm not 300mm.

Pretty much all specifications are translated into marketing speak. To produce a lens that works they build it to whatever tolerances are required to make it sharp, focus, contrasty, etc. Rather than building it to set lengths and apertures and hoping it turns out sharp.

However that doesn't sell well to have an EF 294mm f/4.14. It is just to complicated so they use big round numbers to approximate what it actually is.

Just like how a 300GB hard drive or 8GB CF card are never that much. A real GB is 1024 MB but that makes things complex and not big and round so all storage is approximated to 1GB = 1000MB because that markets better.

Chris


----------



## hmmm (May 26, 2011)

I am definitely interested in this lens -- at a reasonable price. 

Hopefully they can keep the price hike at or below 15-20%.


----------



## dgsphto (May 27, 2011)

hmmm said:


> I am definitely interested in this lens -- at a reasonable price.
> 
> Hopefully they can keep the price hike at or below 15-20%.



Or they can leave it at the current price. Just because it is a revision does not mean the price has to rise. It amazes me as so how society is generally very receptive to the notion a revision warrants a price increase!

(Not to pick on you. On the contrary, you bring up a good point.)


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 27, 2011)

dgsphto said:


> Or they can leave it at the current price. Just because it is a revision does not mean the price has to rise. It amazes me as so how society is generally very receptive to the notion a revision warrants a price increase!



Thanks for the laughs!  Sure, they could leave it at the current price. They could also give it away for free, which is just about as unlikely...


----------



## WarStreet (May 27, 2011)

dgsphto said:


> Or they can leave it at the current price. Just because it is a revision does not mean the price has to rise. It amazes me as so how society is generally very receptive to the notion a revision warrants a price increase!
> 
> (Not to pick on you. On the contrary, you bring up a good point.)



Unfortunately, we accept a reasonable increase in lens prices, due to history trend, not because we like it, but at least our old lenses will still hold or even increase in their value.

Cameras do improve while the price remain the same or even decrease, showing that optics improvement/cost is not as good as electronics.


----------



## IronMike (May 28, 2011)

c-law said:


> Just like how a 300GB hard drive or 8GB CF card are never that much. A real GB is 1024 MB but that makes things complex and not big and round so all storage is approximated to 1GB = 1000MB because that markets better.
> 
> Chris



?? It seems to me that 1000MB is 1GB by definition (your argument is like saying that 1024 metres is a kilometre). ???

Mike


----------



## Hillsilly (May 28, 2011)

For at least the last 10 years, the standard international definition has been that 1gb = 1000mb. This has been adopted by the hard drive manufacturers. But computer operating systems use the binary definition of 1gb = 1024mb. That's why a 500gb hard drive will only show as about 480gb on your computer. I used to feel ripped off about this. After all, if I pay for 500gb, I want 500gb. Then I looked it up one day.


----------



## dgsphto (May 28, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> dgsphto said:
> 
> 
> > Or they can leave it at the current price. Just because it is a revision does not mean the price has to rise. It amazes me as so how society is generally very receptive to the notion a revision warrants a price increase!
> ...



So...change an mk1 with integrated hood into mk2 with a detachable one and raise the price by 20%?? 

Seriously, if the change is a major redesign with a significantly different bill of materials and assembly process, a price adjustment (on either side of the reference) is warranted! But if the revision is a minor tweak, then the price increase, if any, has to be miniscule. 

_"Sure, they could leave it at the current price. They could also give it away for free, which is just about as unlikely..."_ 

Yeah right!!


----------

