# Patent: 16-120mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 29, 2013)

```
<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=15364"></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=15364">Tweet</a></div>
The following patent is most likely for the EF-M range of lenses. Also appearing alongside the 16-120 IS STM in the patent is an 18-55 IS STM and an 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 IS STM.</p>
<ul>
<li><span>Patent Publication No. 2013-257507</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Publication date 2013.12.26</span></li>
<li><span>Filing date 2012.6.14</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 1</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 2.87</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 18.58 – 27.82 – 53.36mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno 3.60 -. 4.27 – 5.69</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 36.33 – 26.15 – 14.36 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 13.66mm</span></li>
<li><span>86.23 – - 104.79mm 78.22 overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 0.50mm</span></li>
<li><span>13 pieces of 11-group lens configuration</span></li>
<li><span>Three four-sided aspherical</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 3</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 10.39</span></li>
<li><span>Focal length f = 18.60 – 60.12 – 193.23mm</span></li>
<li><span>Fno 3.55 -. 5.59 – 6.60</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 36.29 – 12.80 – 4.04 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 13.66mm</span></li>
<li><span>151.48 – - 184.39mm 118.58 overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 0.50mm</span></li>
<li><span>18 pieces of 14-group lens configuration</span></li>
<li><span>Three three-sided aspherical</span></li>
<li><span>One UD glass</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><span>Example 4</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Zoom ratio 7.14</span></li>
<li><span>51.87 – - 117.70mm 16.48 focal length</span></li>
<li><span>Fno 3.60 -. 5.30 – 5.88</span></li>
<li><span>Half angle ω = 39.65 – 14.75 – 6.62 °</span></li>
<li><span>Image height Y = 13.66mm</span></li>
<li><span>138.55 – - 162.35mm 114.75 overall length of the lens</span></li>
<li><span>BF 0.50mm</span></li>
<li><span>17 pieces of 13-group lens configuration</span></li>
<li><span>Two two-sided aspherical</span></li>
<li><span>One UD glass</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/tag/Canon"><span>Canon</span></a><span> patents</span>
<ul>
<li><span>Vibration control</span></li>
<li><span>Inner focus</span></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2013-12-29" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2013)

I like the idea of a 16-120 zoom for the EOS M!


----------



## Bob Howland (Dec 29, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I like the idea of a 16-120 zoom for the EOS M!



So do I, although a 15-85 would be just a good.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 29, 2013)

That sounds great! I like the idea of not going too ambitious with the focal length. That would satisfy most of my travel telephoto needs - hopefully without an optically crippled design. The EF-S 15-85mm is a great lens. It was hand's down my favorite EF-S lens.


----------



## pj1974 (Dec 29, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> I like the idea of a 16-120 zoom for the EOS M!



+1

That could / would make a great walk around for the EOS-M (I love my 15-85mm on my 7D, similar range).

(note: mods...) I expect there is/was a typo in the post 51.87 should be 15.87, as the corresponding Half angle ω = 39.65....

Hmmm... I wonder what 'example 2' is... :

Paul


----------



## mb66energy (Dec 29, 2013)

16-120 sounds interesting but I am more interested in
(1) a f/4.0 zoom, e.g. 15-75mm with GREAT IQ and a
(2) f/2.0 40mm compact lens (with telephoto construction to minimize size) with GREAT IQ, IS and a good close focus capability (1:4 would be sufficient for most purposes).

But that's just my "needs" ...


----------



## noncho (Dec 29, 2013)

mb66energy said:


> 16-120 sounds interesting but I am more interested in
> (1) a f/4.0 zoom, e.g. 15-75mm with GREAT IQ and a
> (2) f/2.0 40mm compact lens (with telephoto construction to minimize size) with GREAT IQ, IS and a good close focus capability (1:4 would be sufficient for most purposes).
> 
> But that's just my "needs" ...



Me too...
Add 80/2 and more interesting telephoto than 50-200 5.6.
Too much wishes for the new year...


----------



## surapon (Dec 29, 2013)

Dear Friends.
Yes, that Sound great for me as new toy too.
Any ways, Can Canon Company make The Adapter to use this EOS-M Lens to use with our Big Brother Regular EOS ?
Sorry, That Is the stupid Question . Yes, I know, We do not want to use the Cheap Lens with our High cost Canon Body.
Surapon


----------



## fotorex (Dec 29, 2013)

This would be the fourth lens in the EOS M lineup which contains a 22mm focal length.

Is this really necesssary? I would like to see a focal range from maybe 35-150mm or so.

Regards,
Frank


----------



## BL (Dec 29, 2013)

don't worry frank, it's for Japan/Asia only


----------



## JPAZ (Dec 29, 2013)

Could be a good walk around for the camera that Canon USA seems to have disinherited


----------



## unfocused (Dec 29, 2013)

Is there something in the patents that indicate these are for the EOS-M? How can you tell?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2013)

surapon said:


> Can Canon Company make The Adapter to use this EOS-M Lens to use with our Big Brother Regular EOS ?



Such an adapter would need optics, since the flange focal distance (mount-to-sensor) is short for EF-M lenses. 



fotorex said:


> This would be the fourth lens in the EOS M lineup which contains a 22mm focal length.
> Is this really necesssary? I would like to see a focal range from maybe 35-150mm or so.



A UWA lens, a prime, a 'short' walkaround lens, and a 'long' walkaround lens makes perfect sense. The patent also has a superzoom (18-200).

Consider EF-S lenses - 10-22, 15-85, 17-55, 17-85, 18-55, 18-135, 18-200, that's 7 lenses covering 18-22mm (even counting all the 18-55 versions as one). 

Consider EF lenses - 16-35, 17-40, 24-70/2.8, 24-70/4, 24-105, 28-135, 28-300, three 24mm primes, two 28mm primes, two 35mm primes (not counting the slower ones recently replaced by IS versions). How about four 70-200 zooms, three 70-300 zooms plus a couple of cheap 75-300s, and several primes in that range (meaning at least 10 lenses of that focal length for every prime).

Choice is good - stop complaining!!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 29, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Is there something in the patents that indicate these are for the EOS-M? How can you tell?



The short back focus distance, presumably.


----------



## surapon (Dec 29, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> surapon said:
> 
> 
> > Can Canon Company make The Adapter to use this EOS-M Lens to use with our Big Brother Regular EOS ?
> ...




Thank you, Sir, Dear Teacher Mr. neuroanatomist.
If Need Another Lens for The Lens adapter, I would rather use my 20 years old , Tamron, 28-300mm. F/ 3.5 - 6.3 With EOS-M to EF Lens adapter = Better. 

Thanks to answer my question. Have a great Sunday, Sir.
Surapon


----------



## bholliman (Dec 29, 2013)

Looks like a great option! Hopefully its available in the US when released. Personally, I don't see the need for anything much longer than this as a native M lens. If the lens is to large and bulky, I'll just use a DSLR.

I'd like to see Canon add some fast primes (35mm, 50-55mm, 85mm) f/2.0 or faster added to the system and maybe a fast (f/2.8 or faster) normal range zoom if that's possible while still keeping the size reasonable.


----------



## Sanaraken (Dec 29, 2013)

This is good news. Now we just need the 11-22mm available in the US.


----------



## dufflover (Dec 30, 2013)

Bit more capable lens for the EF-M always good. Still waiting for that basic telephoto, though the new EF-S 55-250 STM might be it in their eyes. But yeah as usual the big question isn't about lenses or bodies but the whole availability and future plans thing.


----------

