# Patent: Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 20, 2015)

```
A lens we’d all like to see happen has appeared in a patent, a 600mm f/4 DO IS. This isn’t the first time we’ve seen a patent for DO lens with a longer focal length than 400mm.</p>
<p>Patent Publication No. 2015-11171 (Google Translated)</p>
<ul>
<li>Published 2015.1.19</li>
<li>Filing date 2013.6.28</li>
</ul>
<p>Example 2</p>
<ul>
<li>Focal length 588.30mm</li>
<li>Fno. 4.12</li>
<li>Angle of view 2.11 °</li>
<li>Image height 21.64mm</li>
<li>Lens length 397.80mm</li>
<li>BF 2.02mm</li>
<li>Positive ShiboTadashi</li>
<li>Inner focus</li>
<li>Vibration control</li>
</ul>
<p>Canon recently updated the 400mm DO lens and solved a lot of the issues some photographers experienced with the first one. If a 600mm variant could cost less than a house, there’d be a pretty good market for it I think.</p>
```


----------



## IglooEater (Jul 20, 2015)

Woohoo! Just wondering what will differentiate this from the 'Normal' 600L, that would keep the 600L on the market at all. Now we just need a 1200mm 5.6 DO.. ;D


----------



## jvirta (Jul 20, 2015)

Interesting lens but what I have been wondering about these patents are the variances between the "sales" and actual specs. I mean that this lens is actually 588mm f/4.12 lens and not a 600mm f/4...

Well the differences of the figures aren't that big, but does anyone know how large can the differences be or is it only about how much the lens manufacturer is willing to "lie"? Is there some specific reasons why they cannot actually make a 600mm f/4 lens or very very close to it?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 20, 2015)

Presumably physically smaller than the current lens, probably a bit lighter. I'd certainly be tempted...


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Presumably physically smaller than the current lens, probably a bit lighter. I'd certainly be tempted...



Matthew 6:13
"Lead us not into temptation but deliver us from the evil one"

I'd prefer a f/5.6 for weight reasons.


----------



## arbitrage (Jul 20, 2015)

jvirta said:


> Interesting lens but what I have been wondering about these patents are the variances between the "sales" and actual specs. I mean that this lens is actually 588mm f/4.12 lens and not a 600mm f/4...
> 
> Well the differences of the figures aren't that big, but does anyone know how large can the differences be or is it only about how much the lens manufacturer is willing to "lie"? Is there some specific reasons why they cannot actually make a 600mm f/4 lens or very very close to it?



Even the patent for the 600 f/4 IS III has a 588mm rating. I wouldn't be surprised if the current one is similar. There is a certain spec they have to be in to quote a certain focal length but I'm not sure what it is.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/03/patent-canon-ef-600-f4l-is-ii-ef-600-f4-do-is/


----------



## Vern (Jul 20, 2015)

AlanF said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Presumably physically smaller than the current lens, probably a bit lighter. I'd certainly be tempted...
> ...



+1, f5.6 would still AF w a 1.4X w current bodies and would likely weigh in a little over 2 kg based on the 400 f4 DO's weight. This would be easy to walk around with. I do go walking for birdies w the 600, f4 but it is a chore.


----------



## wopbv4 (Jul 20, 2015)

Interesting indeed.
I have the new EF 400 DO Mark II and I am very pleased with it. IQ is fantastic, IS is superb and focus is very fast even with 1.4 converter ( not with 2.0 converter).
I use the lens on a 1DX and that combo is perfectly balanced. I can use this for extended periods handheld and for BIF this makes a hughe difference.
Although the 400 DO is a lot cheaper then EF 400 F2.8 it is still (very) expensive. 
The 600 DO would probably still cost something like $8000


----------



## Click (Jul 20, 2015)

What is Positive Shibo Tadashi ?

I looked on the web, some lens are Positive ShiboTadashi, and others Negative ShiboTadashi.

What does it mean?


----------



## Random Orbits (Jul 20, 2015)

wopbv4 said:


> Interesting indeed.
> I have the new EF 400 DO Mark II and I am very pleased with it. IQ is fantastic, IS is superb and focus is very fast even with 1.4 converter ( not with 2.0 converter).
> I use the lens on a 1DX and that combo is perfectly balanced. I can use this for extended periods handheld and for BIF this makes a hughe difference.
> Although the 400 DO is a lot cheaper then EF 400 F2.8 it is still (very) expensive.
> The 600 DO would probably still cost something like $8000



Probably more. If the IQ is as good as the 600 f/4 II, the I'm guessing it'd cost more than the 600 f/4 II, and that lens is 10k+.


----------



## GuyF (Jul 20, 2015)

Click said:


> What is Positive Shibo Tadashi ?
> 
> I looked on the web, some lens are Positive ShiboTadashi, and others Negative ShiboTadashi.
> 
> What does it mean?



Shibo Tadashi is the ancient Japanese art of getting people to accumulate or upgrade equipment. Positive Shibo Tadashi is when they keep the original equipment, Negative is when they sell their old gear to buy the new stuff. Therefore if Neuro sells his 600mm to buy this one, that'll be Negative Shibo Tadashi and a corresponding loss of face among those who have Gear Aquisition Syndrome - why have one type of 600mm when you can have two?

All or none of the above might be true...or not....


----------



## Click (Jul 20, 2015)

Thanks. That's a very good explanation ;D


----------



## NancyP (Jul 20, 2015)

The key feature would have to be "costs less than a house" - or even "costs less than a mid-priced new car".


----------



## RGF (Jul 20, 2015)

NancyP said:


> The key feature would have to be "costs less than a house" - or even "costs less than a mid-priced new car".



perhaps less than a tesla

Also will weigh less than an elephant


----------



## jcarapet (Jul 20, 2015)

I am guessing 15k if it has similar optical quality, 18 if IQ more than current hulk of a lens. the real question is how small will it be and of course IS?


----------



## jcarapet (Jul 20, 2015)

just noticed the IS part. Ignore me.


----------



## RGF (Jul 20, 2015)

Wonder if the 600 DO will be shorter than the 600 F4? Would be easier to travel with.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jul 20, 2015)

>Lens length 397.80mm

Not so much. The 600 f/4 IS II is 448mm long), so already shorter than the focal lenght. (this is the definition of a telephoto lens actually)
Maybe the key here is the weight, but I don't think, it would be much lighter. The current II is already much more lighter than the first I one. (5.3kg->3.92kg)


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 20, 2015)

GuyF said:


> Click said:
> 
> 
> > What is Positive Shibo Tadashi ?
> ...


So positive Shibo Tadashi is like unrequited GAS?


----------



## RGF (Jul 20, 2015)

BeenThere said:


> GuyF said:
> 
> 
> > Click said:
> ...



and an eternally empty bank account


----------



## RGF (Jul 20, 2015)

davidcl0nel said:


> >Lens length 397.80mm
> 
> Not so much. The 600 f/4 IS II is 448mm long), so already shorter than the focal lenght. (this is the definition of a telephoto lens actually)
> Maybe the key here is the weight, but I don't think, it would be much lighter. The current II is already much more lighter than the first I one. (5.3kg->3.92kg)



nearly 50mm is about 2 inches. Some extra space in the bag. Wonder if max diameter, which is related to light gathering ability would be smaller.

I thought that the 400 DO was claimed to be 30% lighter than same non-DO lens (if one were to be built).


----------



## GuyF (Jul 20, 2015)

RGF said:


> and an eternally empty bank account



Looking into his bank account after the purchase of a big white, the Zen master said, "there is nothing". 8)


----------



## GuyF (Jul 20, 2015)

BeenThere said:


> So positive Shibo Tadashi is like unrequited GAS?



Isn't all GAS unrequited? Guess I'll find out when the 1DX mk2 comes along....


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Jul 20, 2015)

I'm assuming Dr. Evil will be the one announcing the price for this model? Somewhere in the range of one hundred billion dollars.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 20, 2015)

I've been wondering where the patent was that covers the new 400mm DO lens, this appears to be it. It describes the new process for the DO elements, and the first, third, and 4th examples are for a 400mm f/4 DO lens. I can't tell for sure if or which design was used in the 400mm DO, but the process for forming the diffraction elements is the same as Canon described in their description of the technology.

Given the popularity of the 400 DO, I'd expect that every possible effort is going into making the 600.

The patent describes a Prime lens, but the optical formula describes a Zoom Element as well as a single lens element . They seem to be covering the possibility of a zoom DO lens even though the patent is for Primes.

"zoom-lens-group data 
Group ** side Focal distance Lens constitution length Forward side principal point position . Rear side principal point position 
1 1 144.55 66.44. -29.74 -
60.942 19 -94.08. 7.47 6.24 
1.973 22 991.13. 52.46 332.98 439.52. "

"Single lens data 
lens ** side The focal distance 
1. 1 
476.272 3 
614.583. 4 
610.894 8 
155.415. 9 -
254.116 13 
287.497. 15 -
144.698 19 -
33.959. 20 
48.9810 23 
42.9811. 
24 -62.6912 26 -31.

1713 27 28.2714 29 

-29.9615 32 32.8416
33 -33.9717 35 -71

.0018 36 54.0619 38
128.8920 40 0.00" 


This is a excerpt describing the bonded diffraction gratings and how the two are brought together to function as a single element that corrects many issues with the earlier DO lens.


"In 2 lamination-type diffraction optical element 1 shown in Fig.10 (a), the first diffraction grating 6 is formed with first ultraviolet curing resin on the glass substrate 4, and the second diffraction grating 7 is formed on other glass substrates 5 with different second ultraviolet curing resin from first ultraviolet curing resin. On both sides of the air layer 8 of the interval D, close arrangement of these [ 1st ] and the second diffraction gratings 6 and 7 is carried out, and they function as one diffraction optical element with the combination of these two diffraction gratings 6 and 7. "


Examples 1, 3, 4
a focal distance of 400 mm, and an optical system for the super telephoto lenses of Fno4.0. 


Examples 2 is for a 600mm f/4 which is a bigger brother to the 400mm DO similar to example 1.

The optical systems of the working example 2 shown in Fig.3 are a focal distance of 600 mm, and an optical system for the super telephoto lenses of Fno4.0. Like the working example 1, front side lens group LF has positive refracting power, and rear side lens group LR also has positive refracting power. The diffraction optical element Ldoe and the aspheric surface Asph are provided by the same position as the working example 1. The diffracting plane of the diffraction optical element Ldoe as well as the working example 1 has positive refracting power.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Jul 20, 2015)

I'm seeing this as a "just in case Nikon does" patent. The current 600 L Hasn't been out that long and I really can't see both being sold at the same time


----------



## RGF (Jul 20, 2015)

Haydn1971 said:


> I'm seeing this as a "just in case Nikon does" patent. The current 600 L Hasn't been out that long and I really can't see both being sold at the same time



why not? the 400 DO II sells side by side with 400 F2.8 II and was introduced a while ago.

Of course that is 400 DO F4 and 400 F2.8.

Not sure how many people would shift from 600 F4 (non-DO) to the DO lens. If they did, Canon would make the same profit again.


----------



## H. Jones (Jul 20, 2015)

I was excited for the possibility of a cheaper 600mm, but then I realized that this will probably end up costing more than the original! Ah well.

Wish it was a cheaper f/5.6, because I really can't justify getting loans out on a lens that'll only be used for my hobby of birding/wildlife and not for my paid photography work.


----------



## wtlloyd (Jul 21, 2015)

Unable to find any logic in these wild statements about price. The new 400 DO II is twice as good as the lens it replaces, yet it's priced the same as the 10 year old version 1 lens.
You could argue it had to be priced as a loss leader to resuscitate the technology in the mind of the marketplace, but you'd be wrong there too...the new lens tech is undeniably far superior and could justify a 50% higher price. The rollout of the 400 has been slow, I predict a second and higher wave of admiration and avarice once more shooters have it in hand.
So why didn't they price it higher? I don't know, and neither do any of you.


----------



## Terry Rogers (Jul 21, 2015)

How much do you think a 600mm f/5.6 (non DO) IS would retail for?


----------



## pierlux (Jul 21, 2015)

Terry Rogers said:


> How much do you think a 600mm f/5.6 (non DO) IS would retail for?


Possible pricing of non-DO 500-600mm f5.6 lenses has been extensively debated in this relatively recent thread:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26507.0


----------



## dstppy (Jul 21, 2015)

In for 2 :


----------



## HankMD (Jul 21, 2015)

Click said:


> What is Positive Shibo Tadashi ?
> 
> I looked on the web, some lens are Positive ShiboTadashi, and others Negative ShiboTadashi.
> 
> What does it mean?



Looking at the source site, it seems to translate as "positive correction". Although what that means is beyond me.


----------



## dolina (Jul 21, 2015)

After 2020.


----------



## daniela (Jul 21, 2015)

Rumors from Japanese Canonians: 15.000-18.000$, about one pound maximal and one and an half pound lighter. newest IS, optimized for high MP. No model "in the wild" for testing until now

Maybe the lens, my friends told me to wait for.


----------



## tron (Jul 24, 2015)

5 cm less is not much. It has to be lighter than the current 600 and cost the same to be tempting.

If it will cost much more it will have to be significantly smaller and lighter to be tempting.

Just my opinion...


----------

