# Patent: Canon RF 17-70mm f/3.5-5.6



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 22, 2019)

> Canon News has uncovered a patent for a new RF mount optical formula, this patent shows an RF 17-70mm f/3.5-5.6 in various forms. This looks like some kind of wide kit style lens because of the variable aperture.
> *Below are the three embodiments:*
> *Canon RF 17-70mm f/3.5-5.6*
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 22, 2019)

17-70 f3.5-5.6 is an ideal FF compatible aps-c lens for a mirrorless 7d ish camera.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 22, 2019)

Not as wide as 15-85 - not ideal.

Good as a FF kit lens, though.


----------



## Tom W (Aug 22, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> 17-70 f3.5-5.6 is an ideal FF compatible aps-c lens for a mirrorless 7d ish camera.


Yes, an ideal focal length for APS-C, or a nice ultra-wide zoom for FF.

Also, with the cropped 4K on the R, it would be a nice lens for video.


----------



## sfericean (Aug 22, 2019)

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. It is one heck of a fun time to be a camera nerd.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 22, 2019)

Some whiners ("only big and heavy lenses nobody wants to buy") should now at least be satisfied...


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 22, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Not as wide as 15-85 - not ideal.
> 
> Good as a FF kit lens, though.


True, but that's not a standard kit lens on any of the 000x or 00x models. The normal kit lenses are 18-55 and 18-135. In the past they have started at 17, but the 15-85 was always a premium upgrade.

I suspect the primary reason it's not 18-55 is that it cost the same to make it slightly wider and slightly longer, and 70mm rolls right into a 70-300 (or 70-200 if it's an upsell). This just cements in my mind that aps-c will come to RF. We will eventually see RF rebels, and probably even a full frame rebel at a 999 price point, even cheaper "street" price. I think the only thing that will *NOT* happen is RF-S.


----------



## Ale_F (Aug 22, 2019)

I'm back from a vacancy changing several times the Wide and standard zoom.
This is the solution for travellers.

PS report for flamers:
In a group (general tourist) we have
1 5D4
1 6D
3 rebels
1 nikon reflex aps-c
1 fuji ML
1 sony 6x00


----------



## IggyMo (Aug 22, 2019)

So an aps-c R is confirmed then. I guess it won't take long for it be announced after the 90d. But then again I don't understand why the 90d release oin that case? Especially since the 90d seems more like a replacement of 80d than 7dmii?


----------



## navastronia (Aug 22, 2019)

IggyMo said:


> So an aps-c R is confirmed then. I guess it won't take long for it be announced after the 90d. But then again I don't understand why the 90d release oin that case? Especially since the 90d seems more like a replacement of 80d than 7dmii?



It's just a patent. Patents don't confirm anything, so I wouldn't get my hopes up just yet.


----------



## Del Paso (Aug 22, 2019)

Ale_F said:


> I'm back from a vacancy changing several times the Wide and standard zoom.
> This is the solution for travellers.
> 
> PS report for flamers:
> ...



Can't be true:
There must have been at least 90% of Wonderful Sonies according to Youtube .


----------



## okaro (Aug 22, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> 17-70 f3.5-5.6 is an ideal FF compatible aps-c lens for a mirrorless 7d ish camera.



It would make no sense to get s FF superwide and waste it with a crop sensor. On full frame such superwide to short tele would be nice.


----------



## timmy_650 (Aug 22, 2019)

That is like my dream walk around around lens. I can shoot landscapes well and get good pictures of my daughter as well with out switching lenses.


----------



## Rivermist (Aug 22, 2019)

Definitely a full-frame lens for full-frame camera, I think (as do some of the folks in prior answers) that one needs to re-think zoom lens strategies with the potential of a new mount. I am leaving tomorrow for a trip to south America, wanting to walk around with light(er) gear than my usual 11-24, 24-105 and 100-400, and using current lenses that I have: 16-35 L IS, 24-105 and either the 70-200 L 4.0 IS or 70-300 DO. Note the overlaps, not always a bad thing but I have 2 bodies for 3 lenses for this use case. Instead, with new RF gear I could have a 17-70 and a 70-200 (or 70-300, sure bet they will offer that at some point in time), so with 2 bodies I do not need to change lenses. Brilliant! 
I see assumptions of this not being an L lens because of the variable aperture, but the EF 100-400 and 70-300 L are variable aperture, so let's not jump to conclusions.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 22, 2019)

IggyMo said:


> So an aps-c R is confirmed then.


Only in your mind. 

Image height: 21.64mm


----------



## canonnews (Aug 22, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> True, but that's not a standard kit lens on any of the 000x or 00x models. The normal kit lenses are 18-55 and 18-135. In the past they have started at 17, but the 15-85 was always a premium upgrade.
> 
> I suspect the primary reason it's not 18-55 is that it cost the same to make it slightly wider and slightly longer, and 70mm rolls right into a 70-300 (or 70-200 if it's an upsell). This just cements in my mind that aps-c will come to RF. We will eventually see RF rebels, and probably even a full frame rebel at a 999 price point, even cheaper "street" price. I think the only thing that will *NOT* happen is RF-S.



While it's not a standard APS-C kit lens, even though it would be much better to have an RF-S 17-70mm, it would to the job in a pinch if Canon wanted to simply release an APS-C camera into the wild with no supporting RF-S lenses. It's one of the few full frame lenses that I could see fitting into both full frame and aps-c, as a kit lens for both sensor sizes. the EOS RP could use it as a sweet kit lens, and so could an APS-C RF camera.

Also, this is the second time we've seen 17-70mm in patent applications, which makes it a bit more likely it's going to happen.


----------



## Philrp (Aug 22, 2019)

Oh man that will fit so nicely on my APS-C equipped EOS R. 

Yippy!!!!


----------



## twoheadedboy (Aug 22, 2019)

This would be perfect, because I could carry this and a 70 - 200 plus a fixed lens or teleconverter and have a very reasonable bag. 

Right now I carry a 16 - 35 + 24 - 105 f/4's + fixed (28 or 85 f/1.4), or 16 - 35 + 70 - 200 f/2.8 + 50 f/1.2 or TC's. None of those configurations are as ideal as this would be.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 22, 2019)

canonnews said:


> While it's not a standard APS-C kit lens,


It has a FF image circle. Think of it as a 17-40 combined with a 24-70, with a variable aperture to keep size/cost down as a non-L lens. Honestly, I think it would be an excellent standard zoom for the EOS RP.


----------



## criscokkat (Aug 22, 2019)

i don’t know why so many people are so defensive by the prospect of canon selling an r mount aps c camera. This lens patent works for both. 

As I recall, Canon said they planned to sell more full frame lenses, they picked their words carefully and never said systems or bodies when talking about the RF mount.


----------



## maves (Aug 23, 2019)

If this does come out as a FF lens, this excites me much more than a 24-240.


----------



## Ale_F (Aug 23, 2019)

This could be better than 24-240.
Actually Canon is looking to a mid-high market, but if it wants to sell numbers, there is a need of non-L lenses. Not 1 or 2 but 5 -6 lenses.
I see in the future also 2 other pieces: a simple and compact R without viewfinder (lower than RP) and a 35mm pancake.


----------



## BillB (Aug 23, 2019)

canonnews said:


> While it's not a standard APS-C kit lens, even though it would be much better to have an RF-S 17-70mm, it would to the job in a pinch if Canon wanted to simply release an APS-C camera into the wild with no supporting RF-S lenses. It's one of the few full frame lenses that I could see fitting into both full frame and aps-c, as a kit lens for both sensor sizes. the EOS RP could use it as a sweet kit lens, and so could an APS-C RF camera.
> 
> Also, this is the second time we've seen 17-70mm in patent applications, which makes it a bit more likely it's going to happen.


17-70 would go nicely with 70-200, 70-300 and 100-400 on either a FF or crop camera.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 23, 2019)

I was thinking: RF 24-70/4 IS + RF 70-200/4 IS (extendable) as a travel kit
I am boring, I know


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Aug 23, 2019)

I'm really surprised that Canon haven't designed a range of small and light pancake prime lenses...after all...the RF mount is an ideal Range Finder. 
So far every thing launched has been in the exotic and very large category. But for many, the RF mount sits alongside their EF kit and needs to find a reason to be...so small and light is the way forwards for many. Not everyone is looking for an DSLR replacement camera.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 23, 2019)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I'm really surprised that Canon haven't designed a range of small and light pancake prime lenses...after all...the RF mount is an ideal Range Finder.
> So far every thing launched has been in the exotic and very large category. But for many, the RF mount sits alongside their EF kit and needs to find a reason to be...so small and light is the way forwards for many. Not everyone is looking for an DSLR replacement camera.



'Designed' and 'launched' are two very different things. We don't really know what Canon has been designing, we only know what they announce.
Personally, I'm hoping for an improved version of the EF f/1.8 primes in RF mount, but I wouldn't say no to an RF version of the EF-M 22mm f/2.


----------



## Antono Refa (Aug 24, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> True, but that's not a standard kit lens on any of the 000x or 00x models. The normal kit lenses are 18-55 and 18-135. In the past they have started at 17, but the 15-85 was always a premium upgrade.



I think the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 and the EF-S 17-85mm were always a premium upgrade.


----------



## TonyPM (Aug 24, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Only in your mind.
> 
> Image height: 21.64mm


That only confirms it's not an ff lens. The image height on an apsc lens is lower, but ff sensors are taller. So it will not cover the image on a FF sensor.

This confirms they are testing apsc lenses for a probable aspc Eos R camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 24, 2019)

TonyPM said:


> That only confirms it's not an ff lens. The image height on an apsc lens is lower, but ff sensors are taller. So it will not cover the image on a FF sensor.
> 
> This confirms they are testing apsc lenses for a probable aspc Eos R camera.


Sorry, but it only confirms you don’t understand patent nomenclature. ‘Image height’ in an optical formula patent refers to the radius of the image circle, i.e. one-half of the diagonal of the sensor. 21.64 mm x 2 = 43.3 mm, which is the diagonal of a 24 x 36 mm FF sensor. It’s a FF lens.


----------



## TonyPM (Aug 24, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sorry, but it only confirms you don’t understand patent nomenclature. ‘Image height’ in an optical formula patent refers to the radius of the image circle, i.e. one-half of the diagonal of the sensor. 21.64 mm x 2 = 43.3 mm, which is the diagonal of a 24 x 36 mm FF sensor. It’s a FF lens.



True, I'm not used to trusting what I can see on these patents. 

Time will tell us what Canon does .


----------



## Kit. (Aug 25, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> I think the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 and the EF-S 17-85mm were always a premium upgrade.


*15*-85.

"Premium" or not, but it's an equivalent of 24mm-... FF, which is a pretty common standard for a "normal-range" zoom these days.


----------



## TonyPM (Aug 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> *15*-85.
> 
> "Premium" or not, but it's an equivalent of 24mm-... FF, which is a pretty common standard for a "normal-range" zoom these days.



All three were premium upgrades for apsc models. 

And before those existed, canon apsc users had the Ef 17-40 f4 L.


----------



## Kit. (Aug 25, 2019)

TonyPM said:


> All three were premium upgrades for apsc models.
> 
> And before those existed, canon apsc users had the Ef 17-40 f4 L.


I don't care what they _were_. There was a time when a consumer 28-80 lens was a "premium upgrade" to a kit 35-80. But the times have changed, and today a "standard" zoom without a 24mm equivalent in its zoom range cannot be called "an ideal lens".


----------



## TonyPM (Aug 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I don't care what they _were_. There was a time when a consumer 28-80 lens was a "premium upgrade" to a kit 35-80. But the times have changed, and today a "standard" zoom without a 24mm equivalent in its zoom range cannot be called "an ideal lens".



I totally agree with that!
I got used to having a 24 equivalent on my hs10 9 years ago and when I bought my Apsc camera 18mm wasn't wide enough sometimes.

Now I use a 17-50 2.8 which is ok on the wide end when you get used to it. 

The EFs 15-85 is a great lens, but a new version is long overdue. 

Or at least the same lens at a better price.


----------

