# Patent: Full-Frame fixed lens camera



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 22, 2021)

> HiLowsNote has uncovered an odd patent showing us a full-frame fixed lens camera lens optical formula. The lens design here is not impressive, as it’s quite slow at f/4.5-8.
> While I have always wanted Canon to make a camera like the Leica Q or Sony RX1 series, I don’t think what we have here will ever become a consumer product.
> It’ll be interesting to see if anything comes from this.
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## jolyonralph (Feb 22, 2021)

security camera lens maybe?


----------



## Swerky (Feb 22, 2021)

15-45? If it's meant to be a fixed lens for something like a full frame G1X, I imagine at those apertures, it would be much more useful to have a 20-70. Or 18-60.


----------



## gatabo (Feb 22, 2021)

why it needs to be a fixed lens?


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 22, 2021)

gatabo said:


> why it needs to be a fixed lens?


Market segmentation, it would be a beefed up P&S which have been decimated because of their small sensor size.

I’m with Craig on this, I always wanted a Canon RX1 as the high quality 35mm fixed lens suits my walk around style perfectly. But goodness the actual RX1 ergonomics put me off every time I pick one up!

I’m sure there is a small market for fixed lens >$2,000 P&S’s, I’m not sure that includes f4.5-8 lenses though so I’d see this much closer to the $1,000 price point.


----------



## melgross (Feb 22, 2021)

Those two front elements aren’t going to be cheap to make.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Feb 22, 2021)

It is a bit strange to me that Canon did not announced anything this year and we are in March almost. Was like this before of this is just pandemic delays?


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 22, 2021)

I think the reason to make such a "thing" for fixed lenses is maybe the group near the sensor which is very close to the sensor AND has to be moved for focusing.
At f/8 some 30 MPix seem reasonable in my thinking - maybe some EOS R sensor reusage project without OVF and lower number of controls (no touchbar . First I thought the RP sensor would be good but I think a little bit more DR would fit an ultra wide which usually captures a lot between bright light sources and dark shadows.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 22, 2021)

blackcoffee17 said:


> It is a bit strange to me that Canon did not announced anything this year and we are in March almost. Was like this before of this is just pandemic delays?


I think this is a big reason because they make lots of profit from selling large numbers of e.g. M50s or similar cameras during holiday seasons and holidays aren't close if schools are closed (at least here in Germany).


----------



## BurningPlatform (Feb 22, 2021)

jolyonralph said:


> security camera lens maybe?


Looks like it. Drawing 7 of the patent shows an implementation for a surveillance camera.


----------



## Larsskv (Feb 22, 2021)

Why would you buy a full frame surveillance camera with a slow lens like this?

I could see myself wanting a small FF camera with a small and slow lens, for hiking and certain travel and daytime photography, but the market for such a camera is probably quite limited.


----------



## slclick (Feb 22, 2021)

And I was hoping for the Canon version of an X100 oh well


----------



## Tangent (Feb 22, 2021)

I wouldn't mind a digital version of the good old Olympus Stylus Epic -- fixed 28 f 2.8 lens. Fixed fl: no longer than 35, no slower than 2.8. Simple and affordable, too -- that was part of the charm of the Olympus!

(An Epic in good shape is worth more now than it was new... that kind of indicates there would be a market for such a cam.)


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Feb 23, 2021)

LOL 15-45 f/4.5-8. I'm sure the fan boys with squeal with joy becuase it will be soooooo light.


----------



## ozwineguy (Feb 23, 2021)

Absolutely with you on the desire for a Canon version of a Leica Q. I'd be all in on that for my walk around. Love my R5, but give me something with an f2 fixed focal length lens (28mm, please, not 35mm) and you've got me. Especially if they implement a leaf shutter a la X100. I had an X100F and it always had the 28mm-equiv converter on there. So give me full frame, Canon colours (I do like Fuji colours, but prefer Canon), and a solid lens, and I'm sold.


----------



## Robolon (Feb 23, 2021)

That 15-45 on a FF-Sensor seems interresting. The f/4.5-8 can be compared to some P&S cameras on the market (if you account for crop factor). I imagine, Canon might put that 20MP Sensor of the R6 or the 45MP Sensor of the R5 behind that lens. That would be an interresting combination.
15mm beeing wide enough for these vloggers. But I am sure people will complain about that dark aperture...


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 23, 2021)

I don't see a market for a P&S that doesn't have both wide and tele long enough to shoot portraits, say 24-70mm in FF terms, all the more so if its an expensive FF camera.

Why would security cameras have FF sensors, rather than m43? What's the usage scenario?

With today's sensors' high ISO performance, and shallow DoF not being a priority for UW, I can see Canon offering an RF 15-35mm f/2.8L and a 15-45mm f/4.5-8 side by side.


----------



## Mahk43 (Feb 23, 2021)

Patents are also here to avoid competitors to make similar things. It is a kind of defensive tool, not only a plan for a new product


----------



## Robolon (Feb 23, 2021)

Antono Refa said:


> I don't see a market for a P&S that doesn't have both wide and tele long enough to shoot portraits, say 24-70mm in FF terms, all the more so if its an expensive FF camera.
> 
> Why would security cameras have FF sensors, rather than m43? What's the usage scenario?
> 
> With today's sensors' high ISO performance, and shallow DoF not being a priority for UW, I can see Canon offering an RF 15-35mm f/2.8L and a 15-45mm f/4.5-8 side by side.


From what I know, security cameras have small sensors, not even m43. With the low resolution those operate (often 1080p or even 720p) they still have large pixels. The dark aperture on the other hand isn't a preoblem for security cameras, you often focus to some distance and you want the maximum DOF...

A 24-70 on a P&S camera would certainly be more useful. But even a 24-70 f/4 would be rather large and heavy on a P&S camera.



> Patents are also here to avoid competitors to make similar things. It is a kind of defensive tool, not only a plan for a new product


You are right.
This might never even be a real product, just a patent so noone makes that product.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Feb 23, 2021)

Robolon said:


> From what I know, security cameras have small sensors, not even m43. With the low resolution those operate (often 1080p or even 720p) they still have large pixels. The dark aperture on the other hand isn't a preoblem for security cameras, you often focus to some distance and you want the maximum DOF...
> 
> A 24-70 on a P&S camera would certainly be more useful. But even a 24-70 f/4 would be rather large and heavy on a P&S camera.


The fact that security cams have traditionally had bad image quality does not mean it always has to be like that. I can imagine a demand for mor resolution and low light capability to enable for instance face recognition. Even in non-totalitarian countries.


----------



## jolyonralph (Feb 23, 2021)

Robolon said:


> From what I know, security cameras have small sensors, not even m43. With the low resolution those operate (often 1080p or even 720p) they still have large pixels. The dark aperture on the other hand isn't a preoblem for security cameras, you often focus to some distance and you want the maximum DOF...


For *real* security applications, not just "I need a security camera for insurance purposes" FF sensors offer much better low-light performance of course. Recording 4K, or higher, surveillance footage may be the difference between (for example) seeing which of your warehouse staff is stealing products and just knowing that someone is doing it.

This is 100% a vertical market product.


----------



## tron (Feb 23, 2021)

A 17-70 would be much better (for me) as it would make it a great excursion camera. I have mentioned it many times as a lens requirement but I guess it would do nice in a compact FF camera.

I guess I will wait a few (or more) years for that!


----------



## Robolon (Feb 23, 2021)

jolyonralph said:


> For *real* security applications, not just "I need a security camera for insurance purposes" FF sensors offer much better low-light performance of course. Recording 4K, or higher, surveillance footage may be the difference between (for example) seeing which of your warehouse staff is stealing products and just knowing that someone is doing it.
> 
> This is 100% a vertical market product.


From my experience, Securty cameras have smaller sensors. I have installed countless of them in the last years. Due to their low resolution Low light Performance is good. And take for example the surveilance cameras from panasonic, these offer good image quality and even HDR features, making it possible for the camera to detect faces even in difficult lighting situations. I havent't seen a single FF surveilance camera yet. Not even the 4K ones from panasonic use a FF sensor as far as I know. And despite the small sensors, it was possible to Identify suspects on these images (Also here is a free fact: this was even possible with the old analog cameras, which used much lower resolution , many years ago. )
Honestly, I don't see very much potential in a FF surveilance camera. It just doesn't make sense.


----------



## WoodyWindy (Feb 23, 2021)

It is clear from the comments that that this isn't going to appeal as an artist's tool (unless the image quality of the camera is stellar in other ways). That doesn't mean that such a camera is of no use, or even won't see significant uptake. "Security" is just one of many applications for such a device. We don't know what sensor is going to be hiding behind the lens, yet, either. Or the end-to-end performance of the system. Maybe it will be in an 8K, high speed, industrial application. Or robotic vision. Or astronomy. Or, perhaps it is just a preemptive patent as some others have suggested. Personally, I suspect we will see something that uses it, we just don't know what form it will take.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 23, 2021)

BurningPlatform said:


> The fact that security cams have traditionally had bad image quality does not mean it always has to be like that. I can imagine a demand for more resolution and low light capability to enable for instance face recognition. Even in non-totalitarian countries.


There are two reasons for the compromise: storage requirements, and the wide interest in viewing the video when something happens.

The higher the resolution (in pixels, color, and frame rate), the more disk required to store the video, multiplied by the number of cameras and the archive period. Replacing B&W (read: 8bpp) by color (read: 24bpp) triples the amount of information. Replacing 1080 by 4K quadruples it, and 4K monitors aren't mainstream yet.

I used to work for a parking lot, and management wanted to cover another spot near the exit. An additional 352x240 2.39fps greyscale camera was much cheaper than upgrading the cameras, network, and recorder to support 720 / 1080, not to mention having to buy 4K monitors for everybody so they could actually see the video in all its glorious detail. Resolution was good enough for license plates & faces, the limiting factor was the police wouldn't bother with drivers who cheated the parking lot out of <$25 parking fee.

My understanding is security camera requirements are still far away from requiring FF sensors. AFAIK, the norm is still under 1".


----------



## Del Paso (Feb 23, 2021)

LEICA Q2


----------

