# Patent: Canon 18-105mm f/4-5.6 With Built-in Telconverter, But With a Twist.



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 9, 2017)

```
Here’s a patent we missed that appeared in Japan and was reported by <a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/canon-ef-lenses-rumours-and-news/">Northlight Images</a>. This is a 18-105mm f/4-5.6 With Built-in Telconverter, which isn’t a big departure, expect that the TC is to make the wide angle, wider!</p>
<p>At 18mm, the lens is f/4, but with the TC engaged, the lens becomes a 15mm f/3.3.</p>
<p><strong>Normal use</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Focal length 18.40 37.44 104.0</li>
<li>Aperture 4.00 4.64 5.89</li>
<li>Half angle of view ω (degree) 36.59 20.04 7.48</li>
<li>Image height 13.66 13.66 13.66 (APS-C)</li>
<li>Lens total length 149.30 165.77 191.31</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Wide-angle TC added</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Focal length 15.40</li>
<li>Aperture 3.35</li>
<li>Half angle of view ω (degree) 41.57</li>
<li>Image height 13.66</li>
<li>Lens total length 149.30</li>
</ul>
<p>This is definitely an interesting concept and it’s likely we’re going to see some pretty innovating lens designs from Canon in the future.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 9, 2017)

thats... kind of cool.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jun 10, 2017)

Having the 15mm F3.3 option on an 18-105mm lens is really cool as long as the picture quality does not suffer much. But could it activate the converter, just spinning?


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 10, 2017)

With innovation like that, CANON IS *******!


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 10, 2017)

_Uuuummm..._

Cool and all - but wrong forum?


----------



## James Larsen (Jun 10, 2017)

That's quite interesting. This is pretty cool, but to be honest I'd rather see them work on getting some better video into their DSLR's instead of working on kinda cool but kinda random lenses that probably won't do super great...unless this is an EF mount? If it's EF-S then it'll be just another boring lens...


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jun 10, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> With innovation like that, CANON IS *******!



Exactly my feeling, especially the sarcasm!

And I see that once again, Canon is not developing according to everyone's priorities.


----------



## 9VIII (Jun 10, 2017)

If flipping a TC around gets you the best Zoom lens formula, I'm all for it.
Most zoom lenses are pretty weak on the wide end.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 10, 2017)

Normally, TC's do not work well with a 6:1 super zoom, the lens imperfections get magnified. But a TC that makes the image wider may not have that same effect.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jun 10, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> With innovation like that, CANON IS *******!



Well placed cynicism.

Nikon released a fisheye zoom & ultra wide tilt shift lenses 7 years after Canon, and Canon's TS-E is wider, and people note how interesting and innovating the fisheye zoom is.

Canon released an ultra wide zoom (the EF 11-24mm) 8 years after Nikon (the 14-24mm), which is the widest rectilinear lens ever, and during which time there was a 3rd party ultra wide zoom (the Sigma 12-24mm), and people say Canon is conservative, and late to respond to the competition.

And people keep saying the same S___ even after the facts are presented.

Same thing when Laowa released a 2x macro lens. It's so innovative of Laowa to present a >1:1 macro, even though canon makes a 5x macro for nearly 20 years.
________________________________________________________________________________________

Edit: Voightlander makes a 10mm f/5.6 lens for Sony E mount, so Canon's EF 11-24mm is the widest rectilinear lens ever. It still proof of innovation, though.


----------



## Markus D (Jun 10, 2017)

Why not make a 15 - 105 to start with?


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 10, 2017)

Antono Refa said:


> And people keep saying the same S___ even after the facts are presented.



Yeah, it's a good thing Canon _doesn't_ read forums, because the engineers would probably get depressed and quit making awesome things if they knew what half the world seems to think of their work.


----------



## e_honda (Jun 10, 2017)

This sounds pretty nice, but most likely it's going to be for crop.

18-105 just doesn't sound like a FF zoom range.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 10, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Yeah, it's a good thing Canon _doesn't_ read forums, because the engineers would probably get depressed and quit making awesome things if they knew what half the world seems to think of their work.



Who told you that? Just because they do not post as Canon does not mean they don't belong to CR and read the forum. They are smart enough to spot trolls just like most of us. Besides, we all have built-in filters that screen out things we don't believe.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 10, 2017)

e_honda said:


> This sounds pretty nice, but most likely it's going to be for crop.
> 
> 18-105 just doesn't sound like a FF zoom range.



The Image Height specifies that it is, in fact, APS-C.


----------



## Deleted member 378664 (Jun 10, 2017)

Shouldn't the converter rather be called a wideconverter instead of a teleconverter?

On the other hand: If you pull it out, you got more tele so it is a teleconverter the other way around.
Would the lens have a zoom range from 15 to 88 with the "wideconverter" applied?

Frank


----------



## rrcphoto (Jun 10, 2017)

Markus D said:


> Why not make a 15 - 105 to start with?



much harder to do.


----------



## scrup (Jun 11, 2017)

So the focal length seems to be for crop. 

Now this would be a nice video lens on a full frame for the 4k crop.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jun 11, 2017)

Antono Refa said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > With innovation like that, CANON IS *******!
> ...


Canon's MP-E 65 doesnt focus to infinity and its a FF lens while Venus 60mm focuses all the way to infinity from 2x mag and its a APS-C lens. So if you really want to compare Venus then it should be compared to Canon's EF-s 60mm or Tamron's 60mm f2 macro not MP-E 65. Both those lenses Mp-e and Venus fill separate niche for macro photographers.


----------



## BurningPlatform (Jun 11, 2017)

Photorex said:


> Shouldn't the converter rather be called a wideconverter instead of a teleconverter?
> 
> On the other hand: If you pull it out, you got more tele so it is a teleconverter the other way around.
> Would the lens have a zoom range from 15 to 88 with the "wideconverter" applied?
> ...



I guess it could be called a built-in speed booster as well. What is interesting is that it retains the same image height when applied. Makes me think the lens actually has to have a wider than APS-C image circle at the standard wide end.


----------



## mitchel2002 (Jun 11, 2017)

is it possible that this is the high end ef-m lens that was spoken about?


----------



## Luds34 (Jun 12, 2017)

This does seem like a crop lens. 18mm on APS-C (Canon especially) just isn't all that wide. Getting to 15mm is a big difference. I think it sounds like an intriguing lens regardless.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jun 12, 2017)

rrcphoto said:


> Markus D said:
> 
> 
> > Why not make a 15 - 105 to start with?
> ...



Canon already makes an Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, so..

1) how much harder would it be to make a slightly slower & longer lens?

2) What would be the point of *making* this lens?

IMHO, the point of the patent isn't Canon making this lens, but rather the innovation in the wide-converter.


----------



## Wizardly (Jun 12, 2017)

Luds34 said:


> This does seem like a crop lens. 18mm on APS-C (Canon especially) just isn't all that wide. Getting to 15mm is a big difference. I think it sounds like an intriguing lens regardless.



Although one of the four working examples has a back focus of 35mm, the other three are firmly in the EF mount range.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 12, 2017)

Antono Refa said:


> IMHO, the point of the patent isn't Canon making this lens, but rather the innovation in the wide-converter.



Yes. This lens ain't it, but I, personally, would find it very handy to have a 70-200 that could have a .5x "TC" dropped in at the wide end to turn it into a 35mm. The 70-200 is my ideal for shooting races, but then I have to swap lenses for post-race and podium shots. It's not bad if I can just run back to my car, but it would be a much handier solution than lugging two lenses around for the job. The patent isn't that extreme though.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jun 13, 2017)

Chaitanya said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



The point was macro lenses that have larger than 1:1 magnification.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jun 13, 2017)

LonelyBoy said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > IMHO, the point of the patent isn't Canon making this lens, but rather the innovation in the wide-converter.
> ...



My understanding is this would be a 70-200mm lens with 88mm image height (read: medium format 3x zoom lens, how many of those are there?) w/ a .5x tele converter to compress it to 35-100mm.

IMHO, the reverse architecture (35-100mm w/ 2x built in tele extender) is more likely.

Canon made an EF 50-200mm f/3.5-4.5L, maybe it would be resurrected with a slightly larger zoom.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jun 13, 2017)

Antono Refa said:


> My understanding is this would be a 70-200mm lens with 88mm image height (read: medium format 3x zoom lens, how many of those are there?) w/ a .5x tele converter to compress it to 35-100mm.
> 
> IMHO, the reverse architecture (35-100mm w/ 2x built in tele extender) is more likely.
> 
> Canon made an EF 50-200mm f/3.5-4.5L, maybe it would be resurrected with a slightly larger zoom.



Hmm. That 50-200L is interesting in theory, but I sprang for the 70-200/2.8ISii specifically so all the AF points would turn on.  Guess I'm just stuck lugging around extra lenses, but it was a nice theory, and I do understand the use and purpose of this sort of lens, even if not everyone does.


----------

