Canon file another 28-560mm f/2.8-5.6 superzoom patent

Canon filed a patent for a 28-560mm f/2.8-5.6L IS lens just a few short months ago. Now, they’ve taken out the image stabilisation and filed another. Many believed that the previous filing was just another patent that would never actually exist in the real world. This new filing suggests that it might happen after all.

It’s been rumoured for a while that Canon have been working on a replacement for the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS. The 28-300mm is an monster of a lens, weighing in at 3.67lbs (~1.7kg) priced around $2500. Could this be its successor?

It’s not uncommon for Canon to produce IS and non-IS versions of the same lens. Just look at their 70-200 models. You’ve got the f/2.8L IS, the f/2.8L, the f/4L IS and the f/4L. Whether they’ll do that with a superzoom, though, is another matter. It is possible, though.

One of the goals mentioned to Canon Rumors about a 28-300mm replacement was that they wanted to save weight. No doubt IS would be a big selling point in a zoom that reaches this far, though. Perhaps two patents and two lenses is a compromise. Those that want IS can get it, and those that don’t need it can save a little weight.

They probably won’t be able to save too much weight, though, as a lens with a max aperture of f/2.8-5.6 is still going to be hefty, even without IS. It probably won’t be cheaper than the lens it may replace, either.

But then, maybe folks are right. Perhaps it is another patent filed for the sake of it and it’ll never be made. Regardless, you can find a little more about it over on Egami (translated).

Do people even really use superzooms? I think I’ve only ever seen one person use a 28-300mm superzoom (and it was a Nikon one). I wonder if the fact that Canon’s costs over twice as much as Nikon’s has anything to do with its popularity. It could just be that people in general don’t like superzooms.

Do you use any superzoom lenses? What do you love or hate about them? Could you see yourself walking around with a single lens that has such a massive range? Or would you prefer more lenses with shorter focal ranges better suited for your purpose? Let us know in the comments.

[via Canon Rumors]

Robert Palu

More zooms thats just fantastic ?
Mike Elmasry

I think superzoom lenses are great. I use mine for travel photography and while it may not be the best performing lens, I rarely miss a shot thanks to the expanded zoom range.
Art Ofwrestling

I would love a lens like that at sport events where the location of the action on the field changes constantly this would be a blessing and I would happily carry it around..I hope it will be made…
pincherio

I love superzooms for travel when weight is an issue. Since I travel with my kids a lot, weight usually is an issue. I have a Sigma 18-300 OS but I also had a Tamron 28-300 and 18-250 before that. I prefer these 3rd party superzooms because of their lighter weight and smaller form factor (the 18-300 and 18-250 are for APS-C but the 28-300 is for full frame and is just as small and light). I don’t think the 28-560 would be the right lens for me given the potential weight and cost but I don’t see any reason why a 560mm max focal length at a max aperture of f/5.6 would be unpopular with the prosumer crowd, specially when you can zoom out to 28mm to spot your target. That’s one thing I really love about my Sigma 50-500. It’s easy to lose a subject when zoomed in at 500mm but easy to pick it right up when you zoom out. As usual, there are compromises to be made when you use zooms as opposed to primes, but the technology today is so good that the gap with regards to IQ is closing quite rapidly. Where it will probably never catch up is when it comes to depth of field, which is why long, bright primes will still be popular with the pro crowd even if this lens ever comes out.