A New EF 800 f/5.6L IS II? [CR2]

[Marsu42]

I hope they do a better job with this lens than they did with the 500mm f/4 II and 600mm f/4 II.

What's wrong with these? You're selling yours for a cheap price :-p ?

Start saving now...

Which probably is the reason why Canon won't release any further aps-h bodies (yes-I-know-it-sounds-like-conspiracy-theory-but-to-me-its-more-like-clever-business) :->

[altenae]

I hope they do a better job with this lens than they did with the 500mm f/4 II and 600mm f/4 II.

?
Please explain.
I am very very happy with this lens.
It's awesome.

Or do you mean the delivery time after announcement.
Edward

[PackLight]

I hope they do a better job with this lens than they did with the 500mm f/4 II and 600mm f/4 II.

What's wrong with these? You're selling yours for a cheap price :-p ?

What? I didn't say anything was wrong with the 500mm f/4 II or the 600mm f/4 II (except the price of course).

I said I hope Canon does a better job. For instance make it lighter, an 8 stop IS (is it possible), or could it even have better optics.

[PackLight]

I hope they do a better job with this lens than they did with the 500mm f/4 II and 600mm f/4 II.

?
Please explain.
I am very very happy with this lens.
It's awesome.

Or do you mean the delivery time after announcement.
Edward

You mean  improve on the delivery time of the 200-400mm? Lets hope.

[Marsu42]

an 8 stop IS

My vote goes to a 10-stop IS :-> ... but I'd really like to know if there are any absolute mechanical or physical limitations to IS, too - Dr. Neuro please?

[neuroanatomist]

Which probably is the reason why Canon won't release any further aps-h bodies (yes-I-know-it-sounds-like-conspiracy-theory-but-to-me-its-more-like-clever-business) :->

Conspiracy theory or not, it makes sense.  I got a 1D X instead of a 1D IV, and that was the main reason I got a 600 II instead of a 500 II.

[Marsu42]

Which probably is the reason why Canon won't release any further aps-h bodies (yes-I-know-it-sounds-like-conspiracy-theory-but-to-me-its-more-like-clever-business) :->

Conspiracy theory or not, it makes sense.  I got a 1D X instead of a 1D IV, and that was the main reason I got a 600 II instead of a 500 II.

Good answer, wrong thread :-> ... but comforting to know I'm not the only one frequently copy/pasting/reposting

[rbr]

It doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. The current 800 already is pretty light, only 1 pound heavier than the 600II, and has the 4 stop IS. Maybe they could shave one more pound off of it, add the IS3 mode, and make it the new color, but I doubt that anyone with the current 800 would go to the cost and hassle of replacing the one they already have for that, especially if it means a price increase.

[neuroanatomist]

The current 800 already is pretty light, only 1 pound heavier than the 600II, and has the 4 stop IS.

True...but what if it was lighter than the 600 II?  600/4 = 150mm front element, 800/5.6 = 143mm front element...so lighter is possible.

Also, I think they need to update the 800/5.6 for optical performance.  Those who do their research (which I would hope is almost anyone spending $13K on a lens) pretty easliy learn that the bare 600 II is optically better than the 800/5.6, enough better that you can add a TC and it's still better.  The 600 II + 1.4xIII is better than the bare 800/5.6, plus it's 40mm longer, lighter and cheaper, and offers f/4 when you use it without the TC.  The 600 II + 2xIII is optically better than the 800/5.6 + 1.4xIII, too, and likewise it's longer, lighter, and cheaper.  So, with the 600 II performance, I see no real need for the continued existence of the current 800/5.6.

[Greatland]

Oh my!! I guess I'll have time to save up for it, before it hits the shelves in 2020 

AMEN to that!!

[Daniel Flather]

I see no real need for the continued existence of the current 800/5.6.

The 800 with the 2x TC gets you to 1600mm, can you stack TCs on the 600?  I don't own a 600, 800, or a TC, so please enlighten.  I think stacked TCs is not a desired option. 

[dolina]

The rumor's legit. I believe that Canon is developing improved 200 and 800.

As to when they will release such lenses is subject to rumor. Consider these past product cycles

20 year cycle
1988 - EF200mm f/1.8L USM
2008 - EF200mm f/2L IS USM

27 year cycle
1981 - New FD800mm f/5.6L (no previous EF predecessor)
2008 - EF800mm f/5.6L IS USM

Will they shorten the product cycle? Possibly, if they can figure a way to increase demand for very specialized lenses.

Before stocks ran the Series I super teles sold for these prices. Included are today's Series II prices.

300
I - $5,000
II - $6,800
400
I - $8,000
II - $11,500
500
I - $7,000
II - $10,500
600
I - $9,200
II - $13,000

A Series II 200 and 800 will be substantially more than $6,000 and $13,900 respectively. Based on the price difference between the actual Series I and II the new 200 and 800 would be priced at the following ranges.

200/2 Series II = $8,160-9,000
800/5.6 Series II = $18,904-20,850

Then again Nikon was able to update their super teles with shorter product cycles without such a severe price increase.

Now to compare Canon vs Nikon as this is the primary incentive to improve products.

200mm f/2.0

Closest Focusing Distance   
Canon - 6.2 ft. / 1.9m
Nikon  - 6.2 ft. / 1.9m

Filter Size
Canon - 52mm (Drop-in Gelatin Filter Holder)
Nikon -  52mm (Drop-in Gelatin Filter Holder)

Max. Diameter x Length, Weight   
Canon - 5.0 in. x 8.2 in./ 128mm x 208mm (maximum lens length); 5.6 lbs./2,520g
Nikon -  4.9 in. x 8.0 in./ 124mm x 203mm (maximum lens length); 6.5 lbs./2,930g

Image Stabilization
Canon - 5-stops
Nikon -  4-stops

800mm f/5.6

Closest Focusing Distance   
Canon - 19.7 ft./6.0m
Nikon  - Under development since Jul 11, 2012

Filter Size
Canon - 52mm (Drop-in Gelatin Filter Holder)
Nikon -  Under development since Jul 11, 2012

Max. Diameter x Length, Weight   
Canon - 6.4 in. x 18.1 in./162mm x 461mm (maximum lens length); 9.9 lbs./4,500g
Nikon -  Under development since Jul 11, 2012

Image Stabilization
Canon - 4-stops
Nikon -  Under development since Jul 11, 2012

[dolina]

To be honest though there are a whole lot of other lenses that needs updating than the 200 or 800.

[vuilang]

I see no real need for the continued existence of the current 800/5.6.

The 800 with the 2x TC gets you to 1600mm, can you stack TCs on the 600?  I don't own a 600, 800, or a TC, so please enlighten.  I think stacked TCs is not a desired option.

the 800 f5.6 + 2x TC give you F11 (2 stop higher).. at F11, you'll lose AF, which i dont think you want to with any tele. Unless you're shooting the moon

[dr croubie]

True...but what if it was lighter than the 600 II?  600/4 = 150mm front element, 800/5.6 = 143mm front element...so lighter is possible.

Also, I think they need to update the 800/5.6 for optical performance.  Those who do their research (which I would hope is almost anyone spending $13K on a lens) pretty easliy learn that the bare 600 II is optically better than the 800/5.6, enough better that you can add a TC and it's still better.  The 600 II + 1.4xIII is better than the bare 800/5.6, plus it's 40mm longer, lighter and cheaper, and offers f/4 when you use it without the TC.  The 600 II + 2xIII is optically better than the 800/5.6 + 1.4xIII, too, and likewise it's longer, lighter, and cheaper.  So, with the 600 II performance, I see no real need for the continued existence of the current 800/5.6.

How about the current 800mm vs the 400/2.8 + 2xTC?

Any new 800mm would have to beat both the 400x2 and 600x1.4 combos
...
unless
...
maybe we could be in for an 800mm f/5.0, or even an 800mm f/4.5 or f/4.0? I know canon has some serious superstition about non-whole-stop lenses (except in 50/85mm and vari-aperture zooms), but they could use even a 1/3rd-stop advantage as marketing fodder if the new lens isn't much better than a 600x1.4 (although i've no reason to think it wouldn't be).