Close Menu

    Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM confirmed, likely in Q4 [CR3]

    By 274 Comments Canon Lens Rumors 1 Min Read

    Canon's EF 500mm f/4L IS USM II is going to be a zoom for the RF mount first. We have confirmed that a Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM will likely be coming in Q4, or perhaps in Q1 of 2024 ahead of the Canon EOS R1.

    The Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM will not come with a built-in teleconverter. Fear not, there will be a nice teleconverter solution coming for both the Canon RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM and the Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM. Canon wants to make such a lens as light as possible, and the built-in teleconverter design does add weight and size to the design.

    Such a lens will cost a lot, but don't they always?

    The image associated with this post is the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM 1.4x

    When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.

    Go to discussion...

    274 comments

    2. Its not for my wallet, but I think the strategy with these both zooms is good to replace several old EF lenses. Why buy a 500 f/4 prime, if the zoom is also great? And then there is no need for a 400 f/4 (with this DO option) and so on.
      The 400/2.8 and 600/4 as "common" primes exists (but are the EF ones with converter, I think they will replaced someday)
      But for the one in between (like the 500/4), this zoom lenses are made for.
      • 0
    4. " Fear not, there will be a nice teleconverter solution coming for both the Canon RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM and the Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM"

      How is this any different from the existing 1.4x and 2x TC's? Is there going to be a new set of RF TCs?
      Yes more expensive ones, remember the price for the 2x Teleconverter of the 1200/f8?
      • 0
    5. Its not for my wallet, but I think the strategy with these both zooms is good to replace several old EF lenses. Why buy a 500 f/4 prime, if the zoom is also great? And then there is no need for a 400 f/4 (with this DO option) and so on.
      The 400/2.8 and 600/4 as "common" primes exists (but are the EF ones with converter, I think they will replaced someday)
      But for the one in between (like the 500/4), this zoom lenses are made for.
      I am sure there will be some who love this and find it very useful and a substitute for multiple lenses. But, I am not one of them. Leaving aside the price, it's weight - no way could I take this out on a hike and it will be too heavy for me to hand hold steady or for BIF. My birding guru @arbitrage recently posted on FM he has sold his Sony 200-600mm f/6.3 because he goes either for lightness or using his long primes and takes his 100-400 instead, and a 200-500/4 is even more of a burden. I really do think the 100-500mm is the ideal compromise for me and I thank Canon for that.
      • 0
    6. I am sure there will be some who love this and find it very useful and a substitute for multiple lenses. But, I am not one of them. Leaving aside the price, it's weight - no way could I take this out on a hike and it will be too heavy for me to hand hold steady or for BIF. My birding guru @arbitrage recently posted on FM he has sold his Sony 200-600mm f/6.3 because he goes either for lightness or using his long primes and takes his 100-400 instead, and a 200-500/4 is even more of a burden. I really do think the 100-500mm is the ideal compromise for me and I thank Canon for that.
      Ignoring the weight and price, I suspect it won't have a decent magnification ratio like the 100-500L and RF100-400 either.
      • 0
    10. Glad to see that Canon is going to release it as a 200-500 mm zoom without the built in TC to keep the size and weight down.

      Canonwatch posted a patent that likely applies to the TC: Canon Variable TC
      Thanks for the heads up. It's described better in the source that Canonwatch used https://asobinet-com.translate.goog...-lens/?_x_tr_sl=ja&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-GB
      It has to be very wide to take the internally swivelling lenses. If they have a TC designed like this, it would give a choice of two focal length multipliers when inserted, say 1.4x or 2x, or even 1x or 2x etc.
      • 0
    11. Another lens for the paid professional photographer, this time field sports shooters.

      Can this market really be worth more than the forgotten middle of amateurs, currently awaiting some equivalent of Sony’s 200–600mm zoom or Nikon’s Fresnel lens (DO, in Canon-speak) telephoto primes? I suspect it really isn’t, but those people don’t have the ear of Canon’s sales department in the way the professional photographers do.
      • 0
    12. Ok...this is something that adds to my kit. I'll be in this market.

      But, what has my attention, along with several other people "Fear not, there will be a nice teleconverter solution coming for both the Canon RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM and the Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM."

      I am hoping this is not spending more money to have the lenses sent to Canon to be retrofited. While I would still prefer a built in TC, the variable TC discuss above would be intriguing. Maybe Canon put that new supercomputer to good use.
      • 0
    13. Thanks for the heads up. It's described better in the source that Canonwatch used https://asobinet-com.translate.goog...-lens/?_x_tr_sl=ja&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-GB
      It has to be very wide to take the internally swivelling lenses. If they have a TC designed like this, it would give a choice of two focal length multipliers when inserted, say 1.4x or 2x, or even 1x or 2x etc.
      Whoa - that's a really weird beast. Seems like it has one fixed TC, and then a second TC which can be swivelled out to the side. But making the housing equally bulky all around seems ..... peculiar.

      Canon could have chosen to go with the "shift to the side" design of the internal TC of the 200-400, but they must have taken sufficient flak from users to not going down that road again.
      • 0
    14. My opinion is that Canon want to regain full control of the professional market, producing lenses their competitors:
      - either are unable to produce
      - or are too expensive for them to make
      - or are unable to amortize
      Remember what's been said about the 100-300 zoom, limited market, low demand, too specialized, etc... The usual litany.
      Well, it seems Canon cannot meet the high demand...
      • 0
    15. " Fear not, there will be a nice teleconverter solution coming for both the Canon RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM and the Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM"

      How is this any different from the existing 1.4x and 2x TC's? Is there going to be a new set of RF TCs?
      Specific TCs are , as the adjective implies, designed for some special lenses. It should be much easier to improve the optical quality compared to what can be achieved with "universal" TCs. Leica did it in the past with very convincing results...
      And yes, they'll certainly cost more.:(
      • 0
    16. Well, it seems Canon cannot meet the high demand...
      Not to sound like a negative Nancy, but what exactly is “high demand” for the niche 100-300 lens? 100 units? 500 units?

      I wonder what the demand would be for a 14, 24, 35 L Prime. Guess they have to leave something for users waiting and wanting more.
      • 0
    17. This would be just about the perfect lens for my use, but I suspect that it will be very expensive. And probably a little bit heavy, so not ideal for birding.
      • 0
    18. Not to sound like a negative Nancy, but what exactly is “high demand” for the niche 100-300 lens? 100 units? 500 units?

      I wonder what the demand would be for a 14, 24, 35 L Prime. Guess they have to leave something for users waiting and wanting more.
      Certainly higher than the expected demand. According to Canon, there will be important delays.
      Of course, mass-production wasn't meant! It is and remains a niche lens.
      • 0
    19. Can this market really be worth more than the forgotten middle of amateurs
      Yes.
      At the same time, I do not think Canon should ignore that market.
      It has generally caused people to switch to Sony and Nikon.
      • 0

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment