It is. If it makes you feel better you can read through all of the posts here, get a laugh, and feel better. Slams all around.

My favorite thus far is @AlanF ‘s takedown of my “beautiful bird” produced by a “trash lens” and presented in humor about what Canon might do.

Just breathe.

But seriously, you were obviously excited enough to be disappointed by the side track after everyone said… yup, might be.

What are you hoping for in the 300-600? Plans? Are you replacing a lens (or set) or is this a new capability for your Canon gear?

Copland said:

...am I the only one bothered by this unfinished, sharp-edged mounting point?

Click to expand...

It's never been a nuisance for me, never actually thought about it until seeing your post. The edges do have some rounding, and don't feel sharp against my skin. I'd really have to work hard to scratch myself.

I can see how that would scratch up some delicate surfaces, though. Or even becoming annoying when hand holding. But you can simply turn the collar, so the mount isn't sitting against a surface or resting in your hand.

Bloody hell, a forum relating to Canon gear and you've posters trying to gang up on another poster.

Yeah, you're right about the Internet, it can be a real sh_t show sometimes

Celts88 said:

So what are you trying to say with the above?

The post I commented to was where you said "The 300-600 is not even at the level of vaporware", so in that post you said it wasn't even vaporware.

Click to expand...

Read to end of my post where I pointed out why it isn’t even up to vaporware! Are you missing things from the bottom of your screen?

Hey, on the upside: we’re back to discussing the 300-600 and its maybe or maybe not nature!

Celts88 said:

"unethical behavior"

Are you for real!!!

Click to expand...

Honestly, I don’t mind being slammed for a complete thought that might not be well thought out on my part or misunderstood by the other person who doesn’t have access to all of my thoughts. Heck, it can even be rather funny in retrospect. But when quoting a person the substantive thought should be provided or it is twisting words. That t’s me off too. In this case, the 2025 is kinda a key point if you plan on arguing.

neuroanatomist said:

Once again, it’s the Internet. You are free to quote only part of a sentence to support your point, and I am free to call you out on unethical behavior.

Click to expand...

"unethical behavior"

Are you for real!!!

Celts88 said:

You don't need to be a smart arse about it, it's only a forum about Canon camera gear.

Click to expand...

Once again, it’s the Internet. You are free to quote only part of a sentence to support your point, and I am free to call you out on unethical behavior.

neuroanatomist said:

You truncated that quoted sentence, which ended with, “…but we heard the same “coming in 2025” last year.”

2025 is over, so where is the lens? That’s vaporware, by definition.

I was joking about introducing you to the internet…but maybe it wasn’t a joke.

Click to expand...

You don't need to be a smart arse about it, it's only a forum about Canon camera gear.

AlanF said:

Merriam-Webster

vaporware​

noun

: a computer-related product that has been widely advertised but has not and may never become available

Oxford Dictionary:
vapourware

/ˈveɪpəwɛː/
noun
informal•Computing
noun: vaporware

1. software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.
   
   
   
   And as it has not yet even been advertised, by Canon, only a hint at some unknown presentation, it's not even up to the confidence level of vaporware.

Click to expand...

So what are you trying to say with the above?

The post I commented to was where you said "The 300-600 is not even at the level of vaporware", so in that post you said it wasn't even vaporware.

Exploreshootshare said:

Thx you very much for these comparisons! Seems like the RF 200-800mm is a very good option for the R5.

Click to expand...

It's my go-to lens for birding, but I keep my RF 100-500mm as it smaller and lighter and still has an edge if I am just doing BIF. The RF 200-800mm has been adopted by lots of us here as the extra native 300mm makes a real difference, and is good enough for most BIF. (For fast BIFs, I usually zoom out to 500mm anyway. I got some good flying Puffin shots with the RF 200-800mm on the R5 at 500mm, and they are not easy).

Celts88 said:

The thread is entitled "Canon RF 300-600mm" so was expecting discussion about that subject

and if you want to talk about the article, it said

"I have been told that in a recent retailer meeting that the lens was once again mentioned in a presentation, but that there is still no announcement date, other than “coming in 2026,"

Coming in 2026 isn't something that's "vaporware".

Click to expand...

Merriam-Webster

vaporware​

noun

: a computer-related product that has been widely advertised but has not and may never become available

Oxford Dictionary:
vapourware

/ˈveɪpəwɛː/
noun
informal•Computing
noun: vaporware

1. software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.
   
   
   
   And as it has not yet even been advertised, by Canon, only a hint at some unknown presentation, it's not even up to the confidence level of vaporware.

GMCPhotographics said:

What’s the point in me “educating myself” in the world of Sigma’s “not very sharp at the long end” zooms when they don’t fit on any current Canon body? So you want me to rent / buy a Sony camera, just to satisfy your curiosity? An anathema logic for sure.

Click to expand...

No need to rent... just read / watch online reviews and you will see that Sigma has come a long way. You do not seem to have any issues declaring the perfection of Canon lenses you do not have and of Canon lenses that haven't been announced yet. So I am confused by your reaction?

GMCPhotographics said:

This gear is dependable, sharp, AF is amazing and there is nothing in the 3rd party lens catalogue that can compete with these lenses from Canon. Even Canon’s finest from 15 years ago are vastly superior to the newest 3rd party offerings.

Trend setters marques lead the way and leave the others in their wake to play catch up, when they eventually catch up with where the trend setter once was, they only find that the trend setter has moved the game on again and are still far back down the road again in their wake.

Click to expand...

You wrote somewhere else that you are a Canon fanboy... I believe you
I do like Canon, but I do not agree with all of their decisions. And I run 2 systems so I know that other manufacturers have pros and cons as well.

Sigma lenses are amazing.

m4ndr4ke said:

This is not to say that Canon completely reinvented them, but the latest iterations of STM motors are more enjoyable to use. It really depends on the lens, though.

The EF 40mm was the first or second STM lens ever, its autofocus is pretty slow and somewhat noisy. There's still a few lenses that I'd say are about as noisy as the 40, such as the RF 50mm f/1.8 and the RF 35mm f/1.8, but some others are different.

There's not a lot of lenses with the newest STM motors yet, as far as I know it's just the RF 7-14mm L, 10-20mm f/4 L (I think), 16-28mm f/2.8, 28-70mm f/2.8 and the 45mm f/1.2, but they are provide a significantly better user experience, being quiet and smooth. Some of them are pretty fast, and that includes the 28-70mm f/2.8, which seems to be about as fast as the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 II.

Additionally, it's important to distinguish the two types of STM motors. Lenses driven by gear type STM motors tend to be a little noisier and jerky (RF 16, 28, 35, 50,...), while lead-screw tends to be quieter and smoother (RF 24, 85, 10-20, 7-14, 16-28, 28-70,...).
The 45mm uses a new gear-type STM, being an exception, that feels to me like a slow but modern USM, it's pleasant, it's smooth and quiet.

Gear type STM are the smallest motors, being the only choice to equip the smallest lenses.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the write up. Very interesting. I'll try more STM in a store, just to see how they perform.

Ring USM is, what, 35 years old, maybe more? It was superb back when the most important attributes of an AF motor were fast starting and fast, accurate stopping, plus quietness. No other brand could compete with Canon's Ring USM for stills on a 1990s SLR. It's kind of sad to see it go but there are so many better alternatives now.

I still have an EF 35-135 USM which is not the sharpest of lenses, but I have kept it as a souvenir of those days.

GMCPhotographics said:

With the advent of the new RF VCM L range, the new RF 45mm f1.2 STM and the new budget friendly and light weight silver ring f2.8 STM zooms...one wonders what 3rd party lenses could actually offer competitvely?

Click to expand...

While I'm pleased with the way the RF system has been developing, I have to recognise that third-parties could always add something, and it's not just low end products.

There are now some nice lenses available for RF, but third-parties have other very competitive offers as well, being Sigma, in my opinion, the biggest "threat".

Lenses like theirs 35mm f/1.4 and f/1.2, 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.2, 28-45mm f/1.8, 28-105mm f/2.8, and now the 200mm f/2 and 300-600mm f/4, plus their Contemporary primes, for instance.

It may be your understanding that Canon offers a few lenses that are somewhat similar to these Sigma offerings, and I get that, but the thing is: some of these cost half the price of Canon's.

Is the RF 24-105mm f/2.8 twice as good as the Sigma 28-105mm f/2.8? Debatable.
Is the RF 28-70mm f/2 twice as good as the Sigma 28-45mm f/1.8? Again, debatable.
Is the RF 50mm f/1.2 twice as good as the Sigma 50mm f/1.2? Same.
Lower end 20mm? We have none.

And a lot of their lenses (most) are very robust, weather sealed (all?) and feature linear motors and internal focusing mechanisms.

Don't be mistaken, the pressure is high for Canon, as these other lens manufacturers are showing off their value daily with other lens mounts, and Sigma is doing potentially enough to motivate changing systems for many photographers.

Also, keep in mind: Sigma is a third-party manufacturer in relation to Canon, Sony, Fuji and Nikon's systems, but they are a primary manufacturer for their own cameras and the L mount. Plus all the other brands.

GMCPhotographics said:

Hahaha....although this wasn't directed at me, I'll comment on my behalf:
It's a daily battle wth the AI mantra fed bot infused trolling we see here. However, I for one am a life long unpaid fanboy who belives in the Canon coolaid. As to others....well, they have their own voices.
Just the other day I was watching a youtube effluencer grinding on about the wonders some obsure Chinease manual focus prime lens, made from ancient and inferior optics. Only to put it on a R5ii and by pass it's amazing AF system...honestly??? At least when Canon decides to pander to this crowd, they punt out a fiscally orientated 45mm f1.2 lens which has an excellent AF system.

Click to expand...

I'm not a fanboy but I've been shooting only Canon since 1975. I just look at buyer-seller relationships as inherently adversarial.

Celts88 said:

"I have been told that in a recent retailer meeting that the lens was once again mentioned in a presentation, but that there is still no announcement date, other than “coming in 2026,"

Coming in 2026 isn't something that's "vaporware".

Click to expand...

You truncated that quoted sentence, which ended with, “…but we heard the same “coming in 2025” last year.”

2025 is over, so where is the lens? That’s vaporware, by definition.

I was joking about introducing you to the internet…but maybe it wasn’t a joke.

Bob Howland said:

Sometimes I wonder if you aren't paid by Canon to post here.

Click to expand...

Hahaha....although this wasn't directed at me, I'll comment on my behalf:
It's a daily battle wth the AI mantra fed bot infused trolling we see here. However, I for one am a life long unpaid fanboy who belives in the Canon coolaid. As to others....well, they have their own voices.
Just the other day I was watching a youtube effluencer grinding on about the wonders some obsure Chinease manual focus prime lens, made from ancient and inferior optics. Only to put it on a R5ii and by pass it's amazing AF system...honestly??? At least when Canon decides to pander to this crowd, they punt out a fiscally orientated 45mm f1.2 lens which has an excellent AF system.

AlanF said:

The 300-600 is not even at the level of vaporware - not announced and specs unknown - as written in the first few lines, so what do you expect?

Click to expand...

The thread is entitled "Canon RF 300-600mm" so was expecting discussion about that subject

and if you want to talk about the article, it said

"I have been told that in a recent retailer meeting that the lens was once again mentioned in a presentation, but that there is still no announcement date, other than “coming in 2026,"

Coming in 2026 isn't something that's "vaporware".

chik0240 said:

I am pretty sure it's canon blocking 3rd party FF RF lenses... with Sigma Art capabilities shown in the Sony E mount I can't believe they just not capable to port their art lineup to RF mount except some financial issues with Canon

Click to expand...

With the advent of the new RF VCM L range, the new RF 45mm f1.2 STM and the new budget friendly and light weight silver ring f2.8 STM zooms...one wonders what 3rd party lenses could actually offer competitvely? Canon have created their own closed loop eco-system and they are bashing out 6-8 lenses per year at all price points, rather effectively. For example, the UWA offerings. The RF 7-14L, RF 10-20L are both spectacular. The RF 14-35/f4 L and RF 15-35 f2.8 are also amazing top tier lenses. Then the RF 16-28 f2.8 is an amazingly light and great performer. At the budget end, the RF 16mm f2.8 is cheap, small and optically excellent. Heck even the super budget friendly RF 24-50 puts in a strong performance. I've not even mentioned the strong RF-s lenses.
What could the 3rd party lenses offer Canon users that aren't already well catered for at keep price points?

Celts88 said:

Came on the thread and seen it had jumped several pages so was excited to read up on what was happening with the 300-600mm only to be disappointed most of the comments had bugger all to do with it.

C'est La Vie

Click to expand...

The 300-600 is not even at the level of vaporware - not announced and specs unknown - as written in the first few lines, so what do you expect?

AlanF said:

I tested carefully the RF 200-800mm vs 100-500mm on the R5, and since then found the AF of the RF 200-800mm is significantly improved on the R5ii so it is fast and reliable at 800mm.

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/summary-of-my-rf-200-800mm-testing.43239/

and earlier threads, linked within.

Click to expand...

Thx you very much for these comparisons! Seems like the RF 200-800mm is a very good option for the R5.

AlanF said:

Is it too well trod for you?

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

@Celts88, meet the Internet. The Internet, meet @Celts88. It’s clear that you two are previously unacquainted.

Click to expand...

Came on the thread and seen it had jumped several pages so was excited to read up on what was happening with the 300-600mm only to be disappointed most of the comments had bugger all to do with it.

C'est La Vie

roby17269 said:

I know you like your old-ish lenses, but you should inform yourself about Sigma lenses... they've come a long way since a decade ago.
In any case, even if the lens was "horrendous" (which it isn't)... why would this be a problem? People can simply not buy it. It's called free market. Not that Canon shooters have the trouble of taking this horrendous risk...

Click to expand...

What’s the point in me “educating myself” in the world of Sigma’s “not very sharp at the long end” zooms when they don’t fit on any current Canon body? So you want me to rent / buy a Sony camera, just to satisfy your curiosity? An anathema logic for sure.

Meanwhile, I’m heading out with my delightful R6ii and R5, ef 400mm f2.8 LIS II and teleconverters and a ef 100-400mm f5.6 LIS II to shoot some sharp wildlife, because it’s gear I have and the gear I have chosen and selected over many years of shooting.
This gear is dependable, sharp, AF is amazing and there is nothing in the 3rd party lens catalogue that can compete with these lenses from Canon. Even Canon’s finest from 15 years ago are vastly superior to the newest 3rd party offerings.

Trend setters marques lead the way and leave the others in their wake to play catch up, when they eventually catch up with where the trend setter once was, they only find that the trend setter has moved the game on again and are still far back down the road again in their wake.