neuroanatomist said:

Try going back and looking at your post:

You made a specific point about the 300-600 not being vaporware using an incomplete quote to support that point, when the full quote supports the opposite conclusion.

You want to rewrite history now, but that’s hard to do when your own words are right there for all to see. The internet, remember?

Of course, you could have chosen to quote and respond to the part of my reply that was about the 300-600, since you seem so bent out of shape that the thread veered away from that topic. But no, you ignored that on-topic bit and chose instead to try vainly to defend your behavior, while perpetuating the tangential path of this thread. So…well done?

Click to expand...

Mate you've really got a problem, whatever floats your boat go for your life, it must be so satisfying being as perfect as you.

I've separated the different parts of several posts into different replies (see post above about me damaging my 200-800) and my next post was going to be about your and DocInfoSci's comments regarding the 300-600, but trying to talk reason with yourself is like getting blood out of a stone.

You're right, I'm wrong, happy now

AlanF said:

Did the 200-800 break in two?

Click to expand...

DocInfoSci said:

That sucks. Sorry to hear of it. Did it break due to an appropriate circumstance, like a bear smacked it? Or something surprising, like you put it in a backpack and then it spontaneously cleaved in two? I ask because one scenario is entertaining and the otehr is actually informative to people considering the lens.

Click to expand...

Nothing as drastic as snapping in two, l fell in our pool and got sand into it and seems to be stuck on 400mm focal length, it was a stupid thing by me that caused it.

We live about 500m from the coast and being in the West the Sun always sets on the Ocean. I was trying to get some photos from our backyard but couldn't quite get high enough to see the clouds and sun so got a small ladder and climbed on that to get a better shot. On my tiptoes I lost balance and fell backwards into the edge of our pool (our pool has a beach area that goes from zero to about 2 feet deep). I landed in this area with a thud on the back of my head and was trying to stop my R1 and 200-800 crashing into the floor.

The R1 kept making this wiring sound and keep turning on and off, but I didn't have time to look at it as I had a big gash on the side of my face (where I hit the ladder) and had a bloody big lump on the back of my head. Later I turned the R1 off and next day it was doing the same (oh dear, well actually words a lot stronger than that ), this time I took out the battery, blown in the space and left the camera alone for the next day. Luckily, I hope, the R1 seems to be working just fine now and the same battery is ok, I'll still send it off to be looked at but here in Perth not much choice for Canon camera repairs so will need to go to Sydney. I don't think I bumped the R1 (was more worried about the lens and camera than my head) and think it just got some water in the battery compartment.

I can live with the 200-800 needing fixed or replaced, but will be gutted if there's an ongoing issue with the R1.

Celts88 said:

You're looking way to much into my post, I had to go back and look at the article to see what you were talking about. My post was originally about there being multiple pages in. a row that had zero to do with the 300-600 lens and was making a joke about changing the thread title.

If it supports your conspiracy theory that I was trying to be "unethical" go ahead, but it was just a copy of a comment from an article and I had zero inclination to divert it's meaning

Click to expand...

Try going back and looking at your post:

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...

You made a specific point about the 300-600 not being vaporware using an incomplete quote to support that point, when the full quote supports the opposite conclusion.

You want to rewrite history now, but that’s hard to do when your own words are right there for all to see. The internet, remember?

Of course, you could have chosen to quote and respond to the part of my reply that was about the 300-600, since you seem so bent out of shape that the thread veered away from that topic. But no, you ignored that on-topic bit and chose instead to try vainly to defend your behavior, while perpetuating the tangential path of this thread. So…well done?

neuroanatomist said:

"You are a very ethical person."
"You are a very ethical person, or so I would have thought before you omitted the end of a quote to change its meaning."

See what I did there?

Click to expand...

You're looking way to much into my post, I had to go back and look at the article to see what you were talking about. My post was originally about there being multiple pages in. a row that had zero to do with the 300-600 lens and was making a joke about changing the thread title.

If it supports your conspiracy theory that I was trying to be "unethical" go ahead, but it was just a copy of a comment from an article and I had zero inclination to divert it's meaning

Groundhog said:

Given that there already is the 28mm pancake lens for RF there is little hope for a pancake in a similar range as RF-S I guess.
28mm is too long for my personal taste so I would have prefered a 24mm pancake as well.

Click to expand...

I should clarify: I'd like an RF-S pancake lens equivalent to a 24, 28 or 35mm FF.

tad1111 said:

I would like to see them make an RF-S 22mm or 24mm pancake. I had the EF-S 24mm but sold it as I moved away from adapted lenses. But now I wish I would have kept it.

Click to expand...

Count me in on this as well. I'd like an RF-S pancake lens equivalent to a 24, 28 or 35mm FF.

But as people have hinted, presumably each named tech has been improved over time, even if it has the same name?

A Little Grebe was trying to swallow a fish that was too large. It bit off its head, a gull swooped to steal the fish, and the Grebe dived faster than a U-boat (R5ii + RF 200-800mm).

DocInfoSci said:

I am feeling much better at this point, and my colleague's team is being taken care of as best as the situation permits.

Click to expand...

Glad to hear that. RIFs are never fun.

My R5, RF to EF adapter, EF 1.4x TC, and EF 600mm f/4 L IS III have had no issues together, but I had that intermittent problem with the same camera, adapter, EF 100mm f/2.8 L IS macro, and a 25mm extension tube.

Cleaning did not correct it, but there was a small bit of flex with all of those connections that revealed itself occasionally.
I replaced the third party extension tube with a Canon one and the problem disappeared.

I noticed the equipment details on your recent nuthatch portrait and thought you had secretly acquired the RF 600 f/4L and was testing it out. Since it now appears that info has been revised, I guess a head to head comparison with your 600mm EF Mark II won't be forthcoming.

I hope you solve the issue and update us as to the cause.

It's rough. Photographers will have nothing left to buy.

Schwetzingen Garden Mosque in the Schwetzingen Palace and gardens

One of my absolute favorite places in the world! The garden is really beautiful and I got these nice (imo) pics there.


Pic 1

All of this plus a brief scan of my earliest engagement in this thread reminds me, I provided an explanation but never did apologize for my snappy mood at @neuroanatomist's attempt at humour.

In earnest spirit, @neuroanatomist — I apologize for my lack of tolerance and willingness to explore the greater intent of the conversation. I am feeling much better at this point, and my colleague's team is being taken care of as best as the situation permits.

Thanks, Click!

Celts88 said:

"unethical behavior"
Are you for real!!!

Click to expand...

"You are a very ethical person."
"You are a very ethical person, or so I would have thought before you omitted the end of a quote to change its meaning."

See what I did there?

Regardless, the 300-600mm might or might not come. It might be f/5.6, it might be f/4-5.6. There was going to be a 200-500mm f/4, with prototypes in the wild and rumored announcement dates. But then...there wasn't, and instead it was going to be a 300-600mm. In 2025. But then there wasn't. And now...in 2026.

I hope there is a 300-600/5.6, and your statement that you want something 'that's a bit more affordable than the current RF 600 f/4' may be reasonable as such a lens will likely be priced in between the 100-300/2.8 at $10.5K (USD) and the 600/4 at $14.5K. So if 'a bit more affordable' to you means a couple of thousand dollars cheaper, well and good. If you're hoping for a 300-600/5.6 costing <$10K USD, I suspect you're headed for disappointment even if the lens does get launched.

GMCPhotographics said:

Which lenses are you saying that I am declaring specifically? I've used most of the EF great whites extensively and choose a EF 400mm f2.8 LIS II for size, weight (it's a lot smaller and lighter than a 600/f4), it has better min focus distance and I like to use mine with a 1.4 and 2X tc's to get an effective 600/f4 and 800/5.6. The 600/f4 get the advantage of an effective 1200mm f8 when combined with a 2x TC and yes it's sharp on a R5.

Click to expand...

I used to have the EF 200 2 (for fashion mostly) and sold it to finance the move to MF. I miss that one dearly. I have rented (not owned) the 400 2.8 II for a safari in South Africa and loved it but could never justify buying a big white given how rarely I do wildlife and I don't do sports.

GMCPhotographics said:

I've handled and used the mkIII versions (which are the same opically as the RF version) and they great but the mkIII 400/2.8 isn't as sharp with a 1.4x and 2x as the mkII.
As to claiming the perfection of gear that is currently unrealeasted....maybe you have me confised with some other guy.

Click to expand...

Well these are your words - I haven't searched long past that

I can only imagine the reach this RF 300-600mm f5.6 will have on the rumoured R7II. An effective 500-1000mm! Lets assume this lens will be tack sharp wide open

Click to expand...

So you are happy to assume that about an unannounced Canon lens, as well as assuming that recent Sigma offerings are sub par?

GMCPhotographics said:

Here's my gear list: Gear
Here's my website: GMCPhotographics which I occasionally update. I used to have a fair bit of my work here on this site, but I removed it all when the site was about to close down and I've not had the time to re-post it yet.
I've been a Canon user since I was 15 when I bought my first SLR, an AV1 on the old FD mount. I bought it so I could use my Dad's lenses (he had an AE-1 programme). I've stayed with the brand my whole life and never needed anyother brand. I loved the EF mount and moved to Digital from film with the 300D. I rapidly jumped to full frame as soon as the EOS 5D was available. I've only recently moved to MILC in the last few years and haven't yet invested in RF glass.

Click to expand...

I cannot access your web sites from work, sorry. I can't even access my own portfolio from the office (in my signature, together with the list of my current gear)
I have listed on dpreview my old (and sold) gear and the list is getting too long, I think I may delete it out of shame thinking about all the money I've spent
Personally, I have started with the 350D and as you moved to FF as soon as the 5D become available - still have fond memories of the old rascal. But in 2017 I branched out to medium format for fashion photography. I use Canon for travel, wildlife and family stuff now, and Hasselblad for fashion... as well as drones occasionally.

GMCPhotographics said:

Lenses I am considering upgrading this year are all in the Canon portfolio, RF10-20mm f4L, RF85mm f1.2L and RF100-500mm F7.1L and i don't see any 3rd party matching any of these fine optics.

Click to expand...

I have all 3 and they are great in their own different ways, especially my favorite, the 85 1.2... Sigma is supposed to release a 85 1.2 soon, but obviously it's academic since Canon does not allow 3rd party FF AF lenses for RF. And Sigma has a 35 1.2 which Canon has not deemed to release yet, in their infinite wisdom

Celts88 said:

Started out with the R6mkII, then to the R3, and just recently to the R1 (got a great deal on a 3 month old one). I had the old EF 800mm f/5.6 but was getting too much for me so I sold that just recently (I've got arthritis in one of my wrists). I've got the RF 100-500, and RF 200-800, but would love Canon to come out with an 'L' lens in the 600m range that's a bit more affordable than the current RF 600 f/4 (someone here in Perth has the RF 800 f/5.6, lucky bugger).

Click to expand...

Nice! Dream great white. The 500 f/4 was my dream Great White (I only buy lenses once I can justify with meaningful use, so waiting on a trip), but tbh the zooms have become effectively prime like aside from light gathering anyhow.

Celts88 said:

Had an accident with the RF 200-800 the other week and will need repaired, but if the RF 300-600mm came out sometime in 2026 I'd be happy to wait for that and put the money towards that.

Click to expand...

That sucks. Sorry to hear of it. Did it break due to an appropriate circumstance, like a bear smacked it? Or something surprising, like you put it in a backpack and then it spontaneously cleaved in two? I ask because one scenario is entertaining and the otehr is actually informative to people considering the lens.

I was considering that lens, but I read it fogs in persistent humidity (I'm in the Pacific Northwest) and on a personal trial at the local store I found the focus ring is too small for my taste (my thumb skids on the barrel). As awesome as Canon's AF capabilities are, dim light and moving grass still thwart on occasion for my R6. Otherwise seems like a great lens and I could probably get over the focus ring in real world use.

Celts88 said:

I'm just an amateur retired old guy who enjoys being out in the outdoors seeing all the beauty that nature gives us.

Click to expand...

I'm mostly a hobbyist myself, albeit very fortunate. I'm a tech guy, but I also live on a hobby farm acreage and live amongst farmers and ranchers. Lots of domesticated and semi-domesticated life and visual obstacles that make up parts of the cool shots. I also travel as work requires or opportunity permits.

Celts88 said:

I don't worry about pixel peeping so doesn't need to be thee sharpest lens out, but a zoom lens does give more options for use than a straight prime (appreciate primes will still give the best image quality).

Click to expand...

I find that I like primes overall for their zen (just frame, tweak, and shoot) but zooms are more practical in many situations or travel. No doubt the 100-300 and 300-600 would make killer safari lenses (or any dustbin / spattering-wet situation).

Celts88 said:

Yes, wishful thinking on my part hoping the 300-600 will come out soon, but if it's by the end of the year that would be fantastic. I don't expect it to be priced like the 200-800, but in between that and the long primes would be a nice bonus (up to USD$5k would be great, but realistically will be more likely from $7k upwards).

Click to expand...

I miss the earlier EF ethos of the 300mm f/4 and 400mm f/5.6. I still have my 300mm f/4 IS, which is fantastic for what it is, especially on modern systems. Would love to see those or equivalents come to the RF line within a $4.5k CAD limit. Perhaps a VCM-inspired tele range, like a 300 f/4, 400 f/5.6, and 500 f/8 and TC compatibility (apertures allowing for cost control in the context of modern ISO capability). But in nice barrels, like the 300mm f/4 with solid focus rings and controls — mini Great Whites (dog sharks) for the fortunate hobbyists. I think that the 600 f/11 and 800 f/11 are innovative for what they are, but I think that the allowance for full aperture control and weather protected are killer features. The original EFs weren't full sealed, but it wouldn't have taken much to finish the job since the 300 is fully internally sealed (no fogging).

Celts88 said:

Started out with the R6mkII, then to the R3, and just recently to the R1 (got a great deal on a 3 month old one). I had the old EF 800mm f/5.6 but was getting too much for me so I sold that just recently (I've got arthritis in one of my wrists). I've got the RF 100-500, and RF 200-800, but would love Canon to come out with an 'L' lens in the 600m range that's a bit more affordable than the current RF 600 f/4 (someone here in Perth has the RF 800 f/5.6, lucky bugger).

Had an accident with the RF 200-800 the other week and will need repaired, but if the RF 300-600mm came out sometime in 2026 I'd be happy to wait for that and put the money towards that.

I'm just an amateur retired old guy who enjoys being out in the outdoors seeing all the beauty that nature gives us. I don't worry about pixel peeping so doesn't need to be thee sharpest lens out, but a zoom lens does give more options for use than a straight prime (appreciate primes will still give the best image quality).

Yes, wishful thinking on my part hoping the 300-600 will come out soon, but if it's by the end of the year that would be fantastic. I don't expect it to be priced like the 200-800, but in between that and the long primes would be a nice bonus (up to USD$5k would be great, but realistically will be more likely from $7k upwards).

Click to expand...

Did the 200-800 break in two?

I really like your series. Well done, danfaz.

Dang, embarrassed to follow-up after antonn's post, but what the hey.
This Osprey was a bit far away at Mono Lake, CA.
Makes for some decent environmental BIFs at least.

DocInfoSci said:

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?

Click to expand...

Started out with the R6mkII, then to the R3, and just recently to the R1 (got a great deal on a 3 month old one). I had the old EF 800mm f/5.6 but was getting too much for me so I sold that just recently (I've got arthritis in one of my wrists). I've got the RF 100-500, and RF 200-800, but would love Canon to come out with an 'L' lens in the 600m range that's a bit more affordable than the current RF 600 f/4 (someone here in Perth has the RF 800 f/5.6, lucky bugger).

Had an accident with the RF 200-800 the other week and will need repaired, but if the RF 300-600mm came out sometime in 2026 I'd be happy to wait for that and put the money towards that.

I'm just an amateur retired old guy who enjoys being out in the outdoors seeing all the beauty that nature gives us. I don't worry about pixel peeping so doesn't need to be thee sharpest lens out, but a zoom lens does give more options for use than a straight prime (appreciate primes will still give the best image quality).

Yes, wishful thinking on my part hoping the 300-600 will come out soon, but if it's by the end of the year that would be fantastic. I don't expect it to be priced like the 200-800, but in between that and the long primes would be a nice bonus (up to USD$5k would be great, but realistically will be more likely from $7k upwards).

roby17269 said:

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?

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.

Click to expand...

Which lenses are you saying that I am declaring specifically? I've used most of the EF great whites extensively and choose a EF 400mm f2.8 LIS II for size, weight (it's a lot smaller and lighter than a 600/f4), it has better min focus distance and I like to use mine with a 1.4 and 2X tc's to get an effective 600/f4 and 800/5.6. The 600/f4 get the advantage of an effective 1200mm f8 when combined with a 2x TC and yes it's sharp on a R5.
I've handled and used the mkIII versions (which are the same opically as the RF version) and they great but the mkIII 400/2.8 isn't as sharp with a 1.4x and 2x as the mkII.
As to claiming the perfection of gear that is currently unrealeasted....maybe you have me confised with some other guy.
Here's my gear list: Gear
Here's my website: GMCPhotographics which I occasionally update. I used to have a fair bit of my work here on this site, but I removed it all when the site was about to close down and I've not had the time to re-post it yet.
I've been a Canon user since I was 15 when I bought my first SLR, an AV1 on the old FD mount. I bought it so I could use my Dad's lenses (he had an AE-1 programme). I've stayed with the brand my whole life and never needed anyother brand. I loved the EF mount and moved to Digital from film with the 300D. I rapidly jumped to full frame as soon as the EOS 5D was available. I've only recently moved to MILC in the last few years and haven't yet invested in RF glass.
Lenses I am considering upgrading this year are all in the Canon portfolio, RF10-20mm f4L, RF85mm f1.2L and RF100-500mm F7.1L and i don't see any 3rd party matching any of these fine optics.

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