Canon RF 300-600mm f/5.6L IS USM: What to Expect and When It Might Land

[Canon Rumors]

As we published last month, the long-rumored Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM appears to have been shelved. In its place, sources tell us, Canon is working on a new super-telephoto: the RF 300-600mm f/5.6L IS USM — a professional-grade zoom designed for wildlife and sports photographers who want the very best.

Read The Full Article

 

[Kbow_photo]

Meh. 5.6 is too slow for what I need. I was really hoping for the 200-500 F/4

 

[zebratt]

Hmmm Canon 300 - 600mm f/5.6 ..... @ $8K to $10K.
Would this be a Sigma 300-600 f/4 killer?

Let's see how this goes.

 

[GAOP]

The RF 300-600mm is the successor to the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM.

Not really. For indoor sports, going from all f2.8 glass to a f4 to get a zoom lens longer than 200mm was an acceptable compromise. Jumping two full stops to f5.6 and loosing the 200-300 range brings too many additional trade offs. If the 200-500 f4 is dead, the 100-300 becomes the 200-400's true successor.

 

[athw]

An RF 300–600mm f/4, even with a high price tag, would have been a no-brainer for me and I would have ordered it without hesitation. However, an f/5.6 aperture is a significant drawback in my eyes. I had waited in vain for years for an RF 200–500mm f/4 as a replacement for my EF 200–400mm f/4. A few months ago, I sold both my EF 300mm f/2.8 II and EF 200–400mm f/4, and replaced them with the RF 100–300mm f/2.8 paired with the 1.4x extender. This is an outstanding lens that easily covers the capabilities of my previous two and offers remarkable versatility. With the extender, it effectively becomes a 140–420mm f/4 with excellent image quality – making a 200–500mm f/4 almost redundant. It's unfortunate that Canon doesn't have a fast 300–600mm f/4 in the pipeline, as it would be a phenomenal complement to the 100–300mm f/2.8.

 

[Loswr]

When I put the RF 2x behind my RF 100-300/2.8, I get a 200-600mm f/5.6 so for me, not much interest in this lens. That combo is $10K, which is where I'd expect this lens to come (and that's not factoring in US price increases from tariffs).

Hoping for a new 600/4 with a built-in 1.4x TC.

 

[Deleted member 395378]

But the Sigma is an f/4, and for the price of a Canon 300-600 f/5.6 —as Fred says— if you need a long telephoto kit you can get an A1 and the Sigma 300-600 f/4 and call it a day, and the image quality coming out from the Sigma is excellent. Plus you can get the unique Sony 50-150 f/2. For me is a no brainer.

 

[EricN]

 

[arbitrage]

This would be an interesting lens for my bird photography. Would really depend on size, weight and cost. I'm currently doing a lot of shooting at 600 f/5.6 in the form of my Sony 300GM and 2xTC. But I'm also doing a good amount of shooting at 300/2.8 and 420/4. Two things you won't be able to do with a fixed f/5.6 from 300-600. After owning the 300GM for just over a year now I checked my LR catalogue and found I used it at 600 50% of the time and then ~25% for each of the two shorter focal lengths.
This lens would have a front element approximately the same size as the 100-300/2.8. The 100-300/2.8 is an overly heavy and expensive lens for what it is. I would really hope Canon could reduce the weight and the cost of a 300-600/5.6 but maybe not.
I have a Test Drive of 100-300/2.8 with both RF TCs and the R1 coming next week from CPS Canada through my Platinum membership. I'm really interested to see if it can take the 2xTC as well as the Sony 300GM does. I'm also excited to try out the R1.
I really like Canon MILCs and owned the R5 and have shot the R5II briefly. But I just haven't found any lenses to really tempt me to invest in the system again. The 100-300 is the only one that has me intrigued so that is why I'm going to test it out.
I'll be watching with interest if this 300-600 comes to fruition. But I would have been more interested in the previously rumoured 200-500 f/4 with TC.

 

[pierceography]

When I put the RF 2x behind my RF 100-300/2.8, I get a 200-600mm f/5.6 so for me, not much interest in this lens. That combo is $10K, which is where I'd expect this lens to come (and that's not factoring in US price increases from tariffs).

Hoping for a new 600/4 with a built-in 1.4x TC.

^^ Pretty much this ^^

The 300-600mm should have an IQ advantage over the 100-300mm + 2x TC, but my wallet will have a $10k advantage. My use cases for longer glass are youth sports, which are split between indoors and outdoors. f/5.6 is fine for outdoor field sports, but it's simply too slow for indoor sports. That's a non-starter for a $10k lens for me.

I'll also add that this seems like a disappointing response to the Sigma 300-600mm f/4. Sure, the Canon will probably be lighter, but $4k more expensive AND losing a stop of light? C'mon, Canon... Just open up the RF mount already.

Until then, I guess I'll just hold out hope for a fully RF 600mm f/4 and/or a longer f/2 zoom.

 

[docsmith]

Booo !!!! Booo!!!!

(yes, that is a Princess Bride reference)

This is mostly regarding the rumor that the RF 200-500 f/4 is shelved. I am one of the holdouts for the RF 200-500 f/4. Bit of a dream lens for me. If the rumor is correct and it is shelved, then I suspect the culprit is price point. That Canon would have wanted to sell it for ~>$15,000, assessed the market and decided that enough photographers are not willing to pay that much. I get the impression that the RF 800 and RF 1200 are not big sellers (they are often in stock in the refurbished store, which is uncommon for Big White lenses).

As for the RF 300-600 f/5.6, I'll wait and see, but my second reaction is similar to my first, it seems to me that it needs to do something more. An extra 100 mm on either end? An f/4 aperture? World's fastest AF? Built in TC? Just to have 600 mm f/5.6 you'll need a similar front element to the RF 100-300, so you can see how they would be priced similarly. But the RF 100-300 f/2.8 is more versatile, and I hear the AF with a 2x TC is very good. But, maybe.

 

[yankiefrankie]

This lens intrigues me as well as puzzles me. On one hand I think it would go well with my 100-300 when shooting baseball/softball, but I couldn't really justify the price if it is in the 10K range. Also, I don't know how I would use it, as I shoot with two R52s with the 100-300 and 24-105 2.8. 300mm is too short to get the outfield from around home plate (where this lens would be useful), but I can't do without the 24-100mm range (dugout, batters, etc). I'm not going to start to shoot with three cameras, so I guess I'm stuck until the mythical 1-1.4-2x teleconverter appears.

With problems like these, I don't know how I manage to get myself out of bed in the morning....

 

[candyman]

As for the RF 300-600 f/5.6, I'll wait and see, but my second reaction is similar to my first, it seems to me that it needs to do something more.

I'm not familiar with the physical possibilities and limitations of this focal length. but maybe Canon can do something about the minimum focus distance? The Sigma has: 280(W)-450(T)cm / 110.3(W)-177.2(T)

Edit: Canon will definitely do something about the weight. Especially since it is f5.6. The Sigma weighs L-Mount：3,985g / 140.6oz. Sony E-mount：3,970g / 140.0oz. So there is definitely room for improvement here.

 

[Loswr]

...so I guess I'm stuck until the mythical 1-1.4-2x teleconverter appears.

I think you'll have a shorter wait for a 6" portable wormhole that lets you push your 24-105/2.8 in from behind home plate and the front of the lens sticks out behind second base.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

But the Sigma is an f/4, and for the price of a Canon 300-600 f/5.6 —as Fred says— if you need a long telephoto kit you can get an A1 and the Sigma 300-600 f/4 and call it a day, and the image quality coming out from the Sigma is excellent. Plus you can get the unique Sony 50-150 f/2. For me is a no brainer.

There is also a huge difference between top tier Canon AF and IS and Sigma's best efforts. It's usually night and day in a comparison.

 

[qz55]

300-600mm f5.6 for 10k ? No way. Sony 200-600 f6.3 is under 2k, and that's probably one of the best lens of the market in this category, and -in my opinion- is closer in terms of use than the brand new sigma 300-600...

 

[domo_p1000]

My worry is that the launch of a 300-600mm f/5.6 might guarantee that Canon never opens up the RF mount for the Sigma 300-600mm f/4.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

Although I am definitely not in the market for such a lens, I don't know if it would trigger a lot of interest. Losing one stop and 100mm on the wide for gaining 100mm on the long end (which easily could be achieved by cropping) really doesn't sound like a good trade-off on paper. Of course, we don't have all the facts. Maybe, the lens is super, super light weight. Actually, in order to be compelling it kind of has to be.

Paring the lens with the RF 100-300mm makes perfect sense, but shouldn't the new lens go a bit further than 600mm then? The 400-800mm zoom range sounds much more compelling, although one probably can't compare this lens to a real super tele lens because of the built, feature, sizes etc, absence of constant aperture etc.

If this lens comes to fruition with the rumored specs/ price, I wouldn't be surprised if more people choose Nikon or Sony. But Canon most of the times knows what they're doing, I´ll just sit, wait and then read and watch curiously how it turns out.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

When I put the RF 2x behind my RF 100-300/2.8, I get a 200-600mm f/5.6 so for me, not much interest in this lens.

I didn´t even think about that. Now, the lens makes even less sense to me. Hmmm, with the 2x extender one gets a lot wider and is more flexible. And if the ominous new extender are really coming, it could even take away the hassle of taking of/ putting on the extender to switch the focal length.

 

[yankiefrankie]

I think you'll have a shorter wait for a 6" portable wormhole that lets you push your 24-105/2.8 in from behind home plate and the front of the lens sticks out behind second base.

My luck the portable wormhole will only be available on L mount and Sony mounts.