RF 300mm f2.8 on the horizon?

[Mikehit]

The EF 300mm f2.8 was a superb option for wildlife - relatively compact with the chance of using teleconverters to give up to 600mm f5.6.
The only RF option is the 100-300 f2.8 which is heavy and damned expensive. Are there any murmurs of Canon making more RF tele-primes or is it all high quality zoom now?

 

[m4ndr4ke]

is it all high quality zoom now?

The 300 is the only prime lens that has been replaced with a zoom, so far.
There’s 135, 400, 600, 800 and 1200mm primes.
There’s no 200mm yet, but that wasn’t a 2.8 either, so it just hasn’t been replaced yet.

The 100-300 weights about 300 grams more than the EF 300mm f/2.8 IS II without adapter, and it can take teleconverters as well.

Sure, it costs a big chunk of money, but it delivers. I doubt they’ll make a fixed 300mm f/2.8 anytime soon.

 

[Mikehit]

The 300 is the only prime lens that has been replaced with a zoom, so far.
There’s 135, 400, 600, 800 and 1200mm primes.
There’s no 200mm yet, but that wasn’t a 2.8 either, so it just hasn’t been replaced yet.

The 100-300 weights about 300 grams more than the EF 300mm f/2.8 IS II without adapter, and it can take teleconverters as well.

Sure, it costs a big chunk of money, but it delivers. I doubt they’ll make a fixed 300mm f/2.8 anytime soon.

Thank you. When you can't afford two of the classic workhorses (they are also missing an RF version of the 500mm f4) whether it delivers is a moot point. I am moving back from Olympus to FF, and it is these gaps in their lens line-ups that is making me compare adapting EF lenses or stump up the extra and go to Sony. But I really like Canon.
Lenses used to be Canon's strong point now, not so much...they seem to be majoring on keeping their pro-base happy more than looking at what the wider customers think.

 

[P-visie]

Lenses used to be Canon's strong point now, not so much...they seem to be majoring on keeping their pro-base happy more than looking at what the wider customers think.

The price of the EF 300mm f2.8 II was between 6000 and 6500€ (including VAT). IMO that is not a price for ‘the wider customers’.

Canon has a range of affordable primes and zoomlenses (from 16mm to 800mm). If you want a 300mm but cannot, or do not want to, spend 9500$/ 12000€, Canon has the RF 200-800mm (no need for extenders) or the RF 100-500mm, both are excellent lenses. Or wait until the rumored RF300-600mm is released. The rumored price is around 6500-7000$ if the rumors are correct, this zoom is f4 for 300mm and f5.6 for 500mm and 600mm.

 

[Mikehit]

The price of the EF 300mm f2.8 II was between 6000 and 6500€ (including VAT). IMO that is not a price for ‘the wider customers’.

Canon has a range of affordable primes and zoomlenses (from 16mm to 800mm). If you want a 300mm but cannot, or do not want to, spend 9500$/ 12000€, Canon has the RF 200-800mm (no need for extenders) or the RF 100-500mm, both are excellent lenses. Or wait until the rumored RF300-600mm is released. The rumored price is around 6500-7000$ if the rumors are correct, this zoom is f4 for 300mm and f5.6 for 500mm and 600mm.

I have the 100-500 and the option of f2.8 is what makes the 300mm so attractive. I wonder what the weight of the 300-600 would be....I look with envy at the Sony 300mm f2.8 coming in at under 1.5kg.

 

[P-visie]

I have the 100-500 and the option of f2.8 is what makes the 300mm so attractive. I wonder what the weight of the 300-600 would be....I look with envy at the Sony 300mm f2.8 coming in at under 1.5kg.

I guess the RF 300-600mm will weigh 10-15% more than the RF 100-300mm.

 

[Planterz]

The Sony 300mm f2.8 GM is a relatively popular lens. It's light enough for hand holding (at least much moreso than the 400mm). From what I've read it works great with the 1.4x teleconvertor and still holds up well with the 2x TC, giving you a much lighter 600mm than the 200-600mm and of course way lighter than the 600mm f4. It's a long way past "inexpensive", but it's still thousands less than the 400mm f2.8 and 600mm f4. IMO the real competition for the 300mm f2.8 is the Sigma 500mm f5.6, which is an incredible lens for the price, but has the typical Sony limitations of 15fps and no TC.

I think Canon would do well to offer something like this as well. The 100-300mm is an incredible feat of engineering, but it's a chonk. Or take a page out of Nikon and Sigma's book and make hand holdable "affordable" primes like the 500mm f5.6 or the Nikkor 400mm f4.5 and 600mm f6.3.

 

[P-visie]

I think Canon would do well to offer something like this as well. The 100-300mm is an incredible feat of engineering, but it's a chonk. Or take a page out of Nikon and Sigma's book and make hand holdable "affordable" primes like the 500mm f5.6 or the Nikkor 400mm f4.5 and 600mm f6.3.

Canon’s RF 300-600mm is probably Canon’s answer to Nikon’s PF tele telelenses.

 

[AlanF]

Canon’s RF 300-600mm is probably Canon’s answer to Nikon’s PF tele telelenses.

For some maybe, but it would weigh more than a kg greater than the Z 600mm f/6.3, which weighs in at about the same as the RF 100-500mm.

 

[phils.pix]

Why not get a used EF 300 f/2.8 L Mk. II? You can get them between 2.800 - 3.500€. It's still quite ligthweight and compact and works great with the 1.4x and 2.0x Extenders, without sacrificing much image quality. It works stellar on the R Cameras.

 

[SvO2]

Why not get a used EF 300 f/2.8 L Mk. II? You can get them between 2.800 - 3.500€. It's still quite ligthweight and compact and works great with the 1.4x and 2.0x Extenders, without sacrificing much image quality. It works stellar on the R Cameras.

I don’t know if I’d consider it particularly light weight or compact. Sony’s weighs a full kg less. I’m sure Canon could make something similar if they wanted.

 

[padam]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com