Price just was pushed out: £2,899
No dollar figure yet, assume the normal windage between GBP and USD
- A
No dollar figure yet, assume the normal windage between GBP and USD
- A
Upvote
0
Now that the prices have been previewed, we know that this lens is not particularly cheap. It will be interesting to see if this lens offers something that the others don't, beyond size and weight. The IQ, bokeh, etc. might be special enough on this lens to warrant a purchase. We'll find out soon whether the lens earns its L badge and warrants its high price tag, or whether the lens isn't quite attractive enough to convince EF lens owners to upgrade.I don’t understand Canon and those new lenses....
Why they don’t give us the possibility to separate the focus distance more.... with a 3rd option for under 10/15m?!?! I don’t get it... it is a L lens nothing cheap ... this should have standard features like the Sigma 150-600 and Sony 200-600 has...
my hope was strong for a really nice Tele zoom for RF but this... isn’t what I expected! A cheap copy of an 100-400 for RF, nothing special. NOTHING to beat the current 150-600/200-600 or 200-500 lenses of the other players!!
Price just was pushed out: £2,899
No dollar figure yet, assume the normal windage between GBP and USD
- A
mean->think? I'm guessing you mostly use Afrikaans and that Afrikaans is like German "was meinst Du" sounds like "mean" not "think"
I know, I have both in EF also. Need 70-200 for the 2.8 for indoor sports, but already had the 100-400 for the longer reach for wildlife/ birds. I will definitely be adapting for a while. I don't use the 70-200 enough to justify that purchase anytime soon with high school sports. The 100-500 probably has my name on it, but I'm not in a rush, so I can wait a little while and catch it on a price drop of second hand if reviews are good (which I expect.)I have both EF version but impractical to travel with both.
I know, I have both in EF also. Need 70-200 for the 2.8 for indoor sports, but already had the 100-400 for the longer reach for wildlife/ birds. I will definitely be adapting for a while. I don't use the 70-200 enough to justify that purchase anytime soon with high school sports. The 100-500 probably has my name on it, but I'm not in a rush, so I can wait a little while and catch it on a price drop of second hand if reviews are good (which I expect.)
I would not expect the RF 2.0 extender to work with any EF lenses. I believe it will only work with RF lenses, specifically the 100-500, 600 f/11, and 800 f/11.I am in the same boat. I use the 70-200 F2.8 for portrait and like you, I don’t use it a lot.
I have the R and am planning to get the R5 if Canon fixes the EVF lag and blackout.
I will also get the RF 2.0 extender if the image quality is good and compatible with the EF100-400. I will eventually replace it with the RF100-500 if the image quality is as good or better than the EF100-400, and the price has come down.
I would not expect the RF 2.0 extender to work with any EF lenses. I believe it will only work with RF lenses, specifically the 100-500, 600 f/11, and 800 f/11.
First Canon lens to have dual nano USM to drive the focusing group.
Those bar charts presumably misrepresent the facts because the f number presumably don't jump at the transitions but is a continuous function. Perhaps the bars represent "at least" those stated numbers.