Can't see how the R mount makes much difference for long telephotos as the different flange distance isn't very significant on these huge lenses .I thought so too, until I read this: "The EF 400mm F2.8L IS III USM and EF 600mm F4L IS III USM, which we released in 2018, were manufactured to an extremely high level of perfection in order to realize high image quality, light weight and high-performance IS. However, we did not develop these lenses with the intention of making them 'dual-mount.'"
Source: Go Tokura, Chief Executive, Image Communication Business Operations at Canon. https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...devices-supporting-8k-is-a-very-high-priority
According to Canon, they have yet to release any of their high quality supertelephoto primes designed from the ground up for RF. I, for one, am really looking forward to seeing what they come up with. In the meantime, the RF 400 and RF 600 are "optical masterpieces" as you say.
If Canon did a clean sheet new design of the 400 f/2.8 and 600 f/4 for the R mount what would be different ?
The extra electrical contacts in the R mount would offer more options for the electronics though.
I hope Canon doesn't make any new RF telephoto zooms or primes which don't work properly with extenders like the RF100-500 (sorry only works at 300mm +) fiasco
Upvote
0