Canon Continues to Develop Supertelephoto Zoom

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS 1D MK II
Jul 20, 2010
7,748
380
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
HTML:
<p>Back in 2016 we had heard a few times that <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?s=supertelephoto+zoom">Canon would be introducing a new supertelephoto zoom</a>, something like an EF 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS. This is the type of lens segment that is dominated by Sigma and Tamron, as Canon’s longest “affordable” zoom is the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II.</p>
<p>Since the start of 2017, all has been quiet in regards to such a lens. Recently we’ve started to hear about the development progress of a new supertelephoto zoom from Canon.</p>
<p>While the lens won’t be coming in 2017, we’re told there’s a good chance it will come in the first half of 2018. We’re also told that Canon seems to have a goal to give any new lens some kind of a unique feature over the competition. What that could be for a supertelephoto zoom is anyones guest, but recent history does show some innovation in the lens department from Canon.</p>
<p>We have seen such <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/">optical formula patents</a> from as far back as 2015, but since the demise of the patent hunter site Egami, we haven’t seen anything more.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
 

reczey

I'm New Here
Aug 10, 2013
9
0
With the 1.4x extender it is a 140-560 mm f/5.6-f/8 lens with fast AF, so the new super telephoto range should offer much more than just simply 200-600mm
 
reczey said:
With the 1.4x extender it is a 140-560 mm f/5.6-f/8 lens with fast AF, so the new super telephoto range should offer much more than just simply 200-600mm
It's not always about just zoom though. It is also about autofocus speed and sharpness. You lose on both of those with the extenders.
 

Dekaner

EOS T7i
Apr 5, 2014
64
0
If Canon is reading - I'd really like a 70-200 2.8 w/ a built in 1.4x similar to how the 200-400 works.
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,080
377
Chaitanya said:
I know a lot of birders will happily pay for 400 f4 or 500 f5.6 lens.
There is already a 400 4 lens (the DO II). Even if a "normal" lens is made it will still be expensive. Maybe less than the DO but still expensive. Also there is also a zoom that ends at 400 f/4 and it is super big and expensive. So the 400 f4 case is out of the question. 500 5.6 seems a much more feasible option (economically and size wise) either for a zoom or a fixed lens. But by economically I mean from the buyers perspective not Canon's...
 

Besisika

How can you stand out, if you do like evrybdy else
Mar 25, 2014
638
26
Montreal
kingrobertii said:
reczey said:
With the 1.4x extender it is a 140-560 mm f/5.6-f/8 lens with fast AF, so the new super telephoto range should offer much more than just simply 200-600mm
It's not always about just zoom though. It is also about autofocus speed and sharpness. You lose on both of those with the extenders.
Agree!
I do a lot of sport shots with my 100-400 II and autofocus suffers with extender.
In high ISO sharpness suffers greatly as well.
If the new super zoom (200-600mm 5.6) is as fast (focus) and as sharp as the current 100-400 II (but heavier) I will be the first to buy it provided a good price.
Technically speaking, I cannot justify the 400 F4 DO. Zoom is important in sport and F4 to F5.6 is no longer (for my need) a difference given the high ISO capability of the 1DX II. Low light sport shooters like me will like that lens very much.
 

LordofTackle

EOS RP
Nov 25, 2014
291
0
Maybe another attempt on a DO superzoom?? They showed the potential of the DO material with the 400 II.

The old 70-300 DO really sucked quality-wise, but the size was nice for an EF superzoom :)
Disadvantage: if the do it, it will be reaaaallly expensive.

-Sebastian
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,550
771
I could see something like a 100-460mm zoom with built-in 1.4 TC. Built-in TC's can be optimized to work with a lens so that there is little degradation. They do increase complexity. Canon produces many lenses with built-in TC's, so they know how to do it, keeping cost down is the problem.
 
Mar 31, 2014
981
78
69
Center of my universe
Mt Spokane Photography said:
I could see something like a 100-460mm zoom with built-in 1.4 TC. Built-in TC's can be optimized to work with a lens so that there is little degradation. They do increase complexity. Canon produces many lenses with built-in TC's, so they know how to do it, keeping cost down is the problem.
Please list these lenses with built-in TC's; I am familiar only with the 200-400.

Personally, I would like to see a 400mm prime with a built-in TC; huffers do not appeal to me.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,966
1,177
119
chrysoberyl said:
Mt Spokane Photography said:
I could see something like a 100-460mm zoom with built-in 1.4 TC. Built-in TC's can be optimized to work with a lens so that there is little degradation. They do increase complexity. Canon produces many lenses with built-in TC's, so they know how to do it, keeping cost down is the problem.
Please list these lenses with built-in TC's; I am familiar only with the 200-400.

Personally, I would like to see a 400mm prime with a built-in TC; huffers do not appeal to me.
The 200-400 is the only EF lens with one, though the FD 1200mm f5.6 had one, but Canon make many different series of lens, a lot of the video/tv/broadcast lenses have built in TC's.
 

RunAndGun

EOS RP
Dec 16, 2011
323
27
chrysoberyl said:
Mt Spokane Photography said:
I could see something like a 100-460mm zoom with built-in 1.4 TC. Built-in TC's can be optimized to work with a lens so that there is little degradation. They do increase complexity. Canon produces many lenses with built-in TC's, so they know how to do it, keeping cost down is the problem.
Please list these lenses with built-in TC's; I am familiar only with the 200-400.

Personally, I would like to see a 400mm prime with a built-in TC; huffers do not appeal to me.
They're broadcast tv lenses. And we pay dearly for the 2x. But it is pretty much a necessity. We need the versatility and it's not a five second process on a big tv camera popping off a lens and slapping it back on.
 

Plainsman

EOS 80D
Oct 26, 2012
193
0
..lens formulaes blah blah - it's not complicated at all - just give us a 200-500 like Nikon...
 
Mar 31, 2014
981
78
69
Center of my universe
Thanks, privatebydesign and RunAndGun. So Canon has extensive experience with built-in TC's. Now I really want a 400mm prime with a built-in TC, for under $3K.

Sorry, I am way off topic.
 

Jopa

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 11, 2015
1,056
0
Any 150-600 similar to Sigma or Tamron but "Canon-style" relaible AF would work assuming the price is right (under $2500).
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,966
1,177
119
Talys said:
Plainsman said:
..lens formulaes blah blah - it's not complicated at all - just give us a 200-500 like Nikon...
Yeah, that would be great -- though 200-600 would be better! :D
Jopa said:
Any 150-600 similar to Sigma or Tamron but "Canon-style" relaible AF would work assuming the price is right (under $2500).
There is no way on earth Canon are going to make a 'cheap', sub $3,000, lens >500mm, their commitment to the f5.6 standard they made themselves means they are limited by physics to 500mm.

Which begs the question, if the 100-400 MkII is as good as it is and often out resolves third party lenses of 600mm in tests and the fact that it works with the 1.4 TC and many bodies now have f8 AF, how much of a need is there for a budget 150-500 lens?
 

Jopa

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 11, 2015
1,056
0
privatebydesign said:
There is no way on earth Canon are going to make a 'cheap', sub $3,000, lens >500mm, their commitment to the f5.6 standard they made themselves means they are limited by physics to 500mm.
It's never too late to reconsider ;) And ok, if $2.5k is too low, I'm fine with $3k. f/6.3 is still 2/3 of a stop faster than f/8, and the 1.4 TC III impacts AF speed more than the IQ imho. So a normal, no-TC lens sill makes sense. Anything makes sense if there is a demand for it - people will pay for it, Canon will make some $$.

I agree, a quality f/5.6 zoom will be large and expensive (similar size and price of the Sigma 120-300 2.8 S).
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,966
1,177
119
Jopa said:
privatebydesign said:
There is no way on earth Canon are going to make a 'cheap', sub $3,000, lens >500mm, their commitment to the f5.6 standard they made themselves means they are limited by physics to 500mm.
It's never too late to reconsider ;) And ok, if $2.5k is too low, I'm fine with $3k. f/6.3 is still 2/3 of a stop faster than f/8, and the 1.4 TC III impacts AF speed more than the IQ imho. So a normal, no-TC lens sill makes sense. Anything makes sense if there is a demand for it - people will pay for it, Canon will make some $$.

I agree, a quality f/5.6 zoom will be large and expensive (similar size and price of the Sigma 120-300 2.8 S).
In my opinion Canon will never make an EF lens slower than f5.6, for the sake of this discussion about a budget tele zoom that means a 500mm limit.

No a quality 150-600 f5.6 is already available from Canon and has been for over 20 years, even now used ones cost over $5,000. An EF version would be substantially more in size and cost than a Sigma 120-300!
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,973
502
Jopa said:
Any 150-600 similar to Sigma or Tamron but "Canon-style" relaible AF would work assuming the price is right (under $2500).
Key consideration: the Sigmas and Tamrons are 600mm f/6.3 on the long end. As I'm sure we've covered this 100 times here before, Canon does not sell f/6.3 EF (or EF-S lenses). It would have to be 600mm f/5.6 on the long end, which would...

...have a much larger entrance pupil / front element / outer diameter than the Sigmas/Tamrons

...possibly not offer a front filtering option (due to size)

...cost a great deal more

...only be one stop slower than their $12,000 600 f/4L IS II

Can Canon make such a lens? Absolutely.

Can they offer a 200-600 f/5.6 IS for under $3k? Not sure.

- A