Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III coming ahead of Photokina [CR3]

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,163
337
A child might ask the question but you wouldn't have a decent answer. "Looking at other manufactures is a good guide to what is physically possible" is ridiculous.
Not ridiculous at all.
If no-one offers what you ask it suggests of two things: it may be that what you ask for is commonly thought (by the manufacturers) to be not worth including, or it may be that no-one has found a way to do it in which case your expectations are unreasonable. Hence Scyrene saying it is 'a guide'.
There is nothing wrong with wanting something but to criticise a company for no other reason than you are ignorant of technical capability is flawed.
 

takesome1

EOS 5Ds R II
Aug 23, 2013
1,468
96
But looking at what Canon just released with their 70-200 f4, 5 stops was what they chose.
"Chose" vs "physically possible"

Keep in mind you are comparing a $1200 lens to a $12000 lens.
scyrene seemed to be familiar with the term "diminishing returns". It would be easier for a manufacture to incorporate more expensive elements in a lens cost $12,000 than one costing $1,200.

One stop is good though. On the big lenses an extra stop is a substantial gain.
 

takesome1

EOS 5Ds R II
Aug 23, 2013
1,468
96
Not ridiculous at all.
If no-one offers what you ask it suggests of two things: it may be that what you ask for is commonly thought (by the manufacturers) to be not worth including, or it may be that no-one has found a way to do it in which case your expectations are unreasonable. Hence Scyrene saying it is 'a guide'.
There is nothing wrong with wanting something but to criticise a company for no other reason than you are ignorant of technical capability is flawed.
Looking at what is available presently and using that as a guide to determine what innovations the industry leader may incorporate is flawed.

I am confused by your second statement:
"There is nothing wrong with wanting something but to criticize a company for no other reason than you are ignorant of technical capability is flawed."
The only one critisizing in this situation would be scyrene, who was drawing comparisons between companies.
Perhaps you should go back and read the thread more thoroughly.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,163
337
Perhaps you should go back and read the thread more thoroughly.
I was merely responding to your comment that looking at what other companies are doing is (to use your word) 'ridiculous'.
That does not mean that Canon may not be able to beat it and move things a step take a step forward but expecting that 'they doubled it last time so should be able to double it this time' is illogical in technological terms. And that is where looking at other manufacturers is a guide - no-one I know of has in lens IS better than 5 stops which suggests there is a technological limit hard to get over.
Then look at the developments on this lens. The v1 was released in 1999 (?) and as I understand it had 2 stop IS the v2 in 2011 has 4 stops - that is 12 years of technological evolution to go from 2 stops to 4 stops. Now you want them to add another 4 stops after another 7 years simply because you think 'it should be possible'.

But then a one stop addition is in fact a doubling so it all depends on what you mean.
 

takesome1

EOS 5Ds R II
Aug 23, 2013
1,468
96
I was merely responding to your comment that looking at what other companies are doing is (to use your word) 'ridiculous'.
That does not mean that Canon may not be able to beat it and move things a step take a step forward but expecting that 'they doubled it last time so should be able to double it this time' is illogical in technological terms. And that is where looking at other manufacturers is a guide - no-one I know of has in lens IS better than 5 stops which suggests there is a technological limit hard to get over.
Then look at the developments on this lens. The v1 was released in 1999 (?) and as I understand it had 2 stop IS the v2 in 2011 has 4 stops - that is 12 years of technological evolution to go from 2 stops to 4 stops. Now you want them to add another 4 stops after another 7 years simply because you think 'it should be possible'.

But then a one stop addition is in fact a doubling so it all depends on what you mean.
You came in on a conversation of ridiculous statements.

My OP:
I am going to speculate.
New Coating
2 ounces
and $4,000 more

Now to hope,
New Coating
2 pounds
2 more stops of IS
and it is the same price as the II


As was pointed out, by ethanz the 70x200 f4 II was released with 5.
Is it out of the realm of possibility that a new lens might have 6.
I suppose it is if we apply the logic it has never been done.
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,816
35
Does it make sense to upgrade all this glass right before launching a new MILC FF mount? I think it does not. Therefore, my intuition is that the new MILC FF Canon camera will use the EF mount, or some variation of it that may be full compatible with existing EF lenses. But what about the flange distance and focus motor differences required by a MILC camera. Well, maybe these lenses have some hidden upgrade in the focus actuation and/or hardware/firmware that make them more suitable to MILC cameras. In this case, the recent “upgrade” on the 70-200 f2,8 III which apparently didn’t upgrade much, could actually be a “stealth” upgrade, already including internal features that are only going to become relevant once the new MILC FF camera is announced/released...
If Canon mimics Nikon, there will be an adapter to enable current EF lens to work the ML body while there are new lens that have a shorter flange distance
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
7,877
1,209
Canada
But looking at what Canon just released with their 70-200 f4, 5 stops was what they chose.
But also note that the F4 version has an extra stop of IS over the F2.8 version.....

Both are released at the same time, the same focal length, and (presumably) the same technology. The difference is that the F2.8 has heavier elements and takes more energy to move. This is your limit for optical stabilization.
 

takesome1

EOS 5Ds R II
Aug 23, 2013
1,468
96
But also note that the F4 version has an extra stop of IS over the F2.8 version.....

Both are released at the same time, the same focal length, and (presumably) the same technology. The difference is that the F2.8 has heavier elements and takes more energy to move. This is your limit for optical stabilization.
With the 500mm I have always noticed that the 1D models have always pushed the IS and the AF faster. I always assumed it was battery power as much as anything.
 
Reactions: johnf3f

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
7,877
1,209
Canada
With the 500mm I have always noticed that the 1D models have always pushed the IS and the AF faster. I always assumed it was battery power as much as anything.
The 1 series cameras have a 10.8 volt battery, the others (Lp-6) have a 7.2 volt battery. The extra voltage would allow you to drive lens motors faster, so your assumption is probably true.....
 
Reactions: johnf3f

Meatcurry

EOS 80D
Aug 31, 2014
191
17
51
UK
Both of these new lens will have DO elements, my wife's, brothers, sisters mother said so. But seriously I really think that Canon could have reached a point where DO lens can match or better existing conventional designs and that they would have no problem just using the DO tech as part of lens design rather make a DO lens. That's why the 600 DO prototype had a RED ring!!
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
7,877
1,209
Canada
Both of these new lens will have DO elements, my wife's, brothers, sisters mother said so. But seriously I really think that Canon could have reached a point where DO lens can match or better existing conventional designs and that they would have no problem just using the DO tech as part of lens design rather make a DO lens. That's why the 600 DO prototype had a RED ring!!
With DO lenses, chromatic aberration tends to occur in the opposite direction of that in glass elements.... This gives the lens designer another tool to use in the search for the ultimate sharpness.

I predict that DO lens elements are going to become very common at some point in the near future.
 
Reactions: HankMD

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
3,854
193
With DO lenses, chromatic aberration tends to occur in the opposite direction of that in glass elements.... This gives the lens designer another tool to use in the search for the ultimate sharpness.

I predict that DO lens elements are going to become very common at some point in the near future.
Even Canon's superb 400mm DO II has some issues when pointed to bright spot light sources. A green halo around them. This does not exist with L lenses. I discovered it coincidentally by taking a test photo. Since I use it for birding it performs superbly so no issues there.
If they fix that and incorporate DO elements in big heavy lenses they will do our backs (and camera bags) great favor! (not to our wallet though!)
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,816
35
If Canon is able to shave a pound off the 600, I wonder how much it will cost

$2000/lb?
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,816
35
Even Canon's superb 400mm DO II has some issues when pointed to bright spot light sources. A green halo around them. This does not exist with L lenses. I discovered it coincidentally by taking a test photo. Since I use it for birding it performs superbly so no issues there.
If they fix that and incorporate DO elements in big heavy lenses they will do our backs (and camera bags) great favor! (not to our wallet though!)
I have heard that the Nikon 500P does not suffer from this problem. I believe that the Nikon P series is the same as Canon's DO
 

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
3,854
193
I have heard that the Nikon 500P does not suffer from this problem. I believe that the Nikon P series is the same as Canon's DO
I refer to strong point light sources at night. This is non-issue for the use I need the 400mm DO II for. In fact I found out by chance. I do not believe Nikon's will be better than Canon though.
And a possible test between them should be carefully designed to avoid comparing apples to oranges.
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,816
35
I refer to strong point light sources at night. This is non-issue for the use I need the 400mm DO II for. In fact I found out by chance. I do not believe Nikon's will be better than Canon though.
And a possible test between them should be carefully designed to avoid comparing apples to oranges.
Hi Tron

I would like to see a comparison. But tell me, when do you see the green halo? A star? The moon? or perhaps a flood light in the distance. Since I don't have a DO right now I can not test. Hopefully the 600 DO will be released soon. If it is as good as the 400 DO II I'll sell my 600 F4 and buy the 600 DO.