Canon officially announces the development of the RF 100-500 f/4.5-7.1L IS USM, 1.4x and 2.0x extenders

IslanderMV

"life is for the birds"
May 1, 2012
455
252
www.bernierland.com
I am using a Sigma 150-600 C. I got it as a gift so I don't complain about any of its faults (BIF).

However, with the disappointment with the 7.1 end of the RF 100-500, I would be very surprised if Sigma was not working on native RF series lenses.

I have no idea if the new protocols the RF series uses are closely held proprietary info. Will Sigma have to reverse engineer the RF connection? If so, it could be a while before we see a Sigma RF 150-600 f/6.3.
 

bluenoser1993

EOS RP
Jul 11, 2012
210
17
So I also own the RF 24-70 and took a good look at it's rear element, I noticed the rear element for the 24-70 has a square 'window' while the 70-200 is round and more open. This gives me hope that the extenders will still be somehow usable with the 70-200 as it looks like the 70-200 was designed in a way to utilize some kind of extension. All Canon's past extenders have worked with their 70-200 lenses, it doesn't make sense they would change this now...

Edit: To add now that I'm looking better at the 70-200, there are lips on the black surrounding part of the glass--almost like a semi socket for the extender's nub. I'm more confident the extender will come with some kind of round extension tube to circle the protruding nub element of the TC so it can also fit the 70-200. Pure speculation though but there are what appear to be potential design decisions to accept TCs.
I’m not sure how a spacer could work. Consider the 70-200 and a future big white mounted directly to a camera, both lenses are designed to fill the sensor at that distance. The lens of the 1.4x has to be oriented between the body and both lenses the same or it would affect the image projection. It would be like adding a macro tube.
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
265
223
The fact that is slow is not a problem IF the size and weight are similar to the 100-400 and it's 5.6 at 400mm. The problem is if Canon will not release a 200-600, considering both Nikon and Sony will have one and they are pretty affordable and good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HankMD

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
6,343
4,432
The fact that is slow is not a problem IF the size and weight are similar to the 100-400 and it's 5.6 at 400mm. The problem is if Canon will not release a 200-600, considering both Nikon and Sony will have one and they are pretty affordable and good.
I can live with f/6.3 at 400mm. But, I rarely find 400mm too long and would be using it at 500mm 90+% of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape

joestopper

Rrr...
Feb 4, 2020
168
152
I've always thought that one of the great mysteries in life is the nonexistence of an EF 500mm f/5.6 L.
I think Canon's policy with the big whites is to go the limits i.e. the max aperture possible for a given focal length while still be reasonable convenient to carry.

A 500 f/5.6 does fit not in there. While it is not at the limits it would still be expensive and at the same time too close to the 100-400 II.
 
Last edited:

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,200
860
Turku, Finland
I think Canon's policy with the big whites is to go the limits i.e. the max aperture possible for a given focal length while still be reasonable convenient to carry.
They do have the 300mm/4L and 400mm/5.6L which seem to be very well-liked among those who can't afford f/2.8, but they're also very old and Canon doesn't seem to have had any interest in developing updated versions of them. So, uh, I think you have a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
6,343
4,432
There is a 500mm f/5.6, but as Canon doesn't make it, I have bought the only one available and a D500 on which to fit it. Weighing less than a 100-400mm II and tack sharp, it is a joy to use. Why on earth Canon having invented the technology has not made one, I will never understand. The demand is so high, it's back-ordered. And it's not that expensive, around half the price of a 400mm DO II.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HankMD and Pape

joestopper

Rrr...
Feb 4, 2020
168
152
There is a 500mm f/5.6, but as Canon doesn't make it, I have bought the only one available and a D500 on which to fit it. Weighing less than a 100-400mm II and tack sharp, it is a joy to use. Why on earth Canon having invented the technology has not made one, I will never understand. The demand is so high, it's back-ordered. And it's not that expensive, around half the price of a 400mm DO II.
I think you told the reason: half price of 400 DO II not too heavy etc. It is simply not the best business for Canon to sell it. They would like to get such customers to buy one stop above.
 

Codebunny

EOS RP
Sep 5, 2018
248
188
I think you told the reason: half price of 400 DO II not too heavy etc. It is simply not the best business for Canon to sell it. They would like to get such customers to buy one stop above.
I don’t think Canon are so short sighted to think that selling 1 f/4 instead of 3 f/5.6 lenses is good business. £3000 lenses will always sell more quantity, and then you have to factor in the profit.
Which of the two lenses has a higher profit margin, again that would probably be the f/5.6 lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

FramerMCB

Canon 40D & 7D
Sep 9, 2014
439
113
52
If you’re happy with zooming to 400 at 5.6 then don’t zoom To 500 if you don’t like slightly higher ISOs. This isn’t that hard. It’s the same specs as the beloved 100-400 but with a bit more reach for when circumstances support it.
But will this lens be a f5.6 at 400mm or will it be f6.3 at 400mm? I'd like to see the Spec sheet for the f-stop transitions. ...or maybe I missed that and it is available?
 

FramerMCB

Canon 40D & 7D
Sep 9, 2014
439
113
52
And the 70-200 with a 2x teleconverter gives you a nice 140-400mm/5.6... except it looks like the TCs won't fit! Have to buy both anyway dammit! :LOL:
I would be shocked if this new RF 100-500mm will cost more than the RF 70-200mm f2.8 IS, currently $2.699USD at B&H. I would suspect this 100-500mm to not be more than $2.399 at introduction. And less if they plan to sell in volume (i.e. be more competitive with the 3rd-party super-zooms). ...Of course Canon has never seemed to worry too much about 3rd-party lens offerings' pricing before.
 

IcyBergs

I have a Sony...TV
May 31, 2016
79
171
At what price point is the f/7.1 forgiven?

Is it $1499?

That's what I think the price of this lens will be. Now, that doesn't mean that'll be the launch price.

We may see a similar situation play out as we did with the EF 24-70 f/4L IS, Canon read the market wrong and they launched it at $1499, price reductions began less than 6 months and within a year there was a rebate that dropped the price nearly 30% and it ended up sticking at around a 33% price drop from launch after that.
 

FramerMCB

Canon 40D & 7D
Sep 9, 2014
439
113
52
Any bets on the weather sealing for this lens?
It's an "L" lens. What more do you need to know? The "L" lenses all have, 1) robust design and build, 2) weather-sealing, 3) best autofocusing motors, 4) best glass, 5) etc. etc.
 

Optics Patent

Former Nikon (Changes to R5 upon delivery)
Nov 6, 2019
310
248
But will this lens be a f5.6 at 400mm or will it be f6.3 at 400mm? I'd like to see the Spec sheet for the f-stop transitions. ...or maybe I missed that and it is available?
If you were Canon with a venerable 100-400 lens that created a new market category, would you hobble the aperture at 400 in order to extend from 400 to 500 think that your buyers of $2000 lenses wouldn’t care?

Basically, I trust the folks at Canon not to be that insanely stupid. I’m not worried. It will be f5.6 at 400. I guarantee it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,741
667
If you were Canon with a venerable 100-400 lens that created a new market category, would you hobble the aperture at 400 in order to extend from 400 to 500 think that your buyers of $2000 lenses wouldn’t care?

Basically, I trust the folks at Canon not to be that insanely stupid. I’m not worried. It will be f5.6 at 400. I guarantee it.
By the same sort of logic RF 70-200/2.8 should be a teie converter compatible lens. As predecessor was Tele converter compatible. However RF lens is not....
Guarantee is a very strong word. What happens if 100-500 / x-7.1 won’t be F5.6 at 400mm? You loose credibility?
 
  • Like
Reactions: gwooding