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

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
339
144
It does get frustrating when there has been considerable discussion on a topic, like the possible aperture of the 100-500mm at 400mm, and a new poster makes a comment without having read the earlier exchanges. But, there are so many back posts to plough through for those not logging in frequently that polite repetition as here is helpful.
Well, it'd help if you'd read my post carefully, which wasn't actually hinging around the EXACT focal length the aperture changed. I was clearly talking in real-world, general terms.

It's astonishing that you can't read and understand a simple post made in the last day. It's like the numbers, and "proving someone wrong" are a lot more important to you than actually photographing.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
576
Hamburg, Germany
But, there are so many back posts to plough through for those not logging in frequently that polite repetition as here is helpful.
It may be helpful to some.

But we are at a point we're it is hard to argue with past experiences, as it seems that Canon is in the verge of bringing out a series of products that differ from their slow, conservative past.

All the talk that is getting particularly worked up about these topics is not helping anybody I believe. Making fun guesses is just right. It seemed crazy to think the R5 specs were right when they leaked initially. And now here we are.

At this point we simply don't have enough data points from the RF system, particularly concerning Tele lenses, to make any hard assumptions. So what modern Canon would and wouldn't do is in the stars. No need to force everybody to have the same guess. If they want to have a different opinion that should be fine after all we'll find out the truth eventually.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
576
Hamburg, Germany
It's astonishing that you can't read and understand a simple post made in the last day. It's like the numbers, and "proving someone wrong" are a lot more important to you than actually photographing.
Calm down, there was nothing attacking or personal in Alan's post and questioning his photography makes you look plain silly. Ever visited the bird thread? I would highly recommend it.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
576
Hamburg, Germany
I personally could see it going either way. I get the impression that the Canon engineers are allowed to explore the new freedoms that come from the shorter flange distance, as well as the new AF capabilities and the fully electronic image viewing.

We've already seen them doing things that many would consider 'unlike Canon' when they made the 24-240 mm require a slight crop because it's image circle doesn't cover the whole sensor at the wide end. Since the 24-105mm requires a firmware update as well, we might see them use a similar trick again. These are of course lenses with far different price and weight requirements than the 100-500 mm. But we also don't know the exact price and weight of that lens yet, so who knows...

But it shows that their past design behavior is different from what they are doing now.

More details can't come fast enough :LOL:
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
739
496
[..]
We've already seen them doing things that many would consider 'unlike Canon' when they made the 24-240 mm require a slight crop because it's image circle doesn't cover the whole sensor at the wide end. Since the 24-105mm requires a firmware update as well, we might see them use a similar trick again.[..]
At this point I wonder at the competence and foresight of the firmware and RF design team. Canon made a big deal out of the fact that all RF lenses have the correction and DLO included and transmit it to the body. But all the new lenses have needed a firmware upgrade of the body, the RF70-200 *twice*.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,301
539
We have two, and worth every penny. We have had so much use from them that I wouldn't care if we had to give them away in a fire sale. Sharp from edge to edge and with AF as good as the 400mm DO II.
The availability of the 100-400 II has to have cut into sales of the primes, especially those with slower apertures. Once again, Canon seems to have found a sweetspot and built a better mousetrap, at least from a sales point of view.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
6,348
4,465
Calm down, there was nothing attacking or personal in Alan's post and questioning his photography makes you look plain silly. Ever visited the bird thread? I would highly recommend it.
Thanks for this support, which is much appreciated. I don't think it was in fact aimed at me. In his temper tantrum, he attached his reply to my post by mistake instead of to an earlier one by someone else it was aimed at. That in no way condones his use of language, and all discourse on this forum should be conducted with mutual respect.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
619
576
Hamburg, Germany
all discourse on this forum should be conducted with mutual respect.
It's easy to see how one can get worked up about these subjects, after all we are here because we share a passion for photography and gear, as well as a curiosity for the new technologies coming from Canon and the industry as a whole.

Speculation and arguing about the various details that surround the matter is fun and informative in many cases. It's simply more fun and informative if we all try our best to keep in mind that we are talking to other people here, and there are no special awards for being wrong or right about something, especially predictions and rumors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

Sharlin

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 26, 2015
1,200
860
Turku, Finland
At this point I wonder at the competence and foresight of the firmware and RF design team. Canon made a big deal out of the fact that all RF lenses have the correction and DLO included and transmit it to the body. But all the new lenses have needed a firmware upgrade of the body, the RF70-200 *twice*.
Meh, I think those are just bugfixes and maybe some iterative development of the protocols. Teething issues. It’s a brand new mount after all, and it’s impossible to pre-plan everything before you even have a reasonable number of different types of lenses in the system. Software engineering reality.
 

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
4,702
2,622
Irving, Texas
I'm 99% certain it will be f/5.6 at 400mm. The numbers calculate out that way (7.1*400/500 = 5.6)
I'm thinking this is going to be one sweet lens. I'm taking a wait and see approach and hoping for the best. I really liked my EF 400mm f/5.6L, but as good as Canon has been getting with the zooms I can see this lens as a real winner. A great zoom beats a prime of the same aperture in my world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
1,745
671
I'm 99% certain it will be f/5.6 at 400mm. The numbers calculate out that way (7.1*400/500 = 5.6)
yes numbers are correct - provided that girth and size of the 200-500 in overall is also proportionally larger than 100-400, however it looks more like 100-400/xx-6.3 (Sigma or Canon) scaled up to 200-500 size. Like I said, I hope I am mistaken however.... Sigma and Tamron 100-400/6.3 are sold at around AUD$600.00 this days. I think that Canon will have no hesitation in offering F6.3 at 400 mm end.. Let's wait and see :)
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
6,348
4,465
I'm thinking this is going to be one sweet lens. I'm taking a wait and see approach and hoping for the best. I really liked my EF 400mm f/5.6L, but as good as Canon has been getting with the zooms I can see this lens as a real winner. A great zoom beats a prime of the same aperture in my world.
I prefer my zooms to be small :). Likewise, I am hoping for the best. And, I don't care if it's f/6.3 or f/5.6 at 400mm because if there is one thing I am 99% certain of it's that I'll be shooting at 500mm for 99% of the time and less than 1% at 400mm.
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
739
496
I prefer my zooms to be small :). Likewise, I am hoping for the best. And, I don't care if it's f/6.3 or f/5.6 at 400mm because if there is one thing I am 99% certain of it's that I'll be shooting at 500mm for 99% of the time and less than 1% at 400mm.
Future innovation from Canon: a 100,500mm zoom lens. It replaces the zoom ring with a switch, you can select 100 or 500mm, nothing in between :)
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
6,348
4,465
Future innovation from Canon: a 100,500mm zoom lens. It replaces the zoom ring with a switch, you can select 100 or 500mm, nothing in between :)
Much of my photography is like that, a prime with one change of focal length with adding an extender. And Canon has it already in the 200-400mm - just flick in the built in TC.
 

Chaitanya

EOS 6D MK II
Jun 27, 2013
1,214
305
34
Pune
Dpreview has posted photos of this new lens alongside EF 100-400mm mk II and this new lens is a little longer(nearly same as 100-400 with ef to rf adapter) and narrower in diameter.