- Aug 1, 2014
Let’s hope it’s shorter than that. 173mm = 6.8 inches. The EF version is 7.8 inches
The EF 70-200mm f/4L IS is exactly 6.8 inches--the RF sure does not look the size of the 70-200 F/4, it seems a lot more cramped with less real estate. I'd bet it's a little bit wider but definitely shorter than the F/4. I doubt the patents are exact to the specifications of the consumer lens.
I get he feeling it's at least as short as the 70-300mm F/4-5.6L IS, if not possibly even shorter,. The lens mount makes it look barely larger than the RF 24-70, but that's again just a rough estimate that could be skewed.
If not.. What good is sacrificing the internal zoom just to save an inch?