Sooooo, f/11 you say? What’s Canon up to with these upcoming supertelephoto lenses?

Antono Refa

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
992
202
Autofocus was the major hindrance at the time so most lenses had a max aperture of f/5.6.
All FD lenses had a max aperture of f/5.6 or wider, with the exception of a few catadioptric lenses, and I doubt AF was a consideration here.
 

dcm

Good or bad - it's not the gear.
Apr 18, 2013
809
155
All FD lenses had a max aperture of f/5.6 or wider, with the exception of a few catadioptric lenses, and I doubt AF was a consideration here.
Poorly worded on my part. I meant that AF required an aperture of f/5.6 or wider so they didn't make EF lenses with apertures like f/11. AF has improved quite a bit.
 

Hector1970

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 22, 2012
1,166
340
I think its potentially a clever idea from Canon if they are not expensive.
It's perfect for beginners shooting the moon or doing wildlife during the day.
They won't be for serious wildlife photographers or sports shooters but great for an introduction into those genres.
I will be interested in the size and weight. It might be handy for travel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape
After finding out that these are really coming, I decided to spend an entire day shooting birds with my two 600mm lenses with and without 1.4TC and stopping down to f/11 for all shots. So some 600/11 and some 840/11 shooting. I dealt with the SS and ISO as best I could.

In the end I managed to bring home a nice selection of bird photos from that day including shooting perched GHOs in a fairly deep forest setting.

I realize you won't be able to do everything you could possibly want with these f/11 lenses (and that is why I still own a 600/4) but you can still come back with a lot of good images. Background selection is critical. Topaz Denoise will be your best friend especially on the R5's 45MP sensor.

I've been doing lots of f/9 shooting over the past 7 months with 200-600/1.4TC so 2/3 more stops wasn't too hard to adapt to. I've also done lots and lots of f/8 shooting over the years with 600/4, 500/4, 400/4, and 100-400/5.6 lenses once I add the respective TCs.

Now that we know these are going to pack small/short (and most likely shoot long), I could see them being something I'd pick up to go lightweight like I currently do with 500PF. I'd just go for the 800/11. Don't see any need for 600/11. A 600/8 would have been ideal.

I guess the alternative route would be to go 100-500 and use 1.4TC to get 700 f/10 as a sort of in between. Probably a much more expensive lens but much more versatile and still packs small.
 
Aug 23, 2014
7
1
Sorry I didn't read the entire thread. However, I am disturbed by the lack of attention to focusing speed. Especially birds in flight. Cameras focus with the lens wide open. That's not the same thing at setting an aperture to f11 on an f4.0 lens. That is, I find it irrelevant to recount using a lens at f11. The real issue is how fast can a lens focus when the it is wide open at f11? I use a 7DII with a Sigma 150-600mm Sport and have tried it with their new 1.4 teleconverter, making it f8.8 when wide open. For birds I must use the center spot for focusing. For the above setup with the converter, the focusing was too slow to be useful. Unless there is some new tech allowing for rapid autofocus when a lens is wide open at f11, I fail to see a use. Just crop a high MP image instead. Meanwhile still pondering dumping the Canon gear and switching to Sony which has the A7R IV on sale now. In crop mode this obtains 26 MP images (more than the 7DII) and I would expect quicker focus. $600 to convert the mount to Sony, though. I.e., if I'm going to move to mirrorless (beyond my handy Sony RX10 IV), it may be an opportune time to switch to Sony. Canon is just not meeting my photography needs.
 

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
300
206
The more I think about these lenses, the more I think about this lens:
1593117219841.png


I always wondered why it seemed like the 600mm F/4L IS DO was so close to a final design when announced by Canon, and then went *totally,* utterly silent. I wonder if they switched gears to develop that lens for the RF mount, and made the 600mm F/4L IS III as a stop-gap, final EF version?

If Canon is using DO on these lower end lenses already, I'm almost entirely sure that when a 600mm F/4L comes to the RF mount, it won't be much bigger than the original 600mm F/4L IS DO lens they had on display all those years ago. That size is just *amazing* for a 600mm lens, and it makes me wonder if they could do a DO 400mm f/2.8 even shorter than the mock-up 600 and about the size of a 300mm f/2.8.

Exciting stuff to see going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rule556

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
Aug 16, 2012
6,665
5,492
The more I think about these lenses, the more I think about this lens:
View attachment 191008

I always wondered why it seemed like the 600mm F/4L IS DO was so close to a final design when announced by Canon, and then went *totally,* utterly silent. I wonder if they switched gears to develop that lens for the RF mount, and made the 600mm F/4L IS III as a stop-gap, final EF version?

If Canon is using DO on these lower end lenses already, I'm almost entirely sure that when a 600mm F/4L comes to the RF mount, it won't be much bigger than the original 600mm F/4L IS DO lens they had on display all those years ago. That size is just *amazing* for a 600mm lens, and it makes me wonder if they could do a DO 400mm f/2.8 even shorter than the mock-up 600 and about the size of a 300mm f/2.8.

Exciting stuff to see going forward.
The 400mm DO II is the same width as the 300mm f/2.8 II and 16mm shorter. An f/2.8 400mm DO would have to be about 40% wider.
 
  • Like
Reactions: H. Jones
Sep 2, 2018
8
8
I've hauled around the EF600 f/4 L IS on a Gitzo 410 with Wimberley head. No fun! No fun at all!
Also an 800 f/5.6 Nikkor. Also no fun.
I don't expect these new lenses to replace the aforementioned behemoths but I am excited to see how they pan out. And the new bodies do high ISO WAY better than the bodies I was using on the big lenses.
The fact that these f/11 lenses will not be the first choice at the olympics, or for birds in flight does not mean they have no place.
So, Canon, bring 'em on! I am very interested!
 

Codebunny

EOS RP
Sep 5, 2018
377
315
The more I think about these lenses, the more I think about this lens:
View attachment 191008

I always wondered why it seemed like the 600mm F/4L IS DO was so close to a final design when announced by Canon, and then went *totally,* utterly silent. I wonder if they switched gears to develop that lens for the RF mount, and made the 600mm F/4L IS III as a stop-gap, final EF version?

If Canon is using DO on these lower end lenses already, I'm almost entirely sure that when a 600mm F/4L comes to the RF mount, it won't be much bigger than the original 600mm F/4L IS DO lens they had on display all those years ago. That size is just *amazing* for a 600mm lens, and it makes me wonder if they could do a DO 400mm f/2.8 even shorter than the mock-up 600 and about the size of a 300mm f/2.8.

Exciting stuff to see going forward.
This looks exciting but I would rather see DO tech being used to make 800mm and 1000mm professional lenses possible. The 800mm f/5.6 hasn't been updated in so long and it would make a great DO lens to show something really special in the field of 'here's what we couldn't do before'.
 
Sep 2, 2018
8
8
The more I think about these lenses, the more I think about this lens:
View attachment 191008

I always wondered why it seemed like the 600mm F/4L IS DO was so close to a final design when announced by Canon, and then went *totally,* utterly silent.
What is that lens? You imply it is a mock up of a DO version of a 600 f/4? If so, why no green ring as opposed to an L red ring?
How many years ago was this thing displayed?
It is VERY interesting!
 

Rule556

I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
Dec 19, 2019
84
83
Seattle
www.flickr.com
Last year I was lucky enough to take a trip to the Galapagos Islands and I have to say I would have KILLED to have one of these lenses for that trip. Generally when our group would go out to see animals it was in the late morning and early afternoon and the sun was just insanely bright and you really can't be carrying a massive lens around since you're hiking all over the place and jumping on and off boats.

The fantastic range of 600mm or 800mm would let you get amazing shots of the animals and the sunlight there at the equator is so bright that f/11 would still easily let you get amazing shots at low ISO
Yeah... That’s exactly the first thing I thought. We’re planning to do that trip within the next five years, and I’m already trying to decide the gear I’ll be using. I’ve been eying the new RF 100-400mm L as a perfect pair for the 24-105 f/4, and I assumed that a specialized long white just wouldn’t be justifiable, either in size, or in cost. The 800mm f/11 could possibly be though, if it’s small and inexpensive enough.

I suspect there will be a lot of enthusiasts and travelers that will buy these lenses if it makes sense price-wise to jump into these lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC

SteveC

M6 mk II
Sep 3, 2019
852
637
Yeah... That’s exactly the first thing I thought. We’re planning to do that trip within the next five years, and I’m already trying to decide the gear I’ll be using. I’ve been eying the new RF 100-400mm L as a perfect pair for the 24-105 f/4, and I assumed that a specialized long white just wouldn’t be justifiable, either in size, or in cost. The 800mm f/11 could possibly be though, if it’s small and inexpensive enough.

I suspect there will be a lot of enthusiasts and travelers that will buy these lenses if it makes sense price-wise to jump into these lenses.
What I'm getting out of all of this is that it's probably a great starter lens (maybe even a great lens, period, depending on the IQ) provided you have really bright light. For woodland shooting like many of the birders here do, with lots of shaded areas, maybe not, but for blowtorch areas like the Galapagos out of the trees (or places in Australia/Southeast Asia, perhaps), not a bad item.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rule556

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
Aug 16, 2012
6,665
5,492
Yeah... That’s exactly the first thing I thought. We’re planning to do that trip within the next five years, and I’m already trying to decide the gear I’ll be using. I’ve been eying the new RF 100-400mm L as a perfect pair for the 24-105 f/4, and I assumed that a specialized long white just wouldn’t be justifiable, either in size, or in cost. The 800mm f/11 could possibly be though, if it’s small and inexpensive enough.

I suspect there will be a lot of enthusiasts and travelers that will buy these lenses if it makes sense price-wise to jump into these lenses.
I wrote in an earlier post but will repeat it as it could be useful to you, the crucial telephoto lens for the Galapagos will be a 100-400mm or the new 100-500mm as most of what you shoot is incredibly close with the wildlife unafraid of humans. In our trip last year, I never needed 800mm , and my specialty is bird photography where in most places you need reach. And 100mm is too long for a lot of what you see.

Most strangely, Vilacom who recommended the 800mm for the Galapagos joined 15 June for that post and hasn't logged in since.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rule556

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
300
206
What is that lens? You imply it is a mock up of a DO version of a 600 f/4? If so, why no green ring as opposed to an L red ring?
How many years ago was this thing displayed?
It is VERY interesting!
It was a 600mm F/4L IS DO lens Canon showed off in September of 2015. Five years ago already!


At the time they had a functional prototype, and I can't imagine it takes 5 years to develop the final product. I truly think they decided to save this design for the RF mount and wait for the RF 1dx equivalent.
 
Sep 2, 2018
8
8
It was a 600mm F/4L IS DO lens Canon showed off in September of 2015. Five years ago already!


At the time they had a functional prototype, and I can't imagine it takes 5 years to develop the final product. I truly think they decided to save this design for the RF mount and wait for the RF 1dx equivalent.
I was unaware of this. Very interesting! Canon may well have more surprises in store for us!
Thanks for the reply . . . and the link!
 

Rule556

I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
Dec 19, 2019
84
83
Seattle
www.flickr.com
I wrote in an earlier post but will repeat it as it could be useful to you, the crucial telephoto lens for the Galapagos will be a 100-400mm or the new 100-500mm as most of what you shoot is incredibly close with the wildlife unafraid of humans. In our trip last year, I never needed 800mm , and my specialty is bird photography where in most places you need reach. And 100mm is too long for a lot of what you see.

Most strangely, Vilacom who recommended the 800mm for the Galapagos joined 15 June for that post and hasn't logged in since.
Thank you. I appreciate your advice. I saw your post right after I posted. I currently carry my RF 24-105 f/4L and my EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS II USM. This setup works for 90% of everything I do, so I’m definitely saving up for the new 100-500 for that trip (I’ve been wanting an L in that range for a long time). Can’t ever really see needing bigger glass, and if I do, I’ll rent.

I see a lot of wealthy people buying these primes for major life trips who aren‘t using their equipment for anything else. I think they’ll make Canon quite a bit of money. I think they’ll get a lot of use by videographers as well. Depending of course on the price.
 

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
Aug 16, 2012
6,665
5,492
Thank you. I appreciate your advice. I saw your post right after I posted. I currently carry my RF 24-105 f/4L and my EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS II USM. This setup works for 90% of everything I do, so I’m definitely saving up for the new 100-500 for that trip (I’ve been wanting an L in that range for a long time). Can’t ever really see needing bigger glass, and if I do, I’ll rent.

I see a lot of wealthy people buying these primes for major life trips who aren‘t using their equipment for anything else. I think they’ll make Canon quite a bit of money. I think they’ll get a lot of use by videographers as well. Depending of course on the price.
For us the visit to the Galapagos was the adventure of a lifetime, so I encourage you in your planning. If I were to go again and took an R, a 100-500mm would replace my favourite 100-400mm and I would take TCs as well to give an option of going to longer if necessary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rule556

Aussie shooter

www.facebook.com/BrettGuyPhotography/
Dec 6, 2016
754
895
Last year I was lucky enough to take a trip to the Galapagos Islands and I have to say I would have KILLED to have one of these lenses for that trip. Generally when our group would go out to see animals it was in the late morning and early afternoon and the sun was just insanely bright and you really can't be carrying a massive lens around since you're hiking all over the place and jumping on and off boats.

The fantastic range of 600mm or 800mm would let you get amazing shots of the animals and the sunlight there at the equator is so bright that f/11 would still easily let you get amazing shots at low ISO
I was there a while ago and I found the the 70-200 was more than enough and that I often had to swap to the 24-70. I never once put the teleconverter on the 70-200 although if I had been serious about BIF then withoutbt a doubt a longer lens would have been nice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

Scott_7D

I'm New Here
Jul 19, 2011
9
1
I haven't logged in this site in forever, but I've been reading a lot since the impending release of the R5/6. Really looking forward to switching from a 7D2 to the R6 myself, as long as price is right.

Anyway, I decided to post because I haven't seen anyone mention this in the recent threads about the new slow, long lenses: the initial patents that were shown had both a 600/11 and a 600/8. The leaked image of the new lineup shows what looks to be the 600 being about the same diameter as the 800 and 100-500L. Anyone but me thinking it's actually a 600/8?

If it were f11, it should have at most a 67mm front thread, given 600/11 is about 55mm. I'd expect the lens to be a fair bit thinner than the 7xmm diameter of the other 2. Having it at f8 also makes more sense for the new TCs, at least the 1.4x could be used with AF on both the 600 and 100-500L.

Discuss, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter

Aussie shooter

www.facebook.com/BrettGuyPhotography/
Dec 6, 2016
754
895
I haven't logged in this site in forever, but I've been reading a lot since the impending release of the R5/6. Really looking forward to switching from a 7D2 to the R6 myself, as long as price is right.

Anyway, I decided to post because I haven't seen anyone mention this in the recent threads about the new slow, long lenses: the initial patents that were shown had both a 600/11 and a 600/8. The leaked image of the new lineup shows what looks to be the 600 being about the same diameter as the 800 and 100-500L. Anyone but me thinking it's actually a 600/8?

If it were f11, it should have at most a 67mm front thread, given 600/11 is about 55mm. I'd expect the lens to be a fair bit thinner than the 7xmm diameter of the other 2. Having it at f8 also makes more sense for the new TCs, at least the 1.4x could be used with AF on both the 600 and 100-500L.

Discuss, lol.
A 600 f8 would make far more sense. And it would be a great compromise but I imagin it would be north of 4k