What about that EF 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS from Canon?

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
Yes..... CR discussions never go off topic :)

...All these lenses seem to be selling well, to my mind it makes sense for Canon to jump into the fray. I can see either a 500F5.6, or a 600F6.3, but I think a 600F5.6 on the long end is extremely unlikely. They may not necessarily be L lenses if Canon decides to compete on price.
I think it does make sense to offer an alternative, but I'm not sure they should attempt to compete on price. With the 100-400 selling for $1,800, I'd like to see what Canon could do in the 150-500 range for an additional $1,000. Sony and Nikon both seem to simply be offering their own branded versions of Tamron and Sigma in terms of quality. Other than brand loyalty, I'm not sure what the point is. I'd like to see Canon stick to the high road and fill out their 70-300 "L" and 100-400 "L" with a 150-500 "L." Preference would be a f5.6 EF lens, but if they were to produce a 7D quality APS-C body in the R mount, then an f6.3 would be fine.
 

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D + 100-400mm mkii
Feb 7, 2019
111
81
UK
I think it does make sense to offer an alternative, but I'm not sure they should attempt to compete on price. With the 100-400 selling for $1,800, I'd like to see what Canon could do in the 150-500 range for an additional $1,000. Sony and Nikon both seem to simply be offering their own branded versions of Tamron and Sigma in terms of quality. Other than brand loyalty, I'm not sure what the point is. I'd like to see Canon stick to the high road and fill out their 70-300 "L" and 100-400 "L" with a 150-500 "L." Preference would be a f5.6 EF lens, but if they were to produce a 7D quality APS-C body in the R mount, then an f6.3 would be fine.
Bang on
 

uri.raz

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2016
127
66
Right now the X to 500 or 600mm zoom lens is a busy field...
<snipped list for brevity>

Canon is missing! All these lenses seem to be selling well, to my mind it makes sense for Canon to jump into the fray. I can see either a 500F5.6, or a 600F6.3, but I think a 600F5.6 on the long end is extremely unlikely. They may not necessarily be L lenses if Canon decides to compete on price.
That's not the only lens Canon is, IMHO, missing. My guess is

1. With a shrinking market, some of those lenses are just not profitable.

2. As always, Canon prefers to invest in profitable lenses nobody else makes, e.g. tilt shift lenses, and let the competition fill in the holes.

3. With the new FF MILC, Canon is spread a little thin, so it leaves larger holes for the competition.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,105
523
Right now the X to 500 or 600mm zoom lens is a busy field...
Tamron 150-600
Tamron 150-600 G2
Sigma 150-600
Sigma 150-600 Sport
Nikon 200-500
Sony 200-600

Canon is missing! All these lenses seem to be selling well, to my mind it makes sense for Canon to jump into the fray.
I also recall cheap 35-200 "megazooms" of 1990s. Canon was also late to that.
 

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,259
2,301
So far in the poll of what telephoto zooms we are using, 21/34 are for the 100-400mm II, followed by 6/34 for the Sigma 150-600mm C, paralleling my own observations over a large number of users. Weight is a big consideration for many, especially some women who find even the 100-400mm too heavy. Even so, no-one has reported using the light 100-400mm f/6.3 from Tamron and Sigma, both of which I found wanting in IS and AF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Neutral

EOS RP
Oct 19, 2012
333
6
We haven't been discussing the relative merits of the Sony vs Canon 100-400mm lenses. The discussion is about the the new Sony 200-600mm. If you do purchase the Sony 200-600mm then we would be interested to hear from you your first hand experience with the lens and its performance vs the Sony and Canon 100-400mm lenses.
You are right, discussion was not about merits of the Sony vs Canon 100-400mm lenses.
Discussion was what kind of performance could be expected from Sony 200-600mm lens at 600mm based on published MTF charts and initial reviews.
MTF charts shows that this lens expected to have approximately the same resolution power at 600mm as Canon 100-400mm at 400mm.
You told that you have little trust in simulated MTF charts based on MTF charts for lens from some other brands (for cheaper lenses) which had lower performance than claimed by MTF charts.
My response was that from my practical experince I do not see any reason not to trust Sony MTFs for the latest GM and G glass taking Sony and Canon 100-400mm glass (as i have and use both) as an example.
MTF charts show that they have almost identical performance and in real life I see practically the same, with Sony 100-400 GM performing a bit better on Sony bodies compared to adapted Canon lens. Most possibly Canon 100-400mm would be performing better on Canon high res bodies as each lens optimized for use on their native bodies.
All my latest Sony GM and G glass was performing up to expectations (per Sony published MTFs)
Based on my experience I do not see any reason to expect lower performance from 200-600 compared to what is expected from MTF charts, the only doubt what whould be QC and lens variance as lens production facilities will be in China.
I think we will see test results from Lensrentals and DXO some time later.
Now this Sony 200-600mm seems to be very attractive and affordable choice to be used on a7 and a9 bodies and and that could attract/bring more users from other brands to this camp. Also internal zoom is very handy feature, especially for long distance video use.
I still believe that Canon 200-600mm or similar lense at the similar price tag and the same or better performace could be very attractive for Canon users. It is not too late yet for that.
And yes, if I decide to buy this 200-600mm lens I could share my experience with this and comparison with 100-400. I usually do number of different tests initially to see if Iwant to keep new lens or return it back to the shop.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MadisonMike

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,259
2,301
You are right, discussion was not about merits of the Sony vs Canon 100-400mm lenses.
Discussion was what kind of performance could be expected from Sony 200-600mm lens at 600mm based on published MTF charts and initial reviews.
MTF charts shows that this lens expected to have approximately the same resolution power at 600mm as Canon 100-400mm at 400mm.
You told that you have little trust in simulated MTF charts based on MTF charts for lens from some other brands (for cheaper lenses) which had lower performance than claimed by MTF charts.
My response was that from my practical experince I do not see any reason not to trust Sony MTFs for the latest GM and G glass taking Sony and Canon 100-400mm glass (as i have and use both) as an example.
MTF charts show that they have almost identical performance and in real life I see practically the same, with Sony 100-400 GM performing a bit better on Sony bodies compared to adapted Canon lens. Most possibly Canon 100-400mm would be performing better on Canon high res bodies as each lens optimized for use on their native bodies.
All my latest Sony GM and G glass was performing up to expectations (per Sony published MTFs)
Based on my experience I do not see any reason to expect lower performance from 200-600 compared to what is expected from MTF charts, the only doubt what whould be QC and lens variance as lens production facilities will be in China.
I think we will see test results from Lensrentals and DXO some time later.
Now this Sony 200-600mm seems to be very attractive and affordable choice to be used on a7 and a9 bodies and and that could attract/bring more users from other brands to this camp. Also internal zoom is very handy feature, especially for long distance video use.
I still believe that Canon 200-600mm or similar lense at the similar price tag and the same or better performace could be very attractive for Canon users. It is not too late yet for that.
And yes, if I decide to buy this 200-600mm lens I could share my experience with this and comparison with 100-400. I usually do number of different tests initially to see if Iwant to keep new lens or return it back to the shop.
I don't disagree with much of what you write but I must labour the point that theoretically simulated MTFs from Canon, Nikon, Sony etc and not just the ones from cheaper brands considerably overestimate the MTFs that are actually measured by Lensrentals and others - see for example https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/08/the-sort-of-great-400mm-shootout/ where there are many examples you can check with the manufacturers figures. The 400mm f/2.8 II for example has MTFs close to 1.0 published by Canon, but the measured is ~0.8 for the 30 lp/mm.
 
Jun 16, 2019
4
1
Let's do remember that Canon already developed a legendary lens like this in the early '80s, so certainly they're not new to the game:

The New FD 150-600mm f/5.6 L

The trombone-style zoom with focus wheel was quite innovative at the time. It was such a valuable lens that many were bought up by Hollywood and converted to cinema camera mounts. The question still remains what many have been asking here: Will it be affordable? Will it be lightweight enough? Etc.

Personally, I would like to see something that reaches far beyond the 100-400 currently. Like say, a Canon version of this:

Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6 APO

As others have already pointed out, the current EF 100-400 MkII paired with an EF 1.4x already shows better performance than say the Sigma or Tamron 150-600mm lenses. So, it would really be neat if Canon could expand our range well beyond that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,259
2,301
Let's do remember that Canon already developed a legendary lens like this in the early '80s, so certainly they're not new to the game:

The New FD 150-600mm f/5.6 L

The trombone-style zoom with focus wheel was quite innovative at the time. It was such a valuable lens that many were bought up by Hollywood and converted to cinema camera mounts. The question still remains what many have been asking here: Will it be affordable? Will it be lightweight enough? Etc.

Personally, I would like to see something that reaches far beyond the 100-400 currently. Like say, a Canon version of this:

Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6 APO

As others have already pointed out, the current EF 100-400 MkII paired with an EF 1.4x already shows better performance than say the Sigma or Tamron 150-600mm lenses. So, it would really be neat if Canon could expand our range well beyond that.
I once saw a strong young guy struggle with the Sigma 300-800mm. It weighs 12.8kg or 28lb, 6x more than I can manage
Edit: bad mistake, it weighs only 12.94lb! Apologies!
 
Last edited:
Jun 16, 2019
4
1
I once saw a strong young guy struggle with the Sigma 300-800mm. It weighs 12.8kg or 28lb, 6x more than I can manage
Oh, indeed. That's a tripod only lens for sure. Heck, I even put my little EF 400mm f/5.6 L on a tripod!
 

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,259
2,301
Not that thing isn't a beast, but it only weighs in at 12.94lbs (~5.87kg) Still far more than I want to lug around too.
Oops - my mistake! It's only somewhat over 2x I can carry. Apologies! If they get it down to 2kg, I'll rush out and buy.
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
351
199
So anyone considered add bicycle wheel to low end of monopod ,would it work? with lockable brake lever.
Or bazooka kind of shoulder setup with external aimer and little lcd screen?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tron

AlanF

Everyone sits in the prison of his own ideas. A E
Aug 16, 2012
5,259
2,301
You already own a Sigma :D
And it's a very good copy and matches or even exceeds the IQ of my 100-400mm II. But, it doesn't have the AF speed of the Canon that I need for BIF.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
2,055
322
Vancouver, BC
And it's a very good copy and matches or even exceeds the IQ of my 100-400mm II. But, it doesn't have the AF speed of the Canon that I need for BIF.
Too true! I would happily pay $2500 for a Canon AF version that was 6.3 and double that for a 5.6 that was great IQ and sharp wide open.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,025
1,488
Canada
And it's a very good copy and matches or even exceeds the IQ of my 100-400mm II. But, it doesn't have the AF speed of the Canon that I need for BIF.
Apparently the Tamron G2 has faster AF than the Sigma, but is not quite as sharp.....