Another Mention of a Canon Non-L Telephoto Zoom [CR2]

[Canon Rumors]

News about the long rumored supertelephoto zoom from Canon has gone quiet over the last 6 months or so, but we’re now being told the lens is coming in 2018, though the exact time of the announcement is currently unknown. Though the source did say it would not be coming for CES or CP+ in the first quarter of 2018.</p>

<p>As you know, there has been <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/">patents for a 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS optical formula</a> in the past. The source did say any super telephoto zoom such as this will not be an L lens, as to not “step on” the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II and to keep the retail price in line with the consumers that buy these type of lenses. Likely, it’s also to remain price competitive with both Sigma and Tamron.</p>
<p>We still do not know <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/new-unreleased-canon-gear-has-appeared-for-certification/">which two lenses appeared for certification recently</a>, but we hope to know more soon.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[Lee Jay]

This is one thing I'm interested in. I have a Sigma 150-600C for which the price was right ($700) and the optics are quite good. However, the handling is so-so (the zoom ring turns way too far to go from end to end easily) the IS is a little jumpy and the AF accuracy is a little hit and miss on moving subjects.

Ideally, I'd like a 100-600/4.5-5.6 for about twice the price of the Sigma, that handled, focused and stabilized like a Canon. I absolutely love the handling, focusing and stabilization of my 70-200/2.8L IS II, even with 2x TC attached.

 

[ahsanford]

News about the long rumored supertelephoto zoom from Canon has gone quiet over the last 6 months or so, but we’re now being told the lens is coming in 2018, though the exact time of the announcement is currently unknown. Though the source did say it would not be coming for CES or CP+ in the first quarter of 2018.</p>


<p>As you know, there has been <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/">patents for a 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS optical formula</a> in the past. The source did say any super telephoto zoom such as this will not be an L lens, as to not “step on” the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II and to keep the retail price in line with the consumers that buy these type of lenses. Likely, it’s also to remain price competitive with both Sigma and Tamron.</p>
<p>We still do not know <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/new-unreleased-canon-gear-has-appeared-for-certification/">which two lenses appeared for certification recently</a>, but we hope to know more soon.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

EF 600mm f/5.6 IS long end + competitive in price to the Sigma/Tamron = CR2? Unless it's a plastic fantastic with STM and a bone simple design and construction, I don't see how that's possible.

Canon would have to give this lens away at non-existent margins (much like I suspect Nikon is doing the same with their 200-500 5.6 VR).

Consider me exceptionally skeptical of this rumor. I think this a longer-than-400mm zoom is in development, but it'll end up being one of these instead:

• An EF first to allow f/6.3 max aperture (to keep that entrance pupil smaller and less expensive)
• Shorter than 600mm long end, 500 f/5.6 could be possible in a cheaper lens (ask Nikon)
• ...or it will be 100-400L II level in quality and cost a mint, say $3k

- A

 

[docsmith]

I want it to be #3, but I think Canon’s definition of a mint is different than yours. They still need to protect the 200-400 f/4 IS.

I am either expecting a $6k-$8k Lens or a plastic fantastic lens. Fortunately for us, their recent plastic fantastics haven’t been half bad. I am thinking a larger version of the 70-300 non-L.

 

[privatebydesign]

Canon would have to give this lens away at non-existent margins (much like I suspect Nikon is doing the same with their 200-500 5.6 VR).

Consider me exceptionally skeptical of this rumor.

A 600 f5.6 requires an apparent aperture of over 107mm (exactly the same as a 300mm f2.8 ) a 500 f5.6 can get by without 'bending the figures' with a smaller than 90mm apparent aperture. There is no way on earth Canon can be competitive with a 200-500 in a 200-600 of the same aperture. They can't fudge the figures like the third parties do either.

In my opinion that leaves a 200-600 f5.6 >$4,000 'cheap lens' option and a 200-500 f5.6 $2,500 competitive option. You can't make a 107mm front element down to the price range of a 90mm front element out of anything but the bottom of a beer glass, and that would suck anyway.

 

[ahsanford]

A 600 f5.6 requires an apparent aperture of over 107mm (exactly the same as a 300mm f2.8 ) a 500 f5.6 can get by without 'bending the figures' with a smaller than 90mm apparent aperture. There is no way on earth Canon can be competitive with a 200-500 in a 200-600 of the same aperture. They can't fudge the figures like the third parties do either.

In my opinion that leaves a 200-600 f5.6 >$4,000 'cheap lens' option and a 200-500 f5.6 $2,500 competitive option. You can't make a 107mm front element down to the price range of a 90mm front element out of anything but the bottom of a beer glass, and that would suck anyway.

...or Canon allows f/6.3 use on EF with all the advancements made in AF throughout the line.

I could see a plasticky 200-500 f/5-6.3 nano USM (or STM) coming in around $1500 or so.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

A 600 f5.6 requires an apparent aperture of over 107mm (exactly the same as a 300mm f2.8 ) a 500 f5.6 can get by without 'bending the figures' with a smaller than 90mm apparent aperture. There is no way on earth Canon can be competitive with a 200-500 in a 200-600 of the same aperture. They can't fudge the figures like the third parties do either.

In my opinion that leaves a 200-600 f5.6 >$4,000 'cheap lens' option and a 200-500 f5.6 $2,500 competitive option. You can't make a 107mm front element down to the price range of a 90mm front element out of anything but the bottom of a beer glass, and that would suck anyway.

...or Canon allows f/6.3 use on EF with all the advancements made in AF throughout the line.

I could see a plasticky 200-500 f/5-6.3 nano USM (or STM) coming in around $1500 or so.

- A

Maybe, but the post refers to the 200-600 f4.5-5.6 IS patent from a while ago, and I just don't see that as any kind of budget option from the need for big glass alone.

 

[snoke]

A 600 f5.6 requires an apparent aperture of over 107mm (exactly the same as a 300mm f2.8 ) a 500 f5.6 can get by without 'bending the figures' with a smaller than 90mm apparent aperture. There is no way on earth Canon can be competitive with a 200-500 in a 200-600 of the same aperture. They can't fudge the figures like the third parties do either.

In my opinion that leaves a 200-600 f5.6 >$4,000 'cheap lens' option and a 200-500 f5.6 $2,500 competitive option. You can't make a 107mm front element down to the price range of a 90mm front element out of anything but the bottom of a beer glass, and that would suck anyway.

...or Canon allows f/6.3 use on EF with all the advancements made in AF throughout the line.

I could see a plasticky 200-500 f/5-6.3 nano USM (or STM) coming in around $1500 or so.

- A

Maybe, but the post refers to the 200-600 f4.5-5.6 IS patent from a while ago, and I just don't see that as any kind of budget option from the need for big glass alone.

Why assume patent for product? Maybe product patent pending.

Others right about f/6.3 AF. How many Canon DSLR have f/8 AF capability?

EF-1.4x/2x tele-converter compatible?

 

[Chaitanya]

Most probably will be nano-USM not STM or full size USM motors.

 

[Don Haines]

it could be anything..... even a crop lens to replace the 18-200.... That lens is quite long in the tooth and an 18-300 or even an 18-400 would probably sell well.....

 

[ahsanford]

Most probably will be nano-USM not STM or full size USM motors.

+1

Non-L + Ring USM + zoom lens = a thing of the past. We haven't seen a new ring USM non-L zoom since the EF-S 15-85 IS USM in 2009.

- A

 

[Antono Refa]

Canon has made several EF-M lenses with max aperture of f/6.3 at the long end, and the EOS 80D and higher can focus at f/8 (will probably carry to lower lines eventually), so I can see how Canon will release a cheapo super tele to keep in with the competition.

 

[preppyak]

Canon has made several EF-M lenses with max aperture of f/6.3 at the long end, and the EOS 80D and higher can focus at f/8 (will probably carry to lower lines eventually), so I can see how Canon will release a cheapo super tele to keep in with the competition.

Yeah, Im thinking a 200-500 that goes to f/6.3, and has a body-style of say the 55-250 could be put out in the $1000-1200 range. I guess thats the other possibility. They actually target budget users, make it EF-S, and can make a much more reasonably sized lens as a result. But EF-S hasnt really been their style for quite some time.

 

[unfocused]

This is at least the third go round for this rumor and after much discussion previously, I’ve settled on this:

XXX-500mm f5.6 “L” selling for between $2500 and $3500. (XXX representing anywhere from 150-200mm)

I believe those who say an f5.6 600mm zoom would not be affordable. Although Canon has been upgrading all its enthusiast to pro lines with f8 focusing, I’m still doubting they would release a 6.3 lens.

Canon does not need to compete with Sigma or Tamron on price and making a weak performing lens is not in their best interest. They are better off offering a high quality lens and putting a red ring on it to attract enthusiasts who will pair it with the new 7D III. As for hurting sales of the 200-400 I don’t think companies are as worried about that as forum participants imagine.

 

[hendrik-sg]

Now even midclass crop cameras have f8 Focus. For a 600mm lens this would require a 75mm fron element, which sounds reasonable for a "Budget" lens.

 

[JoSto]

I own the Sigma 150-600 f6.3 C and even without the firmware-upgrade (which I will update soon) it is a very solid performer. Used at f7.1 it is sharp enough for the high-density sensor of the Canon 7D mark II. The IS is good, I regular shoot static birds at 1/250s. The Focus feels fast and build quality is equal with the cheaper L-Series Lenses from Canon (100mm macro, 16-35 f4 IS).

With the price at about 900€ incl. sales tax its a _very_ strong offering. As I do not expect a new Canon non-L lens to outperform the sigma there is no reason to jump back to canon. The real difference between f6.3 and f5.6 ist not that big to alone justify a purchase.

I would love to get a Canon 200-600 f5.6 L with all the quality from the 100-400 mkII and real 600mm focal length. Would pay about 3.5k € for it. But I dont expect it to come because it would seriously harm all the big white primes and kill the much more expensive 200-400. Alone for the saved weight every nature fotographer would buy it.

 

[hne]

Canon is making its own glass, they might have figured out a way to make large enough glass cheap enough for a budget-friendly lens.

Except...

The referenced Japanese patent application 2015-212724 mainly talks about video use and the ability of the lens design to enable minimal variation of aberrations when focusing, while keeping the lens compact and internally zooming/focusing. It adds no image stabilisation. The lens design is based on all the large front facing elements being spherically ground for the largest image height. But that still isn't covering a full 24x36mm sensor. The examples show back focus that either wouldn't fit an EF or EF-S mount and the one that would is large enough to comfortably fit both B4 and PL mount.

That patent is not a design for a budget birders. I would bet it being a lens in a box-shaped housing for broadcast cameras on heavy tripods, commonly seen covering major sports events. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if the price tag of a lens built under protection of that pattern ends up costing $50'000.

 

[Sharlin]

Canon has made several EF-M lenses with max aperture of f/6.3 at the long end, and the EOS 80D and higher can focus at f/8 (will probably carry to lower lines eventually), so I can see how Canon will release a cheapo super tele to keep in with the competition.

EF-M can do f/6.3 AF easily due to image sensor AF (AFAIK in bright light live view AF still functions at f/11 albeit not necessarily reliably).

f/8 AF already dribbled down to Rebel level; the 800D/T7i has the exact same AF functionality as the 80D. Indeed, as of now all current Canon bodies except the 200D and the 1300D can AF at f/8 at least with the center point.

 

[Ladislav]

I was waiting for such lens for so long that I ended with Sigma 150-600C. Yes, image stabilization at least on my copy is not very good and AF is so-so for moving subjects (although programable switch with customizable focus distance limiting helps a lot). The point is - it is a lens I'm already enjoying without waiting years for Canon to make a move.

I'm much more reluctant to upgrade a lens I already have then to buy a lens for usage I don't have yet covered, so Canon would have to release something absolutely amazing with great value for money to make me think about the switch.

I somehow doubt Canon is going to release anything I would consider amazing to not compete with existing 100-400L II. I expect some downsides in the new lens which will not be just about build quality and weather sealing - that will make motivation to switch from Sigma less likely to happen.

I would be much more interested if it was L lens - something like 200-500L IS 5.6 optimized to work well with 1.4 extender but that is a dream which will not happen and if it ever happens it will not be cheap. Depending on quality it would either compete with 100-400 or 200-400 and that's why I don't see this lens coming.

 

[-1]

EF 600mm f/5.6 IS long end + competitive in price to the Sigma/Tamron = CR2? Unless it's a plastic fantastic with STM and a bone simple design and construction, I don't see how that's possible.

Canon would have to give this lens away at non-existent margins (much like I suspect Nikon is doing the same with their 200-500 5.6 VR).

Consider me exceptionally skeptical of this rumor. I think this a longer-than-400mm zoom is in development, but it'll end up being one of these instead:

• An EF first to allow f/6.3 max aperture (to keep that entrance pupil smaller and less expensive)
• Shorter than 600mm long end, 500 f/5.6 could be possible in a cheaper lens (ask Nikon)
• ...or it will be 100-400L II level in quality and cost a mint, say $3k

The competitor would likely not be the Siggy C but Sport, sans weather sealing and the Nikkor...