New type of teleconverter coming from Canon alongside a Supertelephoto zoom

[Canon Rumors]

We have been told that Canon will introduce a new type of teleconverter alongside the Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS, which will likely be announced in Q4 of this year, or Q1 of next year. We are still trying to nail down the timetable. The new teleconverter is basically a “zoom” TC. It can be

See full article...

 

[Chaitanya]

Interesting.

 

[davidespinosa]

Let’s hope that 0x really means 1.0x.

 

[koenkooi]

Canon RF plus a mention of "It won't be cheap" will move it into the $2000+ range. At some point it will be cheaper to get a new body with more megapixels instead of a TC.

 

[john1970]

Assuming that it can do 1.0x, 1.4x, and 2.0x this is a huge advantage both in terms of range and flexibility over built-in TCs. I have instructed my local camera shop to buy me this accessory immediately upon official release.

 

[mccasi]

the TC for people who don't like TCs - because changing is cumbersome and exposes the sensor (esp. desert, beach / seafront, snowstorm, rain)

i'll definitely check it out!

 

[john1970]

the TC for people who don't like TCs - because changing is cumbersome and exposes the sensor (esp. desert, beach / seafront, snowstorm, rain)

i'll definitely check it out!

Good point with regards to maintaining weather sealing while changing the magnification.

 

[Avulus]

Wouldn´t it be advantegeous for Canon to make it compatible with other RF-glasses as well ? At least I hope it will. Could be used with RF 70-200mm:s and hopefully also with RF 100-500mm for the whole focal length.

 

[GMAX]

Just take my money Imagine what this brings to a prime too (if compatible)

 

[Del Paso]

Now we understand better why the new superzooms don't have a built-in TC.
Who said that Canon don't innovate? Try to get similar lenses or TCs from SoniPanaNikoLeica.

 

[docsmith]

For me, first key will be IQ, second will be ergonomics, and third will be price. But this has a chance to really innovate my kit. I am very intrigued by the potential of this TC.

 

[Antono Refa]

Let’s hope that 0x really means 1.0x.

I love ultra wide, and will spend good money on a 0mm lens. Which will be never, but one can dream.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Canon RF plus a mention of "It won't be cheap" will move it into the $2000+ range. At some point it will be cheaper to get a new body with more megapixels instead of a TC.

$2K is basically what Nikon is charging extra for a built-in TC vs the same Canon lens without one.
Here we would just be paying once for every compatible lens and getting 2 instead of one.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Wouldn´t it be advantegeous for Canon to make it compatible with other RF-glasses as well ? At least I hope it will. Could be used with RF 70-200mm:s and hopefully also with RF 100-500mm for the whole focal length.

Yes, but that might not be practical.

 

[Brown]

What\'s the CR rating of this claim?

 

[unfocused]

Wouldn´t it be advantegeous for Canon to make it compatible with other RF-glasses as well ? At least I hope it will. Could be used with RF 70-200mm:s and hopefully also with RF 100-500mm for the whole focal length.

It’s the design of the lenses that make the 70-200 incompatible and restrict the zoom range of the 100-500. I doubt that will change with a new teleconverter.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It’s the design of the lenses that make the 70-200 incompatible and restrict the zoom range of the 100-500. I doubt that will change with a new teleconverter.

It's the front-protruding optical train (inner barrel) of the existing TCs that preclude compatibility with the RF 70-200 and full compatibility with the RF 100-500. The lenses won't change, but if the new TC lacks the protruding front portion then it would be compatible with all RF lenses. I doubt Canon will do this, but it's certainly possible. The patent diagrams do not show an optical train protrusion, but that doesn't mean much.

 

[PinholeR5]

I really like the concept, if it can be executed at the right IQ. A dedicated TC has the advantage of being able to be optimized for the single lens, which presumably makes it easier to get better IQ. External TCs have always had a hit in IQ, with 2x much worse than 1.4x. The hit on IQ has reduced over the years with both lens and TC evolution. If this 3-setting external TC can have IQ comparable to the existing RF TCs then I think this is a winner.

Having the 100-300 and 200-500 lenses ship with no TC, but having a multi-setting external TC is a much better solution. The lens is lighter (and presumably cheaper) with no TC. The multi-setting TC will be expensive but will work with (at least) two lenses and can be added for occasions where the added flexibility matters.

 

[Fischer]

Canon RF plus a mention of "It won't be cheap" will move it into the $2000+ range. At some point it will be cheaper to get a new body with more megapixels instead of a TC.

Another reason why we want more and more MPIX. It really delivers flexibility big time when shooting- not least for fast primes.

 

[roby17269]

It's the front-protruding optical train (inner barrel) of the existing TCs that preclude compatibility with the RF 70-200 and full compatibility with the RF 100-500. The lenses won't change, but if the new TC lacks the protruding front portion then it would be compatible with all RF lenses. I doubt Canon will do this, but it's certainly possible. The patent diagrams do not show an optical train protrusion, but that doesn't mean much.

Question: is part of the reason of having the protrusion on the current extenders mechanical stability and / or weather-proofing?
In any case I'd be in the market for this for sure. But first I need to see some tests about the impact on image quality at all settings, especially 1x. If it works well it'd be great not having to choose among nothing / 1.4x / 2x

So I am getting ready for a loooong wait...
On the bad side, if this will come out this year, since Canon is probably going to count it as a new RF lens, it means that there are less chances of getting the 35 f/1.2L in 2023