A new super telephoto lens will be announced soon

[birdman916]

View attachment 207388

Now, my dream…my dream is an RF 300/2.8, preferably with a switchable 1.4x TC.

Me and you are Dreamchasers!!

 

[sutherlandphotogra]

So excited!!

Maggie
St. Louis newborn photographer

 

[PinholeR5]

I'm hoping for the rumored 200-500 f/4 with 1.4xTC. I use the 200-400 f/4 for soccer games and it is fantastic. If I could get the extra reach, a significant reduction in weight and somehow faster AF (though I have nothing to complain on that front about the 200-400), then I might sell both my 200-400 and the 600 f/4 II (and probably add some cash) to get it.

 

[Chaitanya]

Maybe you have a different definition of ‘happening’. The EF 300/2.8 II was discontinued nearly a year ago, and there’s no RF version yet.

Asobinet posted patent of RF 100-300mm 2.8 with 1.4 TC. Maybe that would be of interest to you.

キヤノン「RF100-300mm F2.8 ×1.4 Extender」を想定したような光学系の特許出願

2023年2月8日付けでキヤノンの気になる特許出願が公開。100-300mm F2.8に内蔵テレコンバージョン…

asobinet.com

 

[neuroanatomist]

Asobinet posted patent of RF 100-300mm 2.8 with 1.4 TC. Maybe that would be of interest to you.

キヤノン「RF100-300mm F2.8 ×1.4 Extender」を想定したような光学系の特許出願

2023年2月8日付けでキヤノンの気になる特許出願が公開。100-300mm F2.8に内蔵テレコンバージョン…

asobinet.com

Thanks! And yes, it is definitely of interest, assuming it makes the jump from patent to product.

 

[jaygould]

How does that benefit Canon?

Canon’s lineup currently seems aimed at a low end and a high-end market, not a mid-range market. While many forum dwellers seem to fall into that third category, the question is how many actual buyers do? Canon seems to think the answer to that is not enough.

If that's the way they think, then why not open up their mount to Sigma and others? Third parties could fill the middle class segment. Since Canon aren't going to make any lenses for these people anyway, then they've got nothing to lose.

 

[antolalto]

I think I would sell my firstborn son (which I don't have) for an RF 200-500 f/4 with TC1.4x.

 

[PinholeR5]

I think I would sell my firstborn son (which I don't have) for an RF 200-500 f/4 with TC1.4x.

Maybe not my firstborn , but I'd probably sell my EF 200-400mm f/4 1.4x and my EF 600mm f/4 II to get it!

 

[Stig Nygaard]

I suddenly see DPReview featuring and old story (video) on their frontpage:

DPReview TV: Canon 200mm F1.8L is over 30 years old and it still rocks

The Canon 200mm F1.8L may be over 30 years old, but the fact that it still keeps up with the newest high resolution sensors is a testament to its design. Featuring guest photographer Irene Rudnyk.

www.dpreview.com

A coincidence, or do DPReview know something we don't know yet? Maybe they already have their hands on something new, big and white?

 

[shadowsports]

Maybe not my firstborn , but I'd probably sell my EF 200-400mm f/4 1.4x and my EF 600mm f/4 II to get it!

I'd like a 200~500 f4 with 1.4x TC also, but I don't think it would happen soon enough for me... My 100-500 arrives today.

 

[Czardoom]

If that's the way they think, then why not open up their mount to Sigma and others? Third parties could fill the middle class segment. Since Canon aren't going to make any lenses for these people anyway, then they've got nothing to lose.

I think in actuality, they would have a lot to lose. It seems that many folks are looking for lenses better than the consumer level, but hesitant to buy the pricey pro level. But since there is no middle level, many end up buying the pro level lenses anyway. Lenses, as far as I can remember, have been where the profits are for camera companies, and the biggest profits are in the expensive lenses. So if Sigma or any 3rd party maker produces lenses better than consumer level, but almost pro level but cheaper, then Canon loses sales. They also lose sales of consumer level lenses, since it seems like there is also a segment of folks who buy the cheaper lenses, but are really looking for something just a bit better in quality or build. Canon is not stupid. I think they understand that if they produce a mid-level line of lenses, that seriously hurts the pro level profits. As a lens maker, I think you have two successful paths. Either you make two clearly differentiated lines of lenses as Canon is doing; to satisfy those looking for pro level lenses and those wanting the least expansive option, or you make a line of mid level lenses. I don't think you can do both successfully.

 

[davidespinosa]

There's clearly room for mid-level lenses:
50mm f/1.8 $159
50mm f/1.2 $2099
(prices in US dollars)

 

[jaygould]

I think in actuality, they would have a lot to lose. It seems that many folks are looking for lenses better than the consumer level, but hesitant to buy the pricey pro level. But since there is no middle level, many end up buying the pro level lenses anyway. Lenses, as far as I can remember, have been where the profits are for camera companies, and the biggest profits are in the expensive lenses. So if Sigma or any 3rd party maker produces lenses better than consumer level, but almost pro level but cheaper, then Canon loses sales. They also lose sales of consumer level lenses, since it seems like there is also a segment of folks who buy the cheaper lenses, but are really looking for something just a bit better in quality or build. Canon is not stupid. I think they understand that if they produce a mid-level line of lenses, that seriously hurts the pro level profits. As a lens maker, I think you have two successful paths. Either you make two clearly differentiated lines of lenses as Canon is doing; to satisfy those looking for pro level lenses and those wanting the least expansive option, or you make a line of mid level lenses. I don't think you can do both successfully.

I don't think enthusiasts who don't want to spend the big bucks and normally buy cheap consumer grade level stuff will ever buy $2000+ L-lenses. These people will simply either make due with what they have (the cheap stuff) or move to Sony. I don't see them putting 10 grand on a few primes when they buy an RP or R8 over an R or R6 to save a few hundred.

 

[Kit.]

I don't think enthusiasts who don't want to spend the big bucks and normally buy cheap consumer grade level stuff will ever buy $2000+ L-lenses. These people will simply either make due with what they have (the cheap stuff) or move to Sony. I don't see them putting 10 grand on a few primes when they buy an RP or R8 over an R or R6 to save a few hundred.

They may increase demand on used EF lenses, making RF stuff slightly more affordable to those who are moving from EF to RF,

 

[PinholeR5]

I'd like a 200~500 f4 with 1.4x TC also, but I don't think it would happen soon enough for me... My 100-500 arrives today.

So how do you like the 100-500mm? I have that lens, and it is fantastic. Light and a great focal length range. Sharpness, AF speed and MFD are exceptional. The aperture range... not so much, but these days you can manage the smaller aperture and higher ISOs.

I love mine! Lately, I've been using it quite a bit with the R7.

All that said, constant f/4 for 200-500mm with built-in 1.4x TC??? Yeah, that is in a totally different league!

 

[antolalto]

The only problem with a 200-500 f/4 TC1.4x is that the price range would easily be between 15 and 20k... But what a lens would that be.

 

[PinholeR5]

The only problem with a 200-500 f/4 TC1.4x is that the price range would easily be between 15 and 20k... But what a lens would that be.

Yeah... I'm hoping for 15K so I don't have to add too much after selling the 200-400 f/4 1.4xTC and the 600mm f/4 II.

 

[shadowsports]

So how do you like the 100-500mm? I have that lens, and it is fantastic. Light and a great focal length range. Sharpness, AF speed and MFD are exceptional. The aperture range... not so much, but these days you can manage the smaller aperture and higher ISOs.

I love mine! Lately, I've been using it quite a bit with the R7.

All that said, constant f/4 for 200-500mm with built-in 1.4x TC??? Yeah, that is in a totally different league!

@PinholeR5,
Very sorry for missing your reply. I love it. The 100~500mm is so sharp. My initial reluctance was only being able to use it with a TC at 300-500mm, but the lens itself is awesome. Its so much lighter than my Sigma 150-600c.

I think I'm set. RF100-400 for lightweight travel, and the 100-500 when nothing but the best will do.