Canon EF 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM

[andrei1989]

Has anyone seen this?
How reliable is this article and can we expect this lens this year?

http://www.lens-rumors.com/canon-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is-usm-now-in-testing-to-be-announced-in-late-2016/

 

[DJL329]

Yes, it was reported here a few months ago.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=29454.0

 

[andrei1989]

you're right...my bad...

the update would be that there are some units out there being tested..
and they might be spotted considering they're not L therefore most probably not white

anyway..if the admin feels like it, he can delete the thread

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

you're right...my bad...

the update would be that there are some units out there being tested..
and they might be spotted considering they're not L therefore most probably not white

anyway..if the admin feels like it, he can delete the thread

I haven't heard of test units being out there, but it is expected, since Canon needs to compete. I would not worry about it being a consumer grade lens, I don't treat my gear roughly, such a lens for me would be for personal use, not business.

 

[MrFotoFool]

I do not know how they can project the price of a lens whose existence is not even confirmed yet. If true however it would be quite popular. As Mt Spokane Photography stated, I agree the build quality is not an issue for many people (myself included) as long as the optics are good. However I just bought a refurb 100-400 ii, so I will not be buying any more telephoto lenses (I say now, but when this comes out I may change my tune).

 

[andrei1989]

I haven't heard of test units being out there

well, that's what the rumour brings new to the table

as for the predicted price, it's supposed to be close to the competition, otherwise there is no point for such a product

it will be cheaper than the 100-400 and the sigma sport but a bit more expensive than the nikon 200-500

as i was seriously considering the tamron or the sigma contemporary i will wait now and see how this canon will be for 50% more $$ (after the price stabilises)

 

[Chaitanya]

That lens certainly would be useful for birders on budget. I am still wondering if Canon will ever update their 400mm 5.6 or 300mm 4 or pre historic 50mm Compact macro.

 

[zim]

Interesting that it would be a black lens (non L) as whilst watching the Euros (I can't help checking out the sidelines( I thought I saw a couple of canons with long black lenses, I assumed third party but would a sports photographer at an event like that use third party? must look more closely!

 

[scottkinfw]

you're right...my bad...

the update would be that there are some units out there being tested..
and they might be spotted considering they're not L therefore most probably not white

anyway..if the admin feels like it, he can delete the thread

I haven't heard of test units being out there, but it is expected, since Canon needs to compete. I would not worry about it being a consumer grade lens, I don't treat my gear roughly, such a lens for me would be for personal use, not business.

+1. If optics are excellent, and price point was right, I would buy this in a heartbeat, and wouldn't care that it isn't white. Reason- I would love to have the reach, but not for the price of the big white primes. I would use the lens frequently, but not enough to justify a hefty price. At less than $2K, it isn't a cheap disposable lens, but it is reasonable for what I expect to use it, and for the frequency I would use it. Regarding non-white build, I treat my lenses with kid gloves and it should hold up, no problem.

sek

 

[canonix]

I am curios how much the lens will cost, I think the Canon Lenses (as well as any other original brands like Nikon) are so expensive, because of their name. I mean, for sure they do have a really good quality and are great, but I can get the Sigma 150-600mm for less and it is still a very good lens. I am looking forward to reactions when the Canon came out.

 

[chrysoberyl]

Wow, I do NOT want a dust-huffer, but I might change my mind to get this reach, if it is decent @ 600mm. And AF's well with my 80D.

 

[NorbR]

Personally I still don't really believe it ... The non-L part makes it a bit more believable, but still, I maintain what I've said before: I don't believe we can get these three things together from Canon:
- 600mm on the long end
- f/5.6
- under $2k
I think one of these will have to give.

I'll be quite happy to be proven wrong, if it happens, feel free to come back to this post and mock me. I probably won't see it anyway, I'll be too busy pre-ordering this lens ^^

 

[chrysoberyl]

Personally I still don't really believe it ... The non-L part makes it a bit more believable, but still, I maintain what I've said before: I don't believe we can get these three things together from Canon:
- 600mm on the long end
- f/5.6
- under $2k
I think one of these will have to give.

I'll be quite happy to be proven wrong, if it happens, feel free to come back to this post and mock me. I probably won't see it anyway, I'll be too busy pre-ordering this lens ^^

Ha - I expect at least two things to give. But 600mm, sharper at 600mm than competition, and good AF would be worth up to $2500 to me.

 

[MrFotoFool]

Is it a given that a non-L lens has to be black? Why can't it be white without a red ring?

 

[privatebydesign]

Is it a given that a non-L lens has to be black? Why can't it be white without a red ring?

No reason, there have been non L white lenses already.

 

[Don Haines]

Personally I still don't really believe it ... The non-L part makes it a bit more believable, but still, I maintain what I've said before: I don't believe we can get these three things together from Canon:
- 600mm on the long end
- f/5.6
- under $2k
I think one of these will have to give.

My bet is the F5.6 becomes F6.3....

 

[MrFotoFool]

Or the 600 becomes 500. This seems more likely, to match the Nikon 200-500 5.6. I doubt Canon will go any smaller than 5.6 aperture.

 

[andrei1989]

Is it a given that a non-L lens has to be black? Why can't it be white without a red ring?

No reason, there have been non L white lenses already.

Other than the green ring DO lenses?

 

[Fleetie]

Seriously... A lens with a minimum 107mm entrance pupil? For <$2k ?!
The 200 f/2 L costs way, way more, and that's not even a zoom lens.
I would expect the new lens to cost more than the 200/2.
And I doubt Canon would bother making a second-rate lens with a >107mm front element.

This rumoured cheap price is BS.

[EDIT: Although, given Canon's (and no doubt other companies' too) "flexible" approach to naming lenses based on their optical characteristics, a "600mm f/5.6" lens would likely be 566mm f/5.9, which would only need a 96mm entrance pupil. But even that is going to be big and very expensive.]

 

[MTSG]

107mm front glass and non-L, - it can be do-able for Canon, lets hope for that. however big piece of cake is gone already as tons of sigs and tams 150-600 are sold. i have the time to wait and ll take it ONLY if optics will be same or just a bit better than sig/tam. i do not believe in such miracles Canon will give us something even close to resolutions of big whites. and they have resources to locate 200-600/5.6 right between sig sport and big whites. same like they did with 35/1.4 which is "just" abt 1% better than sig 35/1.4.
L-glass is mechanically complex and if they skip it it may be done. If not sig sport will be mine. next year.