Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS To Arrive in Late 2017 [CR2]

[NancyP]

It may not need BR. It is a lot easier to design an apochromatic telephoto design than an apo wide angle design.

 

[Loswr]

It may not need BR. It is a lot easier to design an apochromatic telephoto design than an apo wide angle design.

In fact, both DO and BR are intended to correct CA.

 

[Jopa]

Looking at the photo again, I just noticed it has a red ring, instead of green, as the other DO lenses have. Perhaps Canon has finally decided to add it to the "L" lineup.

(...)

The prototype shown last year was an L lens: Canon EF 600 mm f/4L DO IS USM.

It looks like "500" to me?

 

[ExodistPhotography]

They said the ef 50mm f/1.2 L II would be ready when?

Can't believe I beat ahsanford to the question.

L? f/1.2? What does that mean? Who needs that?

- A

I support this post..
I would love to see a 50mm IS lens...

 

[Maiaibing]

<p>We’re told that the Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-br-at-canon-expo/">that was shown in prototype form</a> at Canon EXPO in September of 2015 is currently scheduled to be launched in the second half of 2017.</p>

Great marketing ploy. Have no use for this lens. But 600mm in that package - want...

 

[applecider]

Tron with regard to the weight of the 800mm 5.6, I got my info off of the digital picture and the lens plus hood or "in use" weight is 4.9kg +- a little, are you using the lens without hood as your weight standard? Personally I always keep my hood on except for the rare time I'm packing and need more space, and then it gets inverted. I find the hood protects the lens. When I car transport the lens I stuff a soft cotton towel into the hood to keep any objects from getting into the hood and rolling around and potentially scratching the front element.

Sorry a little OT there but the in use weight of the 800mm is 5kg more or less.

From the digital picture:
Manufacturer Specification Weight 157.8 oz
Actual Weight 162.4 oz
Lens Hood Weight 11.3 oz
In-Use Weight 173.7 oz

 

[tron]

Tron with regard to the weight of the 800mm 5.6, I got my info off of the digital picture and the lens plus hood or "in use" weight is 4.9kg +- a little, are you using the lens without hood as your weight standard? Personally I always keep my hood on except for the rare time I'm packing and need more space, and then it gets inverted. I find the hood protects the lens. When I car transport the lens I stuff a soft cotton towel into the hood to keep any objects from getting into the hood and rolling around and potentially scratching the front element.

Sorry a little OT there but the in use weight of the 800mm is 5kg more or less.

From the digital picture:
Manufacturer Specification Weight 157.8 oz
Actual Weight 162.4 oz
Lens Hood Weight 11.3 oz
In-Use Weight 173.7 oz

I got the info from there:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-800mm-f-5.6-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

and there:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/lenses/ef/super-telephoto/ef-800mm-f-5-6l-is-usm

Both say 4.5k

 

[Eldar]

I have just spent two weeks in a safari vehicle, with three others, using the 600/4L IS II (with and without extenders) and the 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, on two bodies. Because of the dust situation, there is no option to drop the hoods and since you are not allowed to leave the vehicle in these parks, getting these monster lenses up and down through the open roof, or out through the small windows of the vehicle is anything but fun.

Swapping the current 600 with a DO version, provided my weight and size expectations are about correct, would be an easy decision. My wife used the 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS II on a 7DII on the same trip and produced stunning shots. A tempting combo for a safari trip would be a 600 DO, with extenders and the 100-400, plus a 24-70.

 

[applecider]

Tron interesting that weight could be uncertain. Even within the digital picture review there are inconsistencies. I still think the lighter weights are without hood. How the manufacturer's weight and actual scale weight differ is another matter. In my own case with other great whites I've added custom feet, that change the weight a little.

Which brings up a small pet peeve of mine, I wish canon would just add acra swiss compatibility to their own feet. Then they'd fit in cases better etc. And the cases should have rollers on them and luggage handles, at least the larger ones.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Tron interesting that weight could be uncertain. Even within the digital picture review there are inconsistencies. I still think the lighter weights are without hood. How the manufacturer's weight and actual scale weight differ is another matter. In my own case with other great whites I've added custom feet, that change the weight a little.

Which brings up a small pet peeve of mine, I wish canon would just add acra swiss compatibility to their own feet. Then they'd fit in cases better etc. And the cases should have rollers on them and luggage handles, at least the larger ones.

I agree about the lens tripod foot! It's ridiculous given other items are first class.

Jack

 

[tron]

Tron interesting that weight could be uncertain. Even within the digital picture review there are inconsistencies. I still think the lighter weights are without hood. How the manufacturer's weight and actual scale weight differ is another matter. In my own case with other great whites I've added custom feet, that change the weight a little.

Which brings up a small pet peeve of mine, I wish canon would just add acra swiss compatibility to their own feet. Then they'd fit in cases better etc. And the cases should have rollers on them and luggage handles, at least the larger ones.

I add Arca swiss plates to my white lenses too. And I use hoods too. The advantages over weigh the slight weight increase disadvantage...