First Leaked Images of the RF 800mm F5.6L IS USM and the RF 1200mm F8L IS USM

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,678
6,114
The "original" EF 1200 was built to order(but also a stop faster and almost six-figures at launch[~$90K before tax]).
Yes but this newer model is a different beast entirely. No special order needed for a souped up 600 f4
 

Copland

I'm New Here
Jun 28, 2021
9
8
The EF 400/2.8 II/III with 2x and 1.4x mounted is a brilliant 1120mm Lens in my view and especially a flexible one.
Of course only on "good light" days. But a 1200mm lens will have the same flickering problems as an almost 1200mm lens.

I´m curious which target group will buy such a special lens. Probably for 2x.xxx $.
 
Last edited:

mxwphoto

R6 and be there
Jun 20, 2013
58
90
1645553324589.png
Superimposing the 800mm EF shows a possibly ever so slightly shorter length of the RF in comparison. There may be a slight angle difference, but assuming the front elements are the same size RF does look smaller. The more important metric would be the weight in my opinion. If there is substantial weight savings despite roughly the same length, then it would be a winner.
 

NMC

Jan 18, 2022
2
1
Man the next 2 years is going to be expensive! Last year I spent 75k euro on my raptor kit, lenses, A1/Z9/R3. This year I’ve already preordered the 400mm 2.8 Z, then we have the 800mm Z and now I have to get the 800 and 1200 rf lenses, they will be so good with the raptor for my big wave surfing footage. On top of that I’m thinking we’ll have the R1 preorder this year. Ow we’ll need an excuse to buy a new VW van heh! Glad I ain’t married.
 

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,343
383
32
34109
www.facebook.com
View attachment 202572
Superimposing the 800mm EF shows a possibly ever so slightly shorter length of the RF in comparison. There may be a slight angle difference, but assuming the front elements are the same size RF does look smaller. The more important metric would be the weight in my opinion. If there is substantial weight savings despite roughly the same length, then it would be a winner.

Less than 3kg/6.6lbs will be a win.
 

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
643
662
If I had to guess, I would say the 800 is a new design, since the EF 800 was introduced in 2008 and is nose heavy compared to the current 400 and 600. The 1200 could be an adaptation of the current 600, but the very long back end suggests more than just the 600 with an extender, and it needs to be more than that, because the performance of the 600 with a 2x isn't all that great, albeit a bit better with an RF extender than an EF III extender.
 

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,451
943
Two hugely expensive lens. I can't see Canon making much money from them. They must be a prestige loss leader.
It will be interesting if there is much of difference image quality wise versus a 600mm 1.4 Ext / 2 Ext.
A 1200mm is a most inflexible lens. It's very hard to find or follow anything at 1200mm a built in extender would be far more useful from that perspective.
I won't have to worry about them. Good luck to anyone who gets one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
3,008
1,215
UK
www.flickr.com
People keep saying just put a 2x on the 600, but with the native 1200 and extenders, you've got 1680 and 2400! RF extenders don't stack, right? Anyway these are mouthwatering but I'll likely never be able to afford a big white again :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

tron

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
5,125
1,503
Ok Canon let's get on with the big whites so as to see what comes next for people who are not body builders and super rich! Let's see the big zooms or smaller DO white lenses ... preferably this decade :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
536
522
I wonder if the rear metal element can be factory -removed, in order to convert RF into EF, since there are still many professional DSLR users.
Provided these are the real pictures of the lenses.
Hm, good Idea. Though I think the demand for this could be quite low.
I think if people invest in such lenses (my guess is 16k for the 800m and 30k for the 1200mm) its most likely that they want a new body with a high mega pixel count like the R5... I think the R5 or R3 is for wildlife and sport photography a big win over the DSLR counterparts. Especialy the 5D IV (which I still have for backup) is notable behind the R5 in my opinion =)
 

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
536
522
What's the point of the 1200 f/8? You could just use the 600 f/4 with a 2X, and have a far more versatile setup. These lenses are silly, hard to believe Canon is wasting resources on these, when the RF mount is still missing a 24mm L, 35mm L, etc.
Its about Quality :)
These extenders impact image quality quite a lot (depending on lense used). I have the 1,4 III and the 2x III canon extenders. I tried them in detail on the 70-200 and on my 100-400 4-5,6L IS II (which is a great lense).
Overall my finding was, that the extender barely brings a quality improvment over just using the native lense and simply scaling up.
So this is not a silly lense ;)
 

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
536
522
People keep saying just put a 2x on the 600, but with the native 1200 and extenders, you've got 1680 and 2400! RF extenders don't stack, right? Anyway these are mouthwatering but I'll likely never be able to afford a big white again :(
Also, extenders decrease the quality. A native 800mm lense is a lot sharper than a 2x 400m lense.
Sometimes you can even just upscale the sharp 400mm image, instead of using the extender. Even the Canon version III extender are not that great to the image...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

northlarch

EOS R5
CR Pro
Sep 10, 2020
53
105
I also can’t help but wonder what’s up with the metal mounts, as if they’re just slapping on the RF adaptors and calling it a day. Was hoping the 400 and 600 were stopgaps. We’ll know more in a few days, but I’m more interested in the route Nikon is taking with their built-in TCs and PF lenses. Much more versatile and practical for field use without sacrificing quality.
 
Last edited:

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,041
1,224
UK
The 400 and 600 are state of the art lens designs that followed years of a monumental development effort. No need to update when just changing the mount or adding an integrated TC. They are probably working on lens designs that actually need to be updated (300mm f 2.8?)
Agree with your first sentence, but it would be good to see updated, lighter and more compact versions of these lenses, to complement the smaller and lighter RF bodies.

I can think of plenty of other lenses that I'd prefer to be updated first though, and plenty of *new* lenses that are desirable to fill out gaps in the RF range. Particularly a stabilised compact 180mm F5.6 macro (yes I know I'm always prattling on about that, but the now discontinued non-stabilised 180mm F3.5 macro needs replacing with something more compact).
 

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,451
943
People keep saying just put a 2x on the 600, but with the native 1200 and extenders, you've got 1680 and 2400! RF extenders don't stack, right? Anyway these are mouthwatering but I'll likely never be able to afford a big white again :(
I assume you can put an empty extender like you'd use with a macro lens between two extenders. It would be manual focus. Might be a likely failure point though. If an RF adapter can explore multiple extenders in a row might be vulnerable. I'd hate to be trying to find a bird on a tree at 2400. I guess something for a real specialist.
Also, extenders decrease the quality. A native 800mm lense is a lot sharper than a 2x 400m lense.
Sometimes you can even just upscale the sharp 400mm image, instead of using the extender. Even the Canon version III extender are not that great to the image...
It will be interesting to see the difference between a native 800mm lens that a 2 x 400mm lens.
I use a 1.4X and 2X on a 600mm lens and both are quite sharp. Focusing speed is good on 1.4X but notably slower focussing with 2X but fine on a static bird.
A 1.4 on a 300mm 2.8 is great.
A side by side comparison might show something but I don't think it will be worth it. Better to get closer than use a longer lens. .
 

peters

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2017
536
522
I assume you can put an empty extender like you'd use with a macro lens between two extenders. It would be manual focus. Might be a likely failure point though. If an RF adapter can explore multiple extenders in a row might be vulnerable. I'd hate to be trying to find a bird on a tree at 2400. I guess something for a real specialist.

It will be interesting to see the difference between a native 800mm lens that a 2 x 400mm lens.
I use a 1.4X and 2X on a 600mm lens and both are quite sharp. Focusing speed is good on 1.4X but notably slower focussing with 2X but fine on a static bird.
A 1.4 on a 300mm 2.8 is great.
A side by side comparison might show something but I don't think it will be worth it. Better to get closer than use a longer lens. .
True, closer is indeed always better. Makes the entire image often more interesting, giving it more depth.

I guess the extender game on primes works better than on zoom lenses. I heard a lot of positive things about that. Though I guess the quality difference is still there to a native lense.
I wonder how many 1200mm lenses canon will actual sell :-D
 

fox40phil

5DIV & RP
Apr 12, 2013
282
178
Germany
www.phileas-schoenberg.de
It's a shame this isn't just an 800mm f/5.6 with a built in 1.4 Extender to make it an 1120mm f/8. I can't honestly dream of too many uses for such a long 1200mm lens, but I would love to see it being put into use.
T H I S !!!
Damn Canon...

Also those ugly silver adapters... o_O

But lets wait for the heavy prices!
But they won't beat the expensive Nikon 800 with 1,2TC I think (It is/was about 17-18000€!)

BUT#3: Can you guys imagine.... Canon brings niche lenses now and not 300 2.8 & 500 4.0 RFs?! Thats a crazy move I think!
 

jeffa4444

EOS 5D Mark IV
Feb 28, 2013
1,566
227
68
In some respects the 1200mm f8L is a step backwards given the cult status of the EF 1200mm f5.6L. When I ran Panavision Europe we had two EF 1200 f5.6L lenses adapted for PL mount (but able to still be mounted EF with adaptors)
Canon reportedly only made 22 one of which they still have. One was sold at auction in Germany last year for € 500K ($560K).
 
Sep 5, 2018
1,141
1,214
Scotland
BUT#3: Can you guys imagine.... Canon brings niche lenses now and not 300 2.8 & 500 4.0 RFs?! Thats a crazy move I think!
The 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4.0 where always late and are just discount 400 f/2.8 and 600 f/4.0. I would expect to see a 120-300 f/2.8 and 200-500 f/4.0 instead so that you pick 'one' of the £13,000 monsters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Dragon

EF 800L
May 29, 2019
643
662
I assume you can put an empty extender like you'd use with a macro lens between two extenders. It would be manual focus. Might be a likely failure point though. If an RF adapter can explore multiple extenders in a row might be vulnerable. I'd hate to be trying to find a bird on a tree at 2400. I guess something for a real specialist.

It will be interesting to see the difference between a native 800mm lens that a 2 x 400mm lens.
I use a 1.4X and 2X on a 600mm lens and both are quite sharp. Focusing speed is good on 1.4X but notably slower focussing with 2X but fine on a static bird.
A 1.4 on a 300mm 2.8 is great.
A side by side comparison might show something but I don't think it will be worth it. Better to get closer than use a longer lens. .
Yes, you can put an extension tube between two TCs, but you lose distant focus, so only useful for close up subjects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user