Gordon Laing reviews the two “new” Big White Lenses for the RF mount

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,257
2,029
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
I know what you mean, but that still should not stop us from criticizing marketing decisions. For example I would probably never by a Porsche, even if I had the money, but I will always say that I hate that fake motor sounds. They (and other automakers) have built secret loudspeakers into their cars that produce the motor sound some customers want. I will also criticize that some luxury apartments cost millions of dollars, but you can't open any windows there.

You say that not having to use an adapter is already good enough for some, but then I have to ask why people, who use their cameras for sports or bird photography and will never use a lens that profits from the shorter flange distance of the RF mount, are also forced to switch to the RF mount, as Canon pretty much abandons the EF mount. Those people probably already earn a 600mm EF lens and now they might learn that they have to switch to the RF version, because the EF version might explode, if you use it with an adapter. What advantage does a sports photographer really have from the RF mount? Wouldn't he prefer a mirrorless camera with an EF mount, which would allow him to keep all his long telephoto lenses? For me it feels like a kind of blackmail by Canon. They only give you all the advantages of a mirrorless camera like IBIS and the much better autofocus, if you switch to the RF mount. Of course that is their way to generate the most money, but it may not be in the interest of their loyal customers.
For the record, there are no "secret" loudspeakers. There is a cabin noise processor in these cars for engine sound that comes through the audio system, if you don't like the sound, just unplug it. Most of them are in the trunk of the car or behind the dash.

Secondly, anyone that uses a big white lens professionally knows that adapters and teleconverters are the weakest link, and it's up to the shooter to decide whether or not they care.

Thirdly, Canon isn't blackmailing anyone, you can continue to use your EF glass for as long as you want. The fact is the EF mount has limitations, and IBIS (the way it works with lens IS) and autofocus can be affected by the EF mount protocols when comparing them to the RF mount. The EF mount is also a 35-year-old technology, I think it has run its course and no one should be too upset that they have moved on.
 

Andy Westwood

EOS R6
CR Pro
Dec 10, 2016
169
273
UK
Sometime ago I traded my old EF 24-70 f/2.8 and put towards the new RF version. First thing I’m going to do in the morning when I open my camera bag is check the lens.

Just in case the retailer sneaked my old EF lens round the back and glued a mount adapter to it, then re-introducing it to me as my new RF 24-70 f/2.8 :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:
 

Otara

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2012
419
245
I dont think they're going to have much trouble selling them at their probable initial production rate.

Im sure the adapters can 'explode' but some idea of the failure rate vs anecdotal experience would be interesting, and the overlap between broken camera/lens vs broken adapter. Are people using the camera as the strap holder or something, because I cant think of many reasons for it to be challenged torsionally the way I use them, I guess a hard knock on a 600mm would be a lot of leverage and I only have a 500mm and dont safari a lot (ha, I dont get to travel 5km right now).

Teleconverters are a non-issue for me in that on my 500 its just leaving the adapter on the camera when changing over, no real difference in practice that I can think of.
 

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,257
2,029
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
I dont think they're going to have much trouble selling them at their probable initial production rate.

Im sure the adapters can 'explode' but some idea of the failure rate vs anecdotal experience would be interesting, and the overlap between broken camera/lens vs broken adapter. Are people using the camera as the strap holder or something, because I cant think of many reasons for it to be challenged torsionally the way I use them, I guess a hard knock on a 600mm would be a lot of leverage and I only have a 500mm and dont safari a lot (ha, I dont get to travel 5km right now).

Teleconverters are a non-issue for me in that on my 500 its just leaving the adapter on the camera when changing over, no real difference in practice that I can think of.
I have never seen anyone use a lens strap. I have always been confused why anyone would. :D

The number of ruined teleconverters we got back when I owned Lens Rentals Canada almost made us not rent them anymore.
 

Otara

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2012
419
245
I have never seen anyone use a lens strap. I have always been confused why anyone would. :D

The number of ruined teleconverters we got back when I owned Lens Rentals Canada almost made us not rent them anymore.
Yeah I can see they'd be at some risk, its more are they any more at risk or difficult to use with an adapter involved as well. Havent seen it myself but I dont have much of a dataset I guess. If the adapter goes before the TC/lens/camera, Id call that a good thing probably, depending on how easily it went.
 

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,257
2,029
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Yeah I can see they'd be at some risk, its more are they any more at risk or difficult to use with an adapter involved as well. Havent seen it myself but I dont have much of a dataset I guess. If the adapter goes before the TC/lens/camera, Id call that a good thing probably, depending on how easily it went.
I've never busted a lens mount on a big white, I have on smaller lenses twice, but both were big drops.
 

Mr Majestyk

EOS RP
Feb 20, 2016
419
276
Australia
Sorry, what exactly is new about them. They are nothing but EF lenses with the adapter glued on. I can't even see the point f releasing, them, the EF III lenses work the same with adapter. Priorities should have been on actually all new 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4. The notion someone would be stupid enough to fork out for the RF version if they already own the EFIII version is ludicrous.
 

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,257
2,029
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Sorry, what exactly is new about them. They are nothing but EF lenses with the adapter glued on. I can't even see the point f releasing, them, the EF III lenses work the same with adapter. Priorities should have been on actually all new 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4. The notion someone would be stupid enough to fork out for the RF version if they already own the EFIII version is ludicrous.
They aren't "new" in optical design, but there appears to be some boost in AF performance with compatible RF mount cameras. It's also nice to see that the RF versions are priced the same as the EF versions, so there's no premium if you're in the market for a 400 2.8. The R3 may be the death knell to a lot of shooters' EF camera bodies.

I am moving on from the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS III, which I just sold tonight for $10,250 USD (shipping and paypal included). That leaves me less than $2000 short for the new RF version. That's really not a big hit financially if you don't have a DSLR anymore. If you're looking to get an R3, it's an even better upgrade.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,431
2,296
They aren't "new" in optical design, but there appears to be some boost in AF performance with compatible RF mount cameras. It's also nice to see that the RF versions are priced the same as the EF versions, so there's no premium if you're in the market for a 400 2.8. The R3 may be the death knell to a lot of shooters' EF camera bodies.

I am moving on from the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS III, which I just sold tonight for $10,250 USD (shipping and paypal included). That leaves me less than $2000 short for the new RF version. That's really not a big hit financially if you don't have a DSLR anymore. If you're looking to get an R3, it's an even better upgrade.

I'm sort of in the opposite boat. Granted I don't have a Big White, just the 100-400 II L, but I actually don't want the 100-500 upgrade (and not because I suffer from "OMG f/7.1!!!!" phobia--I don't because I understand the issue). But I wouldn't even trade straight across for it. Because I sometimes use that lens on my M6-II, something I'd never be able to do with the RF version.

Of course that's flat out not a consideration for most people with the big whites who could reasonably want to switch for the reasons you've named. Conversely, I don't have to worry about torque-shattering my adapter or extender, either, because the lens is quite a bit shorter.
 

InchMetric

Switched from Nikon. Still zooming the wrong way.
CR Pro
Jun 22, 2021
149
149
I have to ask why people, who use their cameras for sports or bird photography and will never use a lens that profits from the shorter flange distance of the RF mount, are also forced to switch to the RF mount, as Canon pretty much abandons the EF mount.
You aren’t forced to switch. But if you feel forced it’s because these market experts think that they will create more customer satisfaction by focusing on mirrorless.
Those people probably already earn a 600mm EF lens and now they might learn that they have to switch to the RF version, because the EF version might explode, if you use it with an adapter. What advantage does a sports photographer really have from the RF mount?
The advantage of the RF version who wants all the benefits that the mirrorless technology enables. The experts might be wrong but I’d wager they have better market data and the only market you’re an expert at is your own personal preferences
Wouldn't he prefer a mirrorless camera with an EF mount, which would allow him to keep all his long telephoto lenses?
The pro who shoots with big lenses doesn’t much care if his upgrade to a new body requires him or his employer to buy an RF lens. Used lenses have their market value and can be sold.
For me it feels like a kind of blackmail by Canon. They only give you all the advantages of a mirrorless camera like IBIS and the much better autofocus, if you switch to the RF mount. Of course that is their way to generate the most money, but it may not be in the interest of their loyal customers.
It’s not blackmail to offer improved technology. And you might be surprised to learn that the only way to generate the most money is to satisfy tue interests of their customers.

It seems more greedy and worthy of criticism for one to expect others to labor and undertake risk to serve the needs of oneself against the others’ own best self interests.
 

Otara

EOS RP
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2012
419
245
I've never busted a lens mount on a big white, I have on smaller lenses twice, but both were big drops.
Fair enough. Im just a bit surprised as Ive never seen any reports before now of actually physically broken ef-rf adapters as a significant issue, but if its mostly about 600mm or the like on safari its probably a bit niche I guess.
 

InchMetric

Switched from Nikon. Still zooming the wrong way.
CR Pro
Jun 22, 2021
149
149
Sorry, what exactly is new about them. They are nothing but EF lenses with the adapter glued on. I can't even see the point f releasing, them, the EF III lenses work the same with adapter. Priorities should have been on actually all new 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4. The notion someone would be stupid enough to fork out for the RF version if they already own the EFIII version is ludicrous.
The point you can’t see is that some RF owners would not buy a lens requiring an adapter for any number of reasons you don’t need to agree with.

It’s irrelevant to the wisdom of the strategy that most EF owners arguably won’t buy an RF. Who cares? Canon has a better chance to sell the lens of both formats are offered. Why would you think they’d be smarter to deny RF owners an appealing choice they might greatly prefer?

What’s your real issue?
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,847
2,464
Alberta, Canada
I have never seen anyone use a lens strap. I have always been confused why anyone would. :D

The number of ruined teleconverters we got back when I owned Lens Rentals Canada almost made us not rent them anymore.
A lens strap coupled with an over the shoulder, under the opposite arm, arrangement can give great support as the strap tensions up when the camera is brought up to the eye. I would never use the camera strap with a big lens. It also places the camera higher when walking and puts my gimbal lens foot just where I like it to hang onto. Hiking through the bush my hand on the lens mount handle or the strap alternately support the heavy lens and the camera tucks into my elbow pit. On rough terrain the handle is always in my hand with slack on the strap and there is little possibility of an adapter or extender getting any stress.

Jack
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

tarjei99

EOS M50
Dec 27, 2013
49
39
I would still go for an EF lens. That would open up the possibility of buying cheap used EF cameras to use it with. And I have a few of those.

Even with the nice AF, a crop camera like the 7D2 or 90D give me more reach without having to mess around with a teleconverter. At range the advantage of a R6 is not that big.

One subtle advantage for a EF camera is reaction time. They are almost instant on when I press a button. A mirrorless will give me a "black wall" instead of what I aiming at when I lift the camera and presses a button. It is just enough to be annoying and loose potential images.
 

David_D

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 19, 2021
56
56
An interesting note about these new lenses Gordon mentions is that the native RF mount allows more power to get to the autofocus motors making them faster. By the sounds of it, this will be camera-dependent and will likely be available starting with the EOS R3.
I assume this faster AF drive is in addition to the normal 1-series advantage from the higher voltage. (I have not had time to watch the video yet, which may cover this. I believe Canon mentioned an additional power pin.) Will be interesting to see the difference between the R3 (which should have both) and the R5 (which has neither).

I'll give it a try soon after my numbers win.
 

edoorn

EOS RP
Apr 1, 2016
354
329
I would still go for an EF lens. That would open up the possibility of buying cheap used EF cameras to use it with. And I have a few of those.

Even with the nice AF, a crop camera like the 7D2 or 90D give me more reach without having to mess around with a teleconverter. At range the advantage of a R6 is not that big.

One subtle advantage for a EF camera is reaction time. They are almost instant on when I press a button. A mirrorless will give me a "black wall" instead of what I aiming at when I lift the camera and presses a button. It is just enough to be annoying and loose potential images.
I think the idea of these lenses is they're aimed at people that only shoot mirrorless from now on. And with bodies like the R3 in mind (and the alledged 'R7' crop camera that's supposedly in the pipe line).

You can bet that an R3 will have a much improved reaction time as well. But of course that's an expensive body as well (although, if you can spare the dough for a lens like this..).

Luckily the EF version will still be around for a very long time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InchMetric

rbielefeld

EOS 90D
Apr 22, 2015
162
363
For new buyers, they're the same price.

You won't lose much by selling your EF version to "upgrade". There is also the adapter issue, I've seen a few of them explode in the field. The other issue is how truly cumbersome teleconverters would become to use alongside an adapter. I think usability is a big advantage if you're all in on RF.
I have been using the control ring adapter with my EF 600 f/4 II and the 1.4x and 2.0x TCs on my R5s and I have not had any issues with usability. It all works great. One thing to note is Canon did not put a Control Ring on the new RF versions of the 600 f/4, unless I missed it, and this is big for me. I like the Control Ring and using the adapter gives me that functionality on all my EF lenses. If I go with the RF 600 f/4 I am taking a small step backwards in the functionality department.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Talys

docsmith

EOS R
CR Pro
Sep 17, 2010
1,064
519
Learned that more contact points will be used to supply energy to power the AF. Very curious as to how fast they can make it. In Gordon's video, there did seem to be an initial lag then it found focus quickly. I am wondering if the initially lag disappears and AF is essentially instantaneous. There will definitely be a market for that.

Oddly, as I shoot my 500 f/4 II on my R5 all the time, his lag seemed longer than mine. I have played with the 1DX III and would say the biggest difference in AF in favor of the 1DX III was initial acquisition.

Not sure why so many people are bent out of shape. RF is the future. Personally, I have a complete kit of EF lenses that do what I want them to do. I haven't found a reason yet to jump to RF. It will happen some day. But I am thinking several more years.
 

David_D

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 19, 2021
56
56
Not sure why so many people are bent out of shape. RF is the future. Personally, I have a complete kit of EF lenses that do what I want them to do. I haven't found a reason yet to jump to RF. It will happen some day. But I am thinking several more years.
It is a simple decision process:
I already own an EF super-teleThis is my first super-tele
I own EF bodies and have no plans to move to RF, everKeepGet an EF as the RF won't fit
I want it to work with EF & RF bodies (and will do for some time)Keep and use with adapterProbably the hardest decision. Buy the EF if it must work on all bodies.
I have have EF bodies but will move to RF sooner rather than laterKeep and use with adapter, and consider upgrading later if you want/need the improved AF & IS or find the adapter too cumbersomeAnother hard decision. Only buy the EF if it must work on the EF bodies, if not postpone and get the RF when migrated to RF bodies..
I only own RF bodies and will never look backKeep and use with adapter, unless you want/need the improved AF & IS or find the adapter too cumbersomeGo for the RF, unless you really want a dedicated control ring

Short version, If you plan to stay committed to the EF system keep or buy the EF version of these lenses, but the more committed you are to RF system the more reasons to get the RF version :cool: