Here are some new lens images and early pricing

Billybob

800mm f/11 because a cellphone isn't long enough!
May 22, 2016
124
247
A quick comparison between the Sony FE 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 G OSS and Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM

SpecificationCanon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USMSony FE 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 G OSS
Weight1370g (3.02lbs)2115g (4.66lbs)
Size93.8mm (3.69") x 207.6mm (8.17")111.5mm (4.38") x 318mm (12.5")
Filter Size77mm95mm
Elements/Groups20 elements in 14 groups24 elements in 17 groups
Minimum focusing distance0.9m (2.95')2.4m (7.87')
Pricing$2999 (speculation)$1998
Good comparison. I own the Sony, the Canon's predecessor (the 100-400L II), and am considering the Canon 100-500L.
As I stated above, the Sony is a G lens, which is a step down from the Sony "Grand Master" lenses. The Sony is more comparable to the Sigma 150-600 S or Nikon 200-500. These are long, heavy, wildlife-specific lenses with a lower build quality than either L or GM lenses. Weather sealing will not be as robust if there is any at all. The 100-400 (or now 100-500) lenses have much better build quality, the fastest and most accurate AF available, and should survive rough handling a lot better than the sub-$2000 long zooms.

I love my Sony 200-600, but the IQ at the 600 end falls a bit short of the best primes (not surprising). if someone came out with a DO or PF 600mm 5.6 prime with the IQ of Canon's latest 400mm DO or Nikon's 500mm pf, I'd definitely would go for it. I expect the 100-500L to have the best 500mm IQ of any non-exotic. I would not be surprised if it came close to the IQ of the Nikon 500mm pf (albeit 2/3 stops darker), which is excellent indeed.
 
Last edited:

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
And the R5 price (along with any potential 'but to get 8K out of it will cost you a lot more' shockers) remains the most closely guarded secret in history.

- A
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Also, we can debate whether Sony's 200-600 is or is not the same price point as the RF 100-500L, but isn't a 5x zoom range vs. a 3x zoom range just begging to let us down sharpness-wise?

(Has a single 24-105 / 24-120 ever outresolved a similar timeframe 24-70?)

- A
 

koenkooi

EOS R
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,450
1,247
And the R5 price (along with any potential 'but to get 8K out of it will cost you a lot more' shockers) remains the most closely guarded secret in history.
My "R5 + 100-500" plan has turned into "R5 + 180mm L". I'm hoping the IBIS will help a bit, it won't the 5 stops the 100-500 has, but I'd be happy with half a stop already to make the EVF less shaky.
If the R5 price is as predicted I might even have budget left for CFexpress cards :)
 

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
CR Pro
Nov 7, 2013
3,106
1,215
Germany
...
Canon RF 600mm f/11 IS STM £699
Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM £929
...
WOW!
I wasn't expecting those f/11 teles be below 1.000 (no matter if $, € or £). I was hoping for such prices, but not expecting them.
Here Canon really surprised me - better shocked me :eek::ROFLMAO:

The rest is close to what I did expect. Though I can understand that the price of the 100-500 hurts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Richard Anthony

EOS 90D
Feb 24, 2020
136
158
Any idea on the possible availability of these lenses ? Or the R5 and R6 for that matter ?
We will find out for sure on Thursday after Canon's announcement , but the R5 is supposed to be available in September (though limited stock ) and the R6 is available from August , nothing on the lenses yet , but I should thing now they have priced them they will be available soon .
 

usern4cr

EOS RP
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
555
525
Kentucky, USA
If these are indeed the official UK prices well, I prefer knowing reality than even educated guesses! :unsure:

My educated guesses were, very close to these prices for the RF 85 STM, RF 600mm and RF 800mm would be.
Out of these 3, I am most interested in the 85mm (i.e. I can't see myself getting the 600mm or 800mm).

However I had hoped the RF 100-500mm might have been closer to around £/$2300 - because of the smaller aperture.
(But I did realise the 100-500mm was a premium in reach in terms of Canon's EF 100-400mm L IS USM II).

The RF 100-500mm is a lens I would be quite keen on after I pick up a RF 24-105mm f/4. That'll make a good 2 lens travel combination. (y)

The £/$2900 sets the bar high for me finding innovating ways of saving money after I hope put my hard earned cash in to buy a R5.
The good thing is with a EOS R adapter (EF lens on an RF mount) do work well (I've tried it on a friend's and store EOS R).
And I am assured that I will still get a lot of good use out of my EF 70-300mm L for a while. It's been great on my DSLRs.

As we know, extra reach s always welcome. :) The EOS R5 is only a few days away from being announced!! Yay! :love:

PJ
The 100-500 price is high, but within the range of what I thought it'd be based on the other prices for the trinity L IS zooms. The weight of it is considerable and will be slightly more than my previous heaviest lens, but I could still handle it. I looked at the graphs of maximum OOF background blur sizes at it's .33X maximum magnification at 500mm (which will greatly compress the background). So now I know that it will be able to take stunning flower/insect images near minimum focus with OOF backgrounds smeared into smooth gradients of colors & shades (which is one of the main things I do). And of course the medium to long telephoto reach will be good for wildlife, BIF and landscapes. All in all, it looks like it may be the 1st lens I get for the R5. If the reviews of it with TC's are good, then I'd probably get a TC to extend the reach further since I'd still have the zoom ability - but if the reviews with TC are worse than the 800 f11 then I might get the 800 also since it's so inexpensive.

I'm still deciding on the rest of the lenses. The 24-105 L f4 would indeed be a good 2 lens combo with the 100-500, as you mentioned. I'd still want something for fast aperture portrait use, and even wider angle landscape use. I wish I knew for sure what was best for me, since I have to pre-order something. Maybe B&H will allow me to preorder the R5 body alone, plus the R5 kit with 24-105 and cancel one of them later when there's more information?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

Go Wild

EOS RP
Dec 8, 2014
284
342
Let´s make it clear, I didn´t said the Sony Lens is better in any way!! ANY! What I have pointed is that the Canon lens is very expensive for the segment of the lens! If you think other way, of course its your opinion. My profession is to work with photography so i guess i can put myself in the "professional" segment. That doesn´t mean we will use L lenses all the time and if we don´t that doesn´t mean we are not professional anymore! Most of the times the L and the G master in Sony have few minor differences for other non L or not Master. Most of the times is the build quality the strongest difference.

Now being said that, yes I prefer L glass, but I find this particular lens, being a 100-500 F7.1 very expensive. Yes, it can be a good lens, even a great lens, but for me it is expensive. I know, it is smaller and lighter, I know its the newest technology...and I believe that there will be photographers out there that consider the price fair. I just don´t...
Fortunately i earn money enough to use a 500mm F4 so this lens is not for me. BUT...I do consider to buy some 100-400 or something like that when I can´t carry the big one. I was looking to this one, but the F7.1 is not good for what I do. And thats just my 2 cents and my personal opinion. Feel free to have others of course! :D
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,070
712
Let´s make it clear, I didn´t said the Sony Lens is better in any way!! ANY! What I have pointed is that the Canon lens is very expensive for the segment of the lens! If you think other way, of course its your opinion. My profession is to work with photography so i guess i can put myself in the "professional" segment. That doesn´t mean we will use L lenses all the time and if we don´t that doesn´t mean we are not professional anymore! Most of the times the L and the G master in Sony have few minor differences for other non L or not Master. Most of the times is the build quality the strongest difference.

Now being said that, yes I prefer L glass, but I find this particular lens, being a 100-500 F7.1 very expensive. Yes, it can be a good lens, even a great lens, but for me it is expensive. I know, it is smaller and lighter, I know its the newest technology...and I believe that there will be photographers out there that consider the price fair. I just don´t...
Fortunately i earn money enough to use a 500mm F4 so this lens is not for me. BUT...I do consider to buy some 100-400 or something like that when I can´t carry the big one. I was looking to this one, but the F7.1 is not good for what I do. And thats just my 2 cents and my personal opinion. Feel free to have others of course! :D
The main problem with the argument is that it isn't the lens to compare with.
It's a different lens that Canon hasn't provided an alternative to just yet.
It is the Sony 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS which is the closest alternative, let's take a look.


SpecificationCanon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USMSony FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS
Weight1370g (3.02lbs)1395g (3.07lbs)
Size93.8mm (3.69") x 207.6mm (8.17")93.9mm (3.7") x 205mm (8.07")
Filter Size77mm77mm
Elements/Groups20 elements in 14 groups22 Elements in 16 Groups
Minimum focusing distance0.9m (2.95')0.98m (3.22')
Pricing$2999 (speculation)$2499

Seems reasonable if it can match it with the wider range.
 
Last edited:

IcyBergs

I have a Sony...TV
May 31, 2016
127
269
100-500 will be DOA at that price. Expect the price drops sooner than later on that one.
 

Go Wild

EOS RP
Dec 8, 2014
284
342
The main problem with the argument is that it isn't the lens to compare with.
It's a different lens that Canon hasn't provided an alternative to just yet.
It is the Sony 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS which is the closest alternative, let's take a look.


SpecificationCanon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USMSony FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS
Weight1370g (3.02lbs)1395g (3.07lbs)
Size93.8mm (3.69") x 207.6mm (8.17")93.9mm (3.7") x 205mm (8.07")
Filter Size77mm77mm
Elements/Groups20 elements in 14 groups22 Elements in 16 Groups
Minimum focusing distance0.9m (2.95')0.98m (3.22')
Pricing$2999 (speculation)$2499

Seems reasonable if it can match it with the wider range.
But you also can´t compare with the Sony 100--400! Sony loses in range but gain very much in aperture. 5.6 vs 7.1. And also the price of Sony is 2500€ vs the 3000€ of this new Canon (rumored...) And yes, I also consider the Sony one a bit expensive....

EDIT: For me if Canon really wanted to be agressive, should price this lens at 2600€
 

Random Orbits

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 14, 2012
2,411
292
Also, we can debate whether Sony's 200-600 is or is not the same price point as the RF 100-500L, but isn't a 5x zoom range vs. a 3x zoom range just begging to let us down sharpness-wise?

(Has a single 24-105 / 24-120 ever outresolved a similar timeframe 24-70?)

- A
There are more compromises when going from wide angle to telephoto than just staying in one range (telephoto range). The goal of the RF 100-500 would be to be as good or better than the EF 100-400 II from 100-400mm, and to have an image at 500mm that is as good or better than the 100-400 II + 1.4x TC. The 100-400 II + 1.4x TC would be similar in price to the RF 100-500 but would be significantly heavier and would require TC swaps while giving slightly more reach (560 vs. 500mm). Give it a year, and the price will fall just it had for the 100-400 II and most L lenses. There is usually a premium to be an early adopter.

Well, according to TDP, the RF 24-105L outresolves the RF 24-70 f/4-7.1 but that has more to do with the difference in class and price of the lenses than difference in zoom ranges.
 

Random Orbits

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 14, 2012
2,411
292
But you also can´t compare with the Sony 100--400! Sony loses in range but gain very much in aperture. 5.6 vs 7.1. And also the price of Sony is 2500€ vs the 3000€ of this new Canon (rumored...) And yes, I also consider the Sony one a bit expensive....

EDIT: For me if Canon really wanted to be agressive, should price this lens at 2600€
It depends what the aperture is at 400mm isn't it? I doubt it's at f/7.1. If it is f/5.6 at 400mm, then the RF 100-500 is like a 100-400 with a 1.25x TC, only it doesn't penalize you at the shorter focal lengths. I'll wait to see what the US price is. I probably jump in for the R5 but I can wait for the 100-500 to shed its early adopter premium.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2011
16,463
1,438
Professionell?! With only 2 focus options? The Sony and Sigma has three...seems to be more professional at all!
I m heavily missing the near distance focus option! This is a huge mistake by Canon!
Whats wrong with the near Focus Distance of the 100-500mm L? The Sony 200-600 focuses to 2.4M while the Canon focuses as close as 0.9M.
 

londonxt

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 3, 2018
64
72
Tempted for that 85mm for Christmas, sold my EF 85mm F1.8 years ago and miss it, but certainly not its hit n miss autofocus ability!
 

RobbieHat

EOS 90D
Feb 4, 2015
111
91
55
Rocklin, CA/The Sea Ranch, CA
Things are starting to round into shape. I am leaning toward a R5 with 24-105 f4 and 100-500 L lenses. I am debating on the future 70-200 f4 and if I will need that given the focal range being covered by the other two lenses.

I will wait to see the IQ on all of them before finalizing my purchases but for landscape and walk around wildlife this seems to cover most needs.

I will adapt my fast Sigmas (14 and 24) and my 11-24 and 600 mm L II for the time being. Everything else is on the chopping block! Going to be a fire sale on a lot of glass and a couple of bodies. This should also significantly lighten my load when packing all this stuff around (especially when I ditch the 600 mm L II)! My back with thank me.