Here are the RF 600mm f/11 & RF 800mm f/11 super-telephoto lenses

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
398
436
Thanks Joules. £2899 for the 100-500mm is a bit steep. The excellent Sony 200-600mm is only £1699.
Also the EF 100-400 II can be had for £1200 on grey market. Very steep indeed. Ok, the Sony is 1kg heavier but it is a lens i would be happy to buy a Sony camera for. Pair it with a cheap A6000 and you already have a very good wildlife kit.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,615
1,627
Also the EF 100-400 II can be had for £1200 on grey market. Very steep indeed. Ok, the Sony is 1kg heavier but it is a lens i would be happy to buy a Sony camera for. Pair it with a cheap A6000 and you already have a very good wildlife kit.

Nikon the same with the 200-500 f/5.6 VR.

I guess Canon is happy to throw the f/11 superteles at the budget market and keep the 100-500 at a relatively premium price (similar to an f/2.8 zoom).

- A
 
DO prices are exactly what I hoped they would be considering the f/11 and STM motors etc. I saw some people talking about $2K or even one guy saying he'd be happy if they were under $2700....I thought $1000 or less would be the only thing that made sense.

At these prices I would certainly pick up the 800DO just to try it.

The 100-500 price is way too high compared to the Sony 200-600. I could have accepted it being more than the 200-600 but it should have been more in line with 100-400II price of $2200. Other than the compact packing size and lower weight, the Sony lens has 600/6.3 vs 500/7.1, internal zoom (pros and cons but I love it), excellent IQ (sometimes I can't tell the images apart from my 600/4), takes a 1.4TC well (100-500 likely will also), fast AF (100-500 likely will also).
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee and Joules

Daner

AE-1 Program
I've been trying to keep an open mind about these, but I'll almost certainly have a 100-500 and a 1.4x which gives me 700 mm at f/10 in a lens which is just a few mm longer than the 600/11 DO when retracted and much shorter than the 800. I also get (with the 1.4x) around three times the maximum magnification for butterflies, snakes etc., and I won't need to buy any new filters! Or indeed a lens hood. The only disadvantage I will have is weight but even that is not a huge difference vs the 800.
My plan as well, but I see the value of these lenses for those who are fair-weather, good light shooters. I suspect that pairing them with the RP will provide a better combination of reach and IQ than anything else at a comparable price point.
 

Daner

AE-1 Program
To everyone saying these lenses are too limiting to be useful, I'd ask: who is buying superzoom bridge cameras? Someone must be. These lenses' maximum apertures compare favourably to that category. We don't yet know the price - I'd expect it to be reasonable, in which case this is aimed at people who want maximum reach regardless of the drawbacks (especially paired with teleconverters); if they aren't cheap, then there must be some X factor we're not yet aware of to make them enticing.
I know several people who are currently happy with the images that they are getting from their superzoom bridge cameras. If/when they develop the desire to explore options that can give them greater resolution and image quality the jump to one of these with an RP and a 24-240 will be much more reasonable from a price/weight/size perspective than most other ILCs.
 
Jun 20, 2020
1
0
100-500mm L is a bit steep but I think its comparable to Sony 100-400mm GM lens which is £2500..
Sony 200-600mm is cheaper but its not a GM lens.
Same goes to Nikon 200-500mm.
 

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,022
652
The 100-500 price is way too high compared to the Sony 200-600. I could have accepted it being more than the 200-600 but it should have been more in line with 100-400II price of $2200. Other than the compact packing size and lower weight, the Sony lens has 600/6.3 vs 500/7.1, internal zoom (pros and cons but I love it), excellent IQ (sometimes I can't tell the images apart from my 600/4), takes a 1.4TC well (100-500 likely will also), fast AF (100-500 likely will also).
It's what I expected compared to the 100-400 GM, which also has the much better MFD over the 200-600, Canon may have decided to combine as much as it could from the two (best overall range, minimum focusing distance and overall sharpness with the least weight and size)
And yes the EF 100-400 II can be bought for half as much as the RF 100-500 and it is still also great.
 

Fischer

EOS M50
Mar 17, 2020
47
30
Is the beginning of the end of the Big White?

I know since the 100-400 came out with it's excellent IQ and IS and good pairing with the 1.4x...... my 600 has seen little use... Specially given the cropability of the 5DSR.. This lens gives me a usable "effective" 100-800 range....

This just seems to be an extension of that same concept... smaller, lighter, more portable -- and most importantly... without giving up IQ...

Am I wrong?
100-400 is an amazing lens for sure. And a true beast on the 5DS/R. That's why I worry that the new 100-500 will not be able to match it (due to the same lack of wide open apertures).
 

Fischer

EOS M50
Mar 17, 2020
47
30
This doesn't end/replace the superwhites. Not at all. This is reach for the masses without needing a loan or teleconverter to get it. This is Canon listening to its users, and we should applaud it, IMHO.

I think RF superwhites will eventually happen. They kind of have to.

And I would be absolutely stunned if the IQ from an f/11 max aperture lens -- even if sharp -- had half the pop / color / contrast / impact of an f/5.6 shot from a proper superwhite.

- A
I can see some people - like myself - keeping their old white primes and supplementing with one of these (if flare and bokeh works out). Makes the transition much more affordable.
 

londonxt

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 3, 2018
60
69
I actually like extreme zooms for Landscapes (inc city-scapes) you can really pick out dramatic points of interest with them, cropping is too limited with a 35 or 50mm and you just cant replicate that artistic compression of a zoom. My 100mm prime just didnt make enough of a difference compared to say the look of a 85mm in such situations, but just not worth investing in a heavy quality longer zoom for that sort of occasional use though and weight has ultimately really made me reasses my hardware recently most of my landscape stuff if during day hikes or longer so a massive lens was always a no-no. I used to own a Sigma 300 f5.6 zoom aeons ago when they used to be bundled with Canon kits (by Dixons probably), recall getting some decent airshow shots on slow slide film on a bright sunny day, I could imagine with modern sensor ISO abilities, the new in-camera image stablisation these would work nicely as an occasionaly hand-held landscape lens along with casual event photography like air shows where you can practise subject tracking.
 
Last edited: