Here are the specifications for the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
  • Jul 20, 2010
    9,731
    2,396
    Canada
    www.canonrumors.com
    Canon announced the development of the RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM alongside the EOS R5, but now we have the full specifications for the new super-telephoto zoom.
    Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM  Specifications:

    20 elements in 14 groups
    1 Super UD element
    6 UD elements
    Minimum focusing distance 0.9m (wide end)
    Maximum magnification 0.33 (telephoto)
    5 stops of IS
    77mm filter diameter
    Size: 93.8mm x 207.6mm
    Weight: 1370g

    Continue reading...
     
    Last edited:

    sobrien

    EOS M50
    CR Pro
    Apr 26, 2020
    46
    77
    That is a significant weight saving over the EF 100-400 Mark ii. Did not expect that!

    To not only maintain but slightly improve on maximum magnification is also really excellent.

    I’m now assuming a relatively quick progression through the maximum aperture range - it will almost certainly be f/6.3 by at least 400mm - but honestly given the above I’m ok with that.

    No fluorite element I see, but no less than six UD elements and one Super UD element might make up for that? Anyone more knowledgable about this please feel free to chime in.

    It will be emotional, for sure, but I fear my 100-400 Mark ii’s days might be numbered.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 user
    Upvote 0

    koenkooi

    EOS 5D Mark IV
    CR Pro
    Feb 25, 2015
    2,395
    2,522
    The Netherlands
    sounds very promissing. Let's see the IQ... ;)

    Only slightly bigger than the EF 100-400L. (208 mm vs. 193 mm).
    But lighter than that (1370g vs. 1.640g)

    You're forgetting to account for the adapter, on an R series it will be shorter than the 100-400 + adapter.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 7 users
    Upvote 0

    FrenchFry

    Wildlife enthusiast!
    Jun 14, 2020
    463
    583
    Still debating whether it’s better to go only to 200 but be at 2.8, or have this great, great zoom range
    Very interesting lens I’d love to try on my R!
    Yes! I'm also trying to make this choice. Unfortunately I think the likelihood that the 70-200mm won't take the extenders will probably make the decision for me. Very much looking forward to learning more during the announcement! The magnification on this lens is exciting! I hope the IQ lives up to expectations!
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 1 users
    Upvote 0
    Yes! I'm also trying to make this choice. Unfortunately I think the likelihood that the 70-200mm won't take the extenders will probably make the decision for me. Very much looking forward to learning more during the announcement! The magnification on this lens is exciting! I hope the IQ lives up to expectations!
    I'm in the same boat. I'm quite disappointed that the 70-200 doesn't appear to be compatible with the extenders. It's a real shame, as it would have been a definite purchase for me. So do I just give up on longer reach, in favour of size, weight, and low light? Hmmm...
     
    Upvote 0

    bmfotonet

    I'm New Here
    Jun 17, 2017
    21
    14
    Chicago
    Visit site
    I have the EF 100-400L II. If this new lens was a f/5.6 maximum I would consider it a huge upgrade over my current lens. As it stands it's gain 100mm on the long end but lose 2/3rds of a stop in the process. This translates to, almost but not quite, doubling the ISO to maintain the same shutter speed. It seems like more of a compromise than an upgrade to me. The one positive is they kept 77mm filter threads which is great for landscapes. I use GNDs for sunsets and Solid NDs for long exposures. Not having to rebuy my filters is a positive. Still, I am not sure if I want this or if my EF 100-400L II is good enough for me for a while.
     
    Upvote 0

    FrenchFry

    Wildlife enthusiast!
    Jun 14, 2020
    463
    583
    I'm in the same boat. I'm quite disappointed that the 70-200 doesn't appear to be compatible with the extenders. It's a real shame, as it would have been a definite purchase for me. So do I just give up on longer reach, in favour of size, weight, and low light? Hmmm...
    I think the only path forward is to buy both lenses... Long reach is just as important as low light and shallow DOF. Sigh.

    Does this mean we will get a second RF 70-200mm F2.8 someday that takes TCs? Will the upcoming RF 70-200mm F4 take TCs? so many questions...
     
    Upvote 0