Here is the Canon EOS R5 and Canon EOS R6, along with the announcement date

[usern4cr]

The 400 DO version 2 is very-very sharp from what ive seen and bokeh looks smooth. I'm curious how it compares to the 400 2.8 at F4.

Thanks for your reply - since I haven't been using EF lenses I wasn't aware of that. If they already have the DO technology worked out with sharp images and smooth bokeh then I wonder why they're not using it in all of their new lenses? Could it be that these two RF DO (non-L) lenses are the beginning of a trend towards DO in everything? Or is there some issue still in the IQ or cost that we're missing that keeps them from being in the RF L versions?

 

[Eclipsed]

i didn’t find it a very big deal; in this case a 500 ii on an R. With extender even. That said, if I’d get a new big white now it would have to be RF

exactly my point. Adapters are fine to employ what you already have but buying a new $10k lens and putting it on adapter is a major cringe, knowing that in a couple years there will be a native.

 

[JustUs7]

Question. For auditorium events / lighting.

I have the RF 24-240 f/4-6.3.
Is a constant f/4 (on the new 70-200) enough of a benefit at the long end to justify adding it? Losing 40 mm and only gaining 1.3 stops at 200mm.

Or keep saving for the 2.8 and enjoy the current lens.

 

[Joe Subolefsky]

The new 400 & 600III already have the 2 extra communication contacts as the RF system. In one of interviews with the engineers they already said it was to future proof the lens. By loosening and tightening a handful of screws service centers could easily replace the EF end cap with a RF end cap they already have the finest optics and IS. That said they already work flawlessly with the R using the supplied adapter with and without extenders.Personally I would love to see ef to rf extenders just to cur down on gear to pack.

 

[Steve Balcombe]

How can you tell? I haven't seen any confirmation that the TCs are RF-RF.

You keep saying this, but they were pre-announced by Canon, and they are on various Canon web sites, with pictures. They are RF Extenders, not adapters. Easy to find with just the minimum of effort.

 

[koenkooi]

You keep saying this, but they were pre-announced by Canon, and they are on various Canon web sites, with pictures. They are RF Extenders, not adapters. Easy to find with just the minimum of effort.

And if you want RF-EF extenders, just stick the adapter on top of it, done!

 

[RobbieHat]

Going to be an expensive year. I am hoping for the R5 plus a few native lenses for landscape and future wildlife.

Looking to swap my EFs for the 24-105 f4, 70-200 f4 and maybe 100-500. Could use the extenders on that in a pinch for a decent walking around wildlife lens in good light. Will have to adapt the long glass until the native primes are released (assuming two more years for those).

Also hoping for a wider fast zoom (was really hoping for 12,13 or at least 14 on the wide side) at f2.8 and a wide, fast prime like the sigma 14 or 21 for astrophotography.

I am about ready to sell off most of my EF glass and two bodies and go with a lighter kit. Also looking forward to that MP monster next year.

 

[RobbieHat]

The new 400 & 600III already have the 2 extra communication contacts as the RF system. In one of interviews with the engineers they already said it was to future proof the lens. By loosening and tightening a handful of screws service centers could easily replace the EF end cap with a RF end cap they already have the finest optics and IS. That said they already work flawlessly with the R using the supplied adapter with and without extenders.Personally I would love to see ef to rf extenders just to cur down on gear to pack.

I wasn’t aware that they might be able to swap out the end plate on those vIIIs for RF active communications. That’s pretty cool. Might have to upgrade my vII 600 f4 if that proves to be the easiest approach. That would make the RF to RF extenders usable with no additional adapter. That would be worth it.

 

[cdcooker]

I think DO will get red rings now and we'll see the new 500 f/4 and 600 f/4 as DO L lenses with red rings. It will push the marking that mirrorless is smaller and lighter than those big EF lenses.

The EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM is not that old.

 

[unfocused]

And white after an arbitrary focal length. 100mm f2.8L macro and 135mm f2 are black but 70-200 is white and now we have big silver (or big grey?) lens

200 mm f2.8 is black as well.

 

[cdcooker]

Canon break their own ‘rules’ whenever they want. The first green ring was back in the early ‘70’s and was for fluorite, red ringed L lenses are FF frame only apart from when they are on a Powershot Pro-1 or a printer!

View attachment 190891

Thanks for the photos. The hunch of Powershot Pro 1 is seriously looking like the EOS RP.

 

[esglord]

Does anyone happen to know if the 85mm macro will be 1:1? I have been weighing picking up a used ef 100mm f/2.8L, but a native non-L may well be good enough for my needs.

 

[privatebydesign]

The prototype 600 DO had a red ring already.

View attachment 190893

No that is an EF 600 f4L IS DO BR USM prototype, no relation to the RF 600 f11 DO.

 

[David_E]

Sigh... Shipping only in September...

“All things come to those who wait.” —Violet Fane

 

[Jack Douglas]

I typically don't photograph birds in foliage, and I've only been shooting for a little over a year, but I'm pretty okay at math. This shot was taken at f/6.3, 1/400, 1600 ISO. I can get the same exposure by closing the aperture to f/11, leaving the shutter speed the same, and bumping the ISO to ~5000. This was taken around 4pm with not great lighting. There was a clearing nearby with close to perfect lighting and I could have used nearly whatever ISO I wanted. No, the 800mm isn't going to let you take the same shots as a 600mm f/4, but it will probably be half the weight or less and cost 1/10th as much. It sounds like this lens isn't for you? I don't know what to tell you. Go practice at f/11 I guess if it bothers you that much.


View attachment 190892

It is extremely disappointing when a once in a lifetime sequence of shots ends up at ISO 12800 and some cropping is required. In the moment you need a fast shutter so the ISO goes through the roof and then another moment the shot is still and you lower the shutter only to have blur on the next shot. You waste time trying to tweak them but in the end it's heartbreaking that you can't proudly display quality shots. This was F8 and 800 mm and that was not enough FL to avoid cropping. And if the shots are too tight you can't follow the action. Never the less, that's life. Happy and disappointed in the very same moment.

 

[Deleted member 381342]

The EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM is not that old.
View attachment 190899

Thats a EF though. I think Canon will make all the big primes DO and red rings. The red ring is very distinctively Canon and as crazy as it sounds, the green ring of the EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM makes it look like a lower end model. Of course we don't know how many people buy a lens on looks, but we know marketing isn't decoupled from selling lenses.

 

[[email protected]]

Could it be a mirror lens with fixed f11 to get to the compact size?

If it were a catadioptric mirror lens + DO optics, it would be much shorter than it appears to be in the picture (and probably wider to accommodate enough light coming in with a central, shadowed area). Would be super cool, and probably a bit more delicate than your average lens. So much so, this might be the reason they've never done it. Might have to be collimated ("telescope" for aligned) regularly. The short flange distance and gaping maw of the R system would really lend itself to this sort of thing.

 

[[email protected]]

The 400 DO version 2 is very-very sharp from what ive seen and bokeh looks smooth. I'm curious how it compares to the 400 2.8 at F4.

You can see a comparison here:



https://www.the-digital-picture.com...meraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
https://www.the-digital-picture.com...meraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

It shows that the f/2.8 lens is sharper and has better contrast at f/4. But the F/4 DO lens is pretty darned good. I've shot both.

 

[blackcoffee17]

The new 400 & 600III already have the 2 extra communication contacts as the RF system. In one of interviews with the engineers they already said it was to future proof the lens. By loosening and tightening a handful of screws service centers could easily replace the EF end cap with a RF end cap they already have the finest optics and IS. That said they already work flawlessly with the R using the supplied adapter with and without extenders.Personally I would love to see ef to rf extenders just to cur down on gear to pack.

They could very easily create 2 versions for every super telephoto, EF and RF versions, 90% of the lens would be the same.

 

[Trey T]

The R6 also seems to have a big mode dial, so probably no top lcd screen?

Supposedly, it was rumored to have a dial located at the top but nobody explicitly say it no top LCD. We made the assumption until today