Here is the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
9,257
2,030
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
An image and some specifications for the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM have leaked out ahead of next week’s official announcement. I will note that the lens is a bit slower at the long end than my original report of f/7.1.
This lens looks to be extremely compact for what it is.
The Canon RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 IS USM has a minimum focusing distance of 88cm at 200mm, a maximum magnification of 0.41x at 400mm, and up to 6 stops of IS when paired with the EOS R5 or EOS R6. When using this lens with the EOS R or EOS RP, image stabilization is about 5.5 stops of correction.
Another interesting design choice is that this lens is compatible with both the RF 1.4x and RF 2.0x teleconverters. Canon has also added a dedicated control ring to the front of the lens.
The Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM will be priced at $649...

Continue reading...
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: tigers media

Caseydull

CR Pro
May 26, 2020
5
3
I think the price will be higher with the latest price increases. If this can use the RF extenders will anyone buy the 600 or 800 f11 lenses at a much higher price?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cmam
I think the price will be higher with the latest price increases. If this can use the RF extenders will anyone buy the 600 or 800 f11 lenses at a much higher price?
Well 800/11 is a heck of a lot better than 800/16 and having to use a 2xTC on a cheap zoom lens to get there. I don't even need to use the lenses to know which one will have better IQ.

600 f/11...yeah that may be more competitive. 560/11 out of this lens but again needing a TC to get there. That remains to be seen how close they'd be for IQ.
 

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,466
650
35
Pune
TC compatibility, I wonder if that’s limited like the 100-500. Regardless…1-2 stops lost from f/8 is dark.
Who uses TC on these entry level tele zooms? I have seen people using TC on 70-200mm lenses(both f4 and f2.8) havent seen anyone using it on 70/75-300mm & 100-400mm(also equivalent 3rd party) lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Talys

Marximusprime

EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 18, 2018
60
61
And only $649? I was expecting north of $1000, honestly. That's just a bit more than the 70-300 II. I don't mind f/8 that much, since I shoot with the 2x on my 500 pretty regularly.
Edit: Based on some quick and dirty math, the 100-400 is about 5.5 inches long, which makes it even shorter than the 70-300 II. Impressive. Rough mockup
size comparison:
E-vEUVMVgAA45wf.jpg
 
Last edited:
Aug 20, 2021
2
9
I just can't find my feet in this new RF system. This is not the lens for me. I bought the 800, f11 and yeah it's light and compact, but unusable in most situations I found out, unless I really jackup the ISO. This is kinda the same. Really wish Canon come up with something like the Sony 200-600 f6.3 not just these low end toys. People much buy them because they are cheap i suppose.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,791
4,193
I just can't find my feet in this new RF system. This is not the lens for me. I bought the 800, f11 and yeah it's light and compact, but unusable in most situations I found out, unless I really jackup the ISO. This is kinda the same. Really wish Canon come up with something like the Sony 200-600 f6.3 not just these low end toys. People much buy them because they are cheap i suppose.
Try the 100-500L. Or the 600/4. Those aren’t ‘low end toys’.
 

JustUs7

EOS RP
Feb 5, 2020
238
441
I just can't find my feet in this new RF system. This is not the lens for me. I bought the 800, f11 and yeah it's light and compact, but unusable in most situations I found out, unless I really jackup the ISO. This is kinda the same. Really wish Canon come up with something like the Sony 200-600 f6.3 not just these low end toys. People much buy them because they are cheap i suppose.
Cheap suggests poor quality. That remains to be seen. It does open up areas of photography that were beyond the financial reach of some though. That’s pretty exciting. And for Canon, it creates a crowd of future L buyers when we in the unwashed masses decide that the images just aren’t doing it for us anymore.

I’m not seeing your middle of the road pricing outside of Sigma and Tamron though. I had a Sigma and it’s the only lens I’ve had that started to fall apart. The zoom grip quite literally fell off. It would telescope on its own unless locked. That was “cheap” to me.

That Sony lens is $2,000.
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
688
852
Should there be? Why…because you say so?

Because the market says so. I see many people who would buy a bit higher end lenses without spending thousands on top L glass.
For example a weather sealed 85mm 1.4 which has a focus motor at least as good as the original EF 85mm 1.8 from 30 years ago.

Not the slow and noisy RF 85 F2 with external focusing. Or should we be happy the filter thread is not rotating?
 

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
449
493
USA
I think the price will be higher with the latest price increases. If this can use the RF extenders will anyone buy the 600 or 800 f11 lenses at a much higher price?
Would be F/16 with a 2x to get to 800. And I'm sure the IQ would not be as good. The 800/11 is really sharp for its price point.

-Brian