I'll be buying this low end toy. A nice fit for my kit.
Upvote
0
You don't say why it's "unusable in most situations", so your comment isn't very helpful.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.
There's a 100-400 II L.There should be something between a $650 100-400 and $3000 100-500.
Great observation. And there are 3rd parties as well. Why would Canon be obligated to plug all the holes.There's a 100-400 II L.
I am either free or very expensive! Anyway, I'll be getting this lens - my wife is beginning to struggle with the 100-400mm II, and I'll use it when I want a lightweight compact set up. f/8 doesn't worry me.0.41x at 400mm for $649! If I didn't have the 100-500 already, I'd be getting this one for chasing dragonflies. And with the leftover money I can try to hire @AlanF to run the images through DxO PL for me
Thanks for the comparison! The RF100-400 will end up even more compact on an RF camera, since the EF lenses need the adapter as well. I think that will push it to the same length as the 70-300+adapter.Adding the 100-400 II for kicks. Sizing was done in photoshop so please pardon any inaccuracies.
View attachment 200085
I just bought a 70-300 II for hiking when I don't want to bring the 100-400 II. This would be a compromise, if it's as sharp as the 70-300.
Samyang/Rokinon/Bower already made the lens you're asking for. 85mm f/1.4, sealed and with a much better focus motor than the terrible STMs (which is a motor Canon should be ashamed of, quite frankly). As a bonus, if you buy the Samyang-branded version it will even have a red ring, because sure why not. (The Samyang-branded version is actually temporarily unavailable due to their distribution problems with covid, but the Rokinon and Bower versions are still around and the Samyang will come back... eventually...)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?
They've put the zoom ring—the most imporant of the three rings—in the wrong place again, as with the 70-200 f/4. You always want the most important control to be as far forward on the lens as possible for maximum stability. Putting the zoom ring to the rear means most of the lens' weight in use is going unsupported, hanging free several inches away. Even with lens IS, that's not good. At the very minimum it puts more wear on the extension mechanicism when the forward weight isn't supported. I suppose if you know you're only going to be using it at 400mm (which I expect many people will) then you could just leave it there and keep your hand on the control ring, but even then it still seems erroneous to place the zoom ring so far away from the control ring.
Also confused as to why they didn't combine the control and manual focus rings. Seems like an obvious, easy cost saving and streamlines the operation of a lens like this which is so very rarely going to be focused manually.
But still, appears to be a good size, I'm happy to see them vaguely (between this, the 24-105 f/7.1, 85mm f/2 and 100mm f/2.8) adopting the modern standard 67mm filter size, and while I don't expect the optics to be anything special, just hitting 400mm (probably actually 380-390mm) at a price below what second hand 400mm f/5.6Ls cost, and presumably a weight far below that lens (not that the L lens is particularly heavy to begin with) is a good combination. With the close focus, I can see this lens plus the 800mm f/11 becoming 'the' combo for the wildlife amateur who wants to shoot everything from butterflies to birds and large mammels with the lightest possible kit. If an RP-size camera can be made that is just a little faster, that and this lens will be a helluva starter combination for kids.
It does raise the question of the purpose of the 600mm f/11, though, since I'm sure many people would much rather have the extra stop of f/8 than the extra 200mm, and conversely if you can live with f/11 and do value more reach then surely you'd go to the 800mm.
Should make a good landscape lens, too; I know many people think "landscape" only means 16-35s, but for my money landscape begins at 100mm.
I wasn't that fussed when the rumours started flying, but now seeing the even smaller than expected size and uncharacteristically reasonable price (unless Canon screws over the UK on the conversion again, as they've done with most RF products so far), I can see myself picking one up for the times when I'm not anticipating seeing anything special and/or I just can't be bothered to carry one of my Great Whites, moreso than I ever considered the f/11 lenses. Overcast England does not like f/11, but f/8 is right at the limit of usable.
Samyang/Rokinon/Bower already made the lens you're asking for. 85mm f/1.4, sealed and with a much better focus motor than the terrible STMs (which is a motor Canon should be ashamed of, quite frankly). As a bonus, if you buy the Samyang-branded version it will even have a red ring, because sure why not. (The Samyang-branded version is actually temporarily unavailable due to their distribution problems with covid, but the Rokinon and Bower versions are still around and the Samyang will come back... eventually...)
Sadly, Canon seem to have decided that all non-L zooms lenses must be one stop slower than EF zooms. I doubt we'll see them change that design philosophy any time soon.Man, I'm not really sure what to think about this maximum aperture at 400mm. The price seems good and the size/weight are very appealing...but this isn't as compact and tidy as I was hoping for in my head for this sacrifice in light gathering. Oh well I was waiting for price/performance...but it looks like I'm getting the Fuji XF 70-300 instead for my casual walk-around super telephoto.