Is a Canon RF 200-500mm f/5.6L IS USM a possibility?

[Elmonducky]

Make it a 200-600 f/5.6 L lens and im definitely in! Internal zoom would definitely be a plus.
200-500 would be of no benefit to me, already having a 100-500.

 

[Manuel]

So "this may be one of those times that the information is solid”, implying that during the last few years, the information you published on the 200-500 f/4 was not solid...

When I remember the Canon R1 80 MP info more than three years ago, and all your past contradictions about the 200-500 f/4 (with and without 1.4x, for November 2024, then early 2025, later 30th November, now f/5.6), I am sorry to say that you lost all credibility.

But do not worry, eventually one of your many contradictory predictions will become true and you will be able to write "as I previously said..."

 

[JMatt]

Hate to bring it up, but Sigma 150-600 f/6.3 anyone? A 500 f/5.6 has a theoretical max apperture/front element size of 89mm. 600 f/6.3 = 95mm.

So a Sigma has a larger front element, is wider at the wide end, narrower at the narrow end, isnt all that heavy, and can be had for a grand.

I'd pay at most $899 for a lens like the one in this rumor. Which is to say that'd never be in our gear.

 

[Loswr]

Hate to bring it up, but Sigma 150-600 f/6.3 anyone?

I'd pay at most $899 for a lens like the one in this rumor. Which is to say that'd never be in our gear.

Does the Sigma lens deliver image and build quality consistent with Canon’s L series? Cheaper 3rd party versions similar to many EF lenses were available, plenty of people still seem to have chosen the OEM lenses.

 

[brianjnelson]

Not AT ALL interested in an f/5.6 version. The RF600 f/4 is incredibly light weight. Professionals will pay the price if it's good.

 

[john1970]

Another possibility:

200-700 mm f4.5 to f6.3 with internal zoom.

A 200-500 mm f5.6 makes no sense to me since it does not replace the 500 mm f4.

If the 200-500 mm f5.6 rumors are true I hope Canon still eventually makes the 500 mm f4 replacement.

 

[Del Paso]

The f/7,1 of the RF 100-500 don't bother me at all, thanks to IBIS, OIS and Denoise programs.
But the missing 100mm of the 200-500 would!
I cannot imagine Canon releasing such a lens, unless it comes at an extremely attractive price-point.

 

[JMatt]

Does the Sigma lens deliver image and build quality consistent with Canon’s L series? Cheaper 3rd party versions similar to many EF lenses were available, plenty of people still seem to have chosen the OEM lenses.

Not to me it doesn't. But it seems to be well thought of by a lot of people, including some folks ( @AlanF ) from a thread just the other day. Pricing also matters to many if not most folks. $999 for the Sigma vs $4,000 for the Canon (hypothetically)? Hard pass.

IMO Canon is over-using white bodies with red rings around the front. And 100% of the Canon lenses I own have a red circle.

 

[stillviking]

My DREAM LENS to replace my old EF 400mm 5.6L !! Lets go Canon!!

 

[Ph0t0]

Since we allready have:
-RF 100-300mm f2.8
(140-420mm f4)
(200-600mm f5.6)
-RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1
-RF 400mm f2.8
-RF 600mm f4

I would dare to speculate the chances are this is gonna be a f4 lens.
A 200-500 f5.6 wouldn't really be that different to RF 100-500mm that is already available. And f5.6 at the 200mm mark doesn't really sound that appealing to me. Has Canon ever even made an L telephoto lens that would cap at f5.6 at 200mm (without a TC)?

Anyway... It seems to me that a 200-500mm f4 would be an improvement (or evolution if you like) on the EF 200-400mm f4 and a lens that would nicely compliment a lighter RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 from the existing lineup.

 

[Ph0t0]

My DREAM LENS to replace my old EF 400mm 5.6L !! Lets go Canon!!

I think that one was kind of replaced by the EF 100-400mm and RF 100-500mm.

 

[Tom Raymond]

The RF 100- 300 2.8 is the finest piece of glass for sports that Canon has ever created. After seeing the results of that lens with the RF 1.4 TC attached, I sold my EF 200-400mm. I also have the EF 600mm F4 III. The 200 - 400 was great in its time, and an outstanding lens for situations where you can not move, but the subject is constantly moving towards and away from you (safari, soccer, golf, etc). Regarding a possible RF 200- 500mm, who wants a 200mm F5.6.....................

 

[Loswr]

Regarding a possible RF 200- 500mm, who wants a 200mm F5.6.....................

I’ll call your 200/5.6, and raise you 1/3-stop……..

 

[snapshot]

Does the Sigma lens deliver image and build quality consistent with Canon’s L series? Cheaper 3rd party versions similar to many EF lenses were available, plenty of people still seem to have chosen the OEM lenses.

i find it somewhat better than ef 100-400 LIS II + 1.4x teleconverter

 

[EricN]

Is it possible they mean with the built-in teleconverter, it will be f/5.6 or there's a plan to dis continue the 100-500 (I think it's too soon, but what do I know?)

 

[Daniel Lindblom]

I would rather have a RF 200-600mm F5.6-7.1 IS USM. Like a little brother to 200-800.

 

[Del Paso]

Is it possible they mean with the built-in teleconverter, it will be f/5.6 or there's a plan to dis continue the 100-500 (I think it's too soon, but what do I know?)

No chance in my opinion. A 200-500 is far less versatile than a zoom starting at 100mm. A 15-35 + 24-70 +100-500 and you cover from UWA to tele without a real gap.
Not the case with the 200-500 f/5,6. Of course, if the 70-150 comes, 200-500 would be ok. But too expensive for many of us.

 

[robval]

I am waiting for a 300 mm 2,8 very light (as sony did )

 

[Chris Hart]

We have been reporting for what seems an eternity that Canon will be announcing an RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM any day now! That has obviously has not come to pass, but over the last month or two there have been some changes in what the 200-500 may actually be. Sometimes information has some assumptions,

See full article...

 

[Chris Hart]

Looks like a stupid lens ...