Patent: Canon EF 200-600mm f/4.5-5.6 IS

[scyrene]

B&H has the 200-400 listed for $11k, the 500 f/4 for $9k and the 600 f/4 for $11.5k. So even $5-6k would be massively cheaper. Not cheap, but certainly much better value for the focal length, and a stepping stone from the lower-rung superteles to the upper ones.

 

[scyrene]

I would not pay more that $1500 unless this lens out performs the equals of Sigma, Tamron and Nikon! It will have to be tack sharp for anyone to spend anymore that that now day's, on that focal range of lens. Lets hope Canon doesn't get too proud of the color with this one either!

Lol, then you won't buy this lens. There is no way it will be that cheap.

 

[scyrene]

I use Mode 3 IS on my 600 II, where the IS doesn't kick in until you take the shot. No stabilized VF, I don't have trouble framing and focusing on BIF, even at 840mm or 1200mm.

Oh, you dealt with that point. I really should reply once I've read to the end! Again, I'd love to know how common this is. I've never used mode 3.

 

[NancyP]

So far as I am concerned, the aged EF 400 f/5.6L no-IS still has a role as an inexpensive and light weight BIF lens and hiking-there lens.

 

[addola]

It's to be expected that Canon should cover this focal length, like Nikon, Tamron and Sigma.

It's slightly faster at all focal lengths than Tamron/Sigma offering (f/4.5-5.6 VS f/5-6.3), I can bet you that this is because they intend to make it compatible with their 1.4x Teleconverter, so that you get some AF at f/8.

Canon's TC is compatible only with L lenses of fixed-focal length 135 & over, the 70-200s, and the 100-400, so if this lens is to be introduced, I believe it would be an L lens.

Price-wise, it expect it to be more expensive than the Tamron/Sigma offering. The Sigma Sport sells for $1999 on B&H, so I'd expect something will north of that price.

My two cents...

 

[KeithBreazeal]

How about a pro body with digital zoom?
Save money, save weight.
Better yet, hack one of the 50:1 $400 cameras zoom lens.
Seriously, I could see my 5DS with a digital zoom.

 

[Etienne]

How about a pro body with digital zoom?
Save money, save weight.
Better yet, hack one of the 50:1 $400 cameras zoom lens.
Seriously, I could see my 5DS with a digital zoom.

Already exists. It's called "Photoshop"

 

[Lee Jay]

Anyone want to bet that it won't compete on price with the Sigma 150-600C I just got on a Cyber Monday deal from BuyDig (reputable authorized dealer who got it to me right on time) for $700?

I'd be guessing $3k or so for the Canon. It's basically a 100-400L upscaled by a factor of 1.5 and with the "L" removed.

Hi Lee Jay!

I really hope you'd be true, but I can't believe it.
Did you ever drill down about producing optical elements?
Did you ever recognize that the price goes up with the diameter in square - at least?

The rule of three is linear, price is not. So if the diameter increases from 77 to 115 we'd have at least 1.5 by 2 so 2.25 for the price. Say $4.500 at a minimum.

Your calculations?

$2,300 for 100-400L * 1.5^2 = $5,175. Divide by 1.5-2 for it being a non-L = $2,587.50 - $3,450.

Want another one?

Tamron 150-600/6.3 = $1,050
Sigma 150-600/6.3C = $1,090
Sigma 150-600/6.3S = $2,000
Nikon 200-500/5.6 = $1,400

$1,400 * (600/500)^2 = $2,016
$2,000 * (6.3/5.6)^4 = $3,203

 

[JonAustin]

Since I already have the 100-400 II, I'd be satisfied with a reasonably priced (whatever that means) 600/5.6L IS prime. But since I can achieve 560/8L("-ish") IS by dropping less than $450 on a 1.4x III, that's probably where I would land.

And by the way, you guys who are betting your nuts ... how do you decide which one? ???

 

[Wizardly]

What I find most interesting about this patent are the 7 design examples.
Example 3 & 4: 60-600mm lens for 135-format is also interesting.
Example 5 & 6: 50-1000mm for APS-C.
Example 7: all of the above. Example 7 actually States that it combines all six of the previous examples.

Text from Example 7:
Thus, the imaging device which has high optical performance is realized
by applying the zoom lens of the present invention **to a television
camera etc.** However, the composition of the zoom lens about the present
invention and a camera is not limited to the form of Fig.21, but various
deformation and change are possible for it within the limits of the
summary.

 

[Don Haines]

Anyone want to bet that it won't compete on price with the Sigma 150-600C I just got on a Cyber Monday deal from BuyDig (reputable authorized dealer who got it to me right on time) for $700?

I'd be guessing $3k or so for the Canon. It's basically a 100-400L upscaled by a factor of 1.5 and with the "L" removed.

Hi Lee Jay!

I really hope you'd be true, but I can't believe it.
Did you ever drill down about producing optical elements?
Did you ever recognize that the price goes up with the diameter in square - at least?

The rule of three is linear, price is not. So if the diameter increases from 77 to 115 we'd have at least 1.5 by 2 so 2.25 for the price. Say $4.500 at a minimum.

Your calculations?

$2,300 for 100-400L * 1.5^2 = $5,175. Divide by 1.5-2 for it being a non-L = $2,587.50 - $3,450.

Want another one?

Tamron 150-600/6.3 = $1,050
Sigma 150-600/6.3C = $1,090
Sigma 150-600/6.3S = $2,000
Nikon 200-500/5.6 = $1,400

$1,400 * (600/500)^2 = $2,016
$2,000 * (6.3/5.6)^4 = $3,203

How about:
With the long whites, a fixed focal length 600F5.6 should be of similar size and slightly higher priced than a fixed length 300F2.8 and ..... which in Canada sells for $7,860

With the "Red Rim Reduction factor" we get $7860 * 1/3 or $2620

Not having the large fluorite element makes the price plummet.

 

[HighLowISO]

I also picked up the deal on the Sigma 150-600mm C on the BF/CM sale. There is no way Canon will compete with that price. I really wanted to update my 100-400mm with the mkII, but the deal was too good even if I have to wait until spring maybe to get some good use of it. I missed the refurb sales, but maybe that was for the best given this Sigma deal.

I will also say no way this new one (200-600 f/5.6) is less than $1500 if it came to be. If it's f/5.6 when it actually ships, $3K would be a deal.

Anyway right now we just have to wait and see what they produce and in what quality. Do they want to tackle Tamron and Sigma head on, or just provide a much better optic even if the price is 2-3x.

Exciting times for those that like to use long lenses on a budget.

 

[candc]

I also picked up the deal on the Sigma 150-600mm C on the BF/CM sale. There is no way Canon will compete with that price. I really wanted to update my 100-400mm with the mkII, but the deal was too good even if I have to wait until spring maybe to get some good use of it. I missed the refurb sales, but maybe that was for the best given this Sigma deal.

I will also say no way this new one (200-600 f/5.6) is less than $1500 if it came to be. If it's f/5.6 when it actually ships, $3K would be a deal.

Anyway right now we just have to wait and see what they produce and in what quality. Do they want to tackle Tamron and Sigma head on, or just provide a much better optic even if the price is 2-3x.

Exciting times for those that like to use long lenses on a budget.

You are right about that. This is a center 100% crop comparison of the 600ii, 400doii+1.4xiii, and tamron 150-600. The point to take away is that even the tamron which seems to be considered the lowest performing lens of the current options available, its still really good. the tamron is stopped down to f/8 the others ate wide open.

 

[JonAustin]

Exciting times for those that like to use long lenses on a budget.

You are right about that. This is a center 100% crop comparison of the 600ii, 400doii+1.4xiii, and tamron 150-600. The point to take away is that even the tamron which seems to be considered the lowest performing lens of the current options available, its still really good. the tamron is stopped down to f/8 the others ate wide open.

I'd love to see the 100-400 II + 1.4x III (which would be @ 560mm f/8 at max FL & max aperture) included in this or a similar comparison.

 

[Sabaki]

I also picked up the deal on the Sigma 150-600mm C on the BF/CM sale. There is no way Canon will compete with that price. I really wanted to update my 100-400mm with the mkII, but the deal was too good even if I have to wait until spring maybe to get some good use of it. I missed the refurb sales, but maybe that was for the best given this Sigma deal.

I will also say no way this new one (200-600 f/5.6) is less than $1500 if it came to be. If it's f/5.6 when it actually ships, $3K would be a deal.

Anyway right now we just have to wait and see what they produce and in what quality. Do they want to tackle Tamron and Sigma head on, or just provide a much better optic even if the price is 2-3x.

Exciting times for those that like to use long lenses on a budget.

You are right about that. This is a center 100% crop comparison of the 600ii, 400doii+1.4xiii, and tamron 150-600. The point to take away is that even the tamron which seems to be considered the lowest performing lens of the current options available, its still really good. the tamron is stopped down to f/8 the others ate wide open.

Thanks for the images C&C

As a bird photographer, I often remind myself that one can wait hours and hours for that perfect moment to happen and I can capture the best image possible.
IQ is of course very important but a lens needs to offer reliable and quick AF to increase one's keeper rate. These static images do allow me to see that IQ is pretty similar but do you know of any online resources that qualifies AF performance as well?

Thanks.

 

[weixing]

I also picked up the deal on the Sigma 150-600mm C on the BF/CM sale. There is no way Canon will compete with that price. I really wanted to update my 100-400mm with the mkII, but the deal was too good even if I have to wait until spring maybe to get some good use of it. I missed the refurb sales, but maybe that was for the best given this Sigma deal.

I will also say no way this new one (200-600 f/5.6) is less than $1500 if it came to be. If it's f/5.6 when it actually ships, $3K would be a deal.

Anyway right now we just have to wait and see what they produce and in what quality. Do they want to tackle Tamron and Sigma head on, or just provide a much better optic even if the price is 2-3x.

Exciting times for those that like to use long lenses on a budget.

You are right about that. This is a center 100% crop comparison of the 600ii, 400doii+1.4xiii, and tamron 150-600. The point to take away is that even the tamron which seems to be considered the lowest performing lens of the current options available, its still really good. the tamron is stopped down to f/8 the others ate wide open.

Hi,
I had the Tamron 150-600 before I got my 100-400 II. My Tamron 150-600 copy is very sharp in the center at 400mm even at wide open... sharper than my 400 F5.6L and around the same as my 100-400 II, but once you move away from the center, the sharpness drop quickly even for an APS-C sensor.

Anyway, I got the 100-400II because of better handling (Tamron is too front heavy for me), faster AF and I found the mode 3 IS very useful on tripod especially my technique is far from perfect...

Have a nice day.

 

[unfocused]

...do you know of any online resources that qualifies AF performance as well?

Thanks.

Check out http://www.the-digital-picture.com/. He did very thorough reviews of the Canon, Tamron and both Sigmas.

 

[unfocused]

Not sure I understand the reasoning of those who say this will not be an "L" lens. I can't imagine it being anything but an "L." It has to perform better than the competition (which perform quite well by all accounts). Canon certainly understands the value of painting a lens white and adding a red ring and this lens cannot sell for less than the 100-400 anyway. I expect it to start at around $2,500 and that's probably optimistic on my part.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Boy, for just a rumor of an anticipated lens these comments sure have moved into the realm of reality. Must be memories of Christmas as a child driving this along! Oh to be young again.

Jack

 

[ahsanford]

Not sure I understand the reasoning of those who say this will not be an "L" lens. I can't imagine it being anything but an "L." It has to perform better than the competition (which perform quite well by all accounts). Canon certainly understands the value of painting a lens white and adding a red ring and this lens cannot sell for less than the 100-400 anyway. I expect it to start at around $2,500 and that's probably optimistic on my part.

Best I can tell...

• One group of people on this thread believes the only (or principal) reason Canon would make a 600mm long end zoom would be to compete with the spate of affordable superteles that have come of late (Tamron, Sigma, Nikon). Making it an L lens at that kind of length would presumably price this 200-600 lens well above that of the aforementioned lenses, so potentially making it a non-L would allow Canon to keep the cost down.
  
  
• The other group thinks it's absolutely going to be an L lens for too many reasons to count -- front element size, internal zooming, only one stop slower than Canon's priciest 500 & 600 primes, same max aperture as the 100-400L II, etc. -- there's just too much 'better than budget' on that list, and an L lens designation seems the inevitable choice.

I'm clearly in the second camp. Were it a slower 200-600 f/5-6.3 IS (like the Tamron & Sigmas) I possibly could be talked into this not being an L lens, but probably not.

- A