Patent: Canon RF 200mm f/2L IS USM and other Big White Lenses

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,242
317
31
34109
www.facebook.com

Regardless of income bracket I believe strongly everyone has a right to have at least 1 kid.

Any succeeding children should have parents be responsible enough to be able to provide for their most basic of physiological needs of food, water, shelter, sleep, healthcare and clothes.

This is most especially true for households making less than $8,000/year or much less less than $5,000/year. The later of which was the price of the EF 200 when I bought one.

If any parent can barely manage to do that for that sole child then dont have any further.

They'll end up asking hand outs from their siblings, relatives, friends and neighbors. This problem only multiply as they multiply.

If anyone can afford it and send their kids to college then go for it but if the folks can barely feed themselves then stop at 1.

Going back to the lens I look forward to the RF equivalent. It will produce exceptional photos.

Looking back it's more a rental than an actual purchase.

In my past... it's a purchase I'd gladly skip
 
Last edited:

Hector1970

EOS R
CR Pro
Mar 22, 2012
1,302
490
I'd say it will be a fantastic lens. A great portrait lens. Unfortunately the price will go with it.
I wonder can they make it lighter.
Not sure I'll ever purchase it. I'm happy enough with the excellent 70-200mm.
 

chasingrealness

RF = Requires Funding
Feb 24, 2020
105
135
Queens, NY
www.chasingrealness.com
Regardless of income bracket I believe strongly everyone has a right to have at least 1 kid.

Any succeeding children should have parents be responsible enough to be able to provide for their most basic of physiological needs of food, water, shelter, sleep, healthcare and clothes.

This is most especially true for households making less than $8,000/year or much less less than $5,000/year. The later of which was the price of the EF 200 when I bought one.

If any parent can barely manage to do that for that sole child then dont have any further.

They'll end up asking hand outs from their siblings, relatives, friends and neighbors. This problem only multiply as they multiply.

If anyone can afford it and send their kids to college then go for it but if the folks can barely feed themselves then stop at 1.

Going back to the lens I look forward to the RF equivalent. It will produce exceptional photos.

Looking back it's more a rental than an actual purchase.

In my past... it's a purchase I'd gladly skip
You see a lot through this lens .
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Juangrande

FamilyGuy

EOS RP
Feb 5, 2020
207
376
I'd do what smart people would do. Ignore. :ROFLMAO:

I think of this as a public service for those on the fence for a purchase.

Internet squatters will steal your work. So is it really worth posting it online or even a buy?

I wish someone pointed it out to me in my 20s so I wouldnt waste my time and money with a bunch of social justice warriors who are going after "evil corp" "fighting the good fight" when the real culprit of habitat destruction and flora/fauna extinction are their next door neighbors producing demand by having more than 2 kids.

Think breeding like rabbits of 6 or more offspring.

Kind of balances out over here. We had five kids because so many aren’t having any.

Don’t worry. We finally figured out what caused it and we put a stop to that.

But we’ve fed them, clothed them, saved for their college. They all get great marks at school, play musical instruments (orchestra, band, piano). The oldest is pre-med in college. I think in the end they’ll be net producers.
 
Last edited:

Andy Westwood

EOS R6
CR Pro
Dec 10, 2016
154
237
UK
The EF 200 f/2 is a mega lens, so it is said as I've never had the pleasure, and should really have warranted a Mark II upgrade. An RF 200 f/2 IS USM should be a fantastic bit of glass but doubt I will ever own one.

A lens for the lucky few :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: fox40phil

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,348
2,192
Kind of balances out over here. We had five kids because so many aren’t having any.

Don’t worry. We finally figured out what caused it and we put a stop to that.

But we’ve fed them, clothed them, saved for there college. They all get great marks at school, play musical instruments (orchestra, band, piano). The oldest is pre-med in college. I think in the end they’ll be net producers.

A kid is a mouth to feed, but also a pair of hands (and a brain) that can produce.
 

Juangrande

EOS 90D
Mar 6, 2017
153
207
I don't get this lens. Too heavy, too short, too little depth of field, too big, and too expensive. I'm sure others love it, but I can't see any situation where I would want this lens.
I disagree with too little depth of field, I sometimes do portraits and lifestyle shoots with the person at a distance and smaller in the frame (like walking along a shoreline or in a downtown environment) and at a distance it really helps to have a very shallow depth of field for separation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Juangrande

EOS 90D
Mar 6, 2017
153
207
I'd do what smart people would do. Ignore. :ROFLMAO:

I think of this as a public service for those on the fence for a purchase.

Internet squatters will steal your work. So is it really worth posting it online or even a buy?

I wish someone pointed it out to me in my 20s so I wouldnt waste my time and money with a bunch of social justice warriors who are going after "evil corp" "fighting the good fight" when the real culprit of habitat destruction and flora/fauna extinction are their next door neighbors producing demand by having more than 2 kids.

Think breeding like rabbits of 6 or more offspring.
I just read something two days about how the birth rate is declining and it’s a concern because we have the largest and still growing elderly population and not enough younger earners contributing to the social security. This is in the United States not sure about worldwide. Personally I think Thanos had the right idea.
 

mangobutter

EOS 90D
Dec 11, 2014
185
95
www.e46mango.com
Theoretically, especially for large lenses, I think Canon could take three routes at RF-ing their EF big white lenses:

1) Minor optical tweak to correct for flange distance and new plastic composite casing to modernize the body with RF aesthetics, as well as AF algorithm and/or motor tweak. Cheap.

2) Re-use the existing optical packaging and simply extend the body a bit and re-work the af algorithms and/or motors. Cheapest.

3) The most expensive, a complete redesign from the ground up. Really expensive.

I think Canon will go with option 1. It seems the research, design, and engineering is done and all they'll need to do is tweak the optics a tad as well as AF. Probably more so for older lenses such as, say, the 400mm f/5.6. I think extending such a large lens the size of an adapter doesn't really affect the size of a huge lens.

I think Canon can also go full #3 for less expensive lenses such as the 70-200 F4 RF to which it looks like it's a completely new from the ground up design.

Take a look at the RF 50mm 1.8... they went full #1 on it and essentially repackaged the EF version but corrected a few elements for projection. Minimal investment. Maximum recovery!

So maybe depending on the lens, a combination.

Or I could just be totally off base and Canon will redesign everything from the ground up which would cost a TON of money, however I'd bet my money on Canon recouping those costs if they did make that investment,
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,163
1,928
Kentucky, USA
The first 2 lenses have a wide-open entrance pupil of 97 and 101 mm. I wonder if there will be a DO front element in any of them? If they can get the price and weight down I would be very interested in one, particularly the 300mm one.

Does anybody care to guess what the price & weight might be for them?
 

TM

EOS M50
Mar 20, 2013
32
1
Yes!! This is a must-have for me. I love my EF 200mm f2.0 II and use it all the time with my R5. Hopefully the RF version will be a bit smaller.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dolina

slclick

Unsolicited & Always Free
Dec 17, 2013
4,499
2,787
Honestly not really that over the top. I have cerebral palsy and I have had other "birders" nearly knock me down while trying to capture images of a bird in a rare location.

If people are willing to shove a handicapped person to get a photograph of a bird then they certainly will steal a photograph.

Which is exactly why I pretty much gave up on any organized "birding". The rudeness is astounding.
People suck, basically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

rbr

EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 11, 2010
96
20
I have had the EF 800 f5.6 L since it came out. I was using the 1D Mark3 at the time and it still works better than ever on my R5. I have no plans to sell it. It wouldn't be worth the price to me for a few pounds. When the weight of the tripod, head and camera are added on, any 800 5.6 will be heavy. The problem with making money with the 800mm in particular is that the markets that use bird photos just isn't what it was during the 00's when the lens was released. There are far fewer paying publications. There are too many people out there giving away photos, and many are excellent photographers. Conservation organizations are cash strapped as it is and have many people eagerly giving them their photos. The good organizations at least ask. I rarely do any bird photography with it anymore, but older photos sell just as well as newer ones. Just yesterday I sold a photo taken in 2009 with the 800L + 1.x on the 1D Mark3 to a well paying national magazine, and a cover shot for a small scientific publication taken in 2005 using a 600f4 (version I) with the 2x on a 1D Mark2. Using newer cameras or lenses wouldn't have made any visible difference for those uses. I'm grateful that I own the EF 800mm f5.6 and that Canon still services it, but at this point I couldn't afford to buy a new one from the income it would generate. The older EF big whites are still very fine lenses and are more than capable of producing photos for publications and beautiful prints at a fraction of the price of the latest and greatest. Now if Canon came out with something like Nikon's 500 f5.6 I would definitely be interested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr and dolina

dolina

millennial
Dec 27, 2011
2,242
317
31
34109
www.facebook.com
I just read something two days about how the birth rate is declining and it’s a concern because we have the largest and still growing elderly population and not enough younger earners contributing to the social security. This is in the United States not sure about worldwide. Personally I think Thanos had the right idea.

Rich nations generally have a lower birth rate. That's one contributing factor to why they're rich.

The reverse is true with poor nations.

Prior to vaccines, public sanitation, hand washing, disinfection, refrigeration and modern agriculture and other life saving practices the world population could not breach 1 billion globally.

During those times it was extremely difficult to cause any man-made extinction and climate change was unheard of.

From 1804 to today we are approaching 7.9 billion and all the climate is changing and mass extinction is occurring.

More people are living to adulthood and living longer than any time prior to today.

I have had the EF 800 f5.6 L since it came out. I was using the 1D Mark3 at the time and it still works better than ever on my R5. I have no plans to sell it. It wouldn't be worth the price to me for a few pounds. When the weight of the tripod, head and camera are added on, any 800 5.6 will be heavy. The problem with making money with the 800mm in particular is that the markets that use bird photos just isn't what it was during the 00's when the lens was released. There are far fewer paying publications. There are too many people out there giving away photos, and many are excellent photographers. Conservation organizations are cash strapped as it is and have many people eagerly giving them their photos. The good organizations at least ask. I rarely do any bird photography with it anymore, but older photos sell just as well as newer ones. Just yesterday I sold a photo taken in 2009 with the 800L + 1.x on the 1D Mark3 to a well paying national magazine, and a cover shot for a small scientific publication taken in 2005 using a 600f4 (version I) with the 2x on a 1D Mark2. Using newer cameras or lenses wouldn't have made any visible difference for those uses. I'm grateful that I own the EF 800mm f5.6 and that Canon still services it, but at this point I couldn't afford to buy a new one from the income it would generate. The older EF big whites are still very fine lenses and are more than capable of producing photos for publications and beautiful prints at a fraction of the price of the latest and greatest. Now if Canon came out with something like Nikon's 500 f5.6 I would definitely be interested.
Photography in general in most cases are high risk and low pay. This is especially true for weddings/events during the past 52 weeks.

When I started in my 20s I never expected to make money from bird photos but I also did not expect the personalities that would leech off me and become unwanted distractions.

If a DeLorean were provided I would opt to go back into time and make sure I never bought any birding gear so I would never met any of these bad eggs. I'd even willingly have all my wisdom teeth pulled out in one sessions without anesthetic rather than take up any sort of birding.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Quackator