Patent: Canon RF 300mm f/2.8L IS 1.4x plus other supertelephoto optical designs

[neuroanatomist]

I'm surprised to hear this. Can you share some MTF charts or back-to-back example shots?

The MTFs are nearly identical except in the extreme corners. Bryan/TDP tested 3 copies of the MkIII lens, one was so bad it was deemed damaged, the other two were similar to each other and slightly less sharp than his copy of the MkII.

Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens Review

Is the Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens right for you? Learn all you need to know in The-Digital-Picture.com's review!

www.the-digital-picture.com

 

[AlanF]

I'd prefer the lenses being optimised for the longest focal length: eg, a 420mm f/4 with a built-in 0.7x speed booster.

 

[AlanF]

The MTFs are nearly identical except in the extreme corners. Bryan/TDP tested 3 copies of the MkIII lens, one was so bad it was deemed damaged, the other two were similar to each other and slightly less sharp than his copy of the MkII.

Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens Review

Is the Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens right for you? Learn all you need to know in The-Digital-Picture.com's review!

www.the-digital-picture.com

The difference is noticeable in his charts with the 1.4xTC

Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Not that I take those charts too seriously.

 

[bbasiaga]

This sounds sweet. Another $10000 lens on the list of stuff I want but can't afford. Maybe the EF IIs will drop in price enough someday.

Brian

 

[Hector1970]

The difference is noticeable in his charts with the 1.4xTC

Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens Image Quality

View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.

www.the-digital-picture.com

Not that I take those charts too seriously.

I'd always assumed the Mark III was better. Interesting, I guess its lower weight is the advantage. The Mark II is very good but also very heavy and not good for my back (I used it hand held on safari - not a good idea)

 

[Hector1970]

A 300mm 2.8 with built in TC would be a very interesting lens. I can just imagine the price.
I love my EF 300mm 2.8 II. The best of all the Canon lens in my personal opinion.
For sport the option of having a built in teleconverter would be a good one.
I often use the 300mm with a 1.4 teleconverter and it works very well.
I have been surprised with the R5 and 100-500mm combo which works really well for sport.
Tracking while not perfect is fairly good. There is a bit of a way to go on tracking but the R5 is decent.
It's great when it detects the head and stays on it.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I have been surprised with the R5 and 100-500mm combo which works really well for sport.
Tracking while not perfect is fairly good. There is a bit of a way to go on tracking but the R5 is decent.
It's great when it detects the head and stays on it.

Tracking is good with the 100-500 on the R3. The problem I have with the combo is for night sports, even at ISO 25600 the images are ~2 stops underexposed to get high enough shutter speeds. The RF 300/2.8 will solve that issue.

 

[LSXPhotog]

I can't wait. I am flirting with the idea of buying a used EF 300 or 400mm f/2.8...might wait for those to drop in price or see just how good these are with the built in TC.

 

[mxwphoto]

This sounds sweet. Another $10000 lens on the list of stuff I want but can't afford. Maybe the EF IIs will drop in price enough someday.

Brian

I doubt it will cost that much for a 300mm 2.8. I would imagine more along the lines of $8000.

Speaking of the EF II, if you wait for a right priced listing you can get it used for around $3500 right now which is not a bad deal.

 

[Billybob]

Not at all, it is Nikon that copied Canon. We do have a 200-400 with built in TC, don't cha know?
I and I am sure other would love Canon to bring out smaller super telephotos like Nikon has with the PF line as we had the DO line first as well. And if you, want to say Canon copied Nikon, it's your story tell it the way you want.

So Nikon, like Apple, took ideas developed elsewhere and made them (far) better? I mean the two Nikon pf lenses put the 400 DO to shame on price/value alone, and the Nikon's are far superior to the cheap, single-aperture RF DO long primes.

That's my story.

 

[PhilA]

So Nikon, like Apple, took ideas developed elsewhere and made them (far) better? I mean the two Nikon pf lenses put the 400 DO to shame on price/value alone, and the Nikon's are far superior to the cheap, single-aperture RF DO long primes.

That's my story.

Also there was the EF1200f5.6L that was fitted with a switchable internal 1.4x - way back in the '80s!

 

[scyrene]

Tracking is good with the 100-500 on the R3. The problem I have with the combo is for night sports, even at ISO 25600 the images are ~2 stops underexposed to get high enough shutter speeds. The RF 300/2.8 will solve that issue.

So shoot at ISO 102400! ;p

 

[john1970]

IMO, some lenses and some use cases lend themselves more to different TCs. For example, IMO, a 400mm is better suited with an internal 1.4x, but I'd argue a 500mm is much more useful with a internal 2.0x at 1000mm. On a 300mm I argue its pretty even between the two, but I'd love to see them seriously consider the internal 2.0x.

I agree. For me a 300 mm f2.8 with a internal 2x would be an amazing lens. Being able to switch between 300 mm and 600 mm on the fly.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I doubt it will cost that much for a 300mm 2.8. I would imagine more along the lines of $8000.

That’s what I was thinking, but built-in switchable TC might push it to $10K.

 

[Deleted member 381342]

Not at all, it is Nikon that copied Canon. We do have a 200-400 with built in TC, don't cha know?
I and I am sure other would love Canon to bring out smaller super telephotos like Nikon has with the PF line as we had the DO line first as well. And if you, want to say Canon copied Nikon, it's your story tell it the way you want.

What's a zoom lens to do with anything? The topic is the big white mirrorless lenses. If you aren't interested in discussing the topic at hand, why bother replying?

 

[becceric]

I'd always assumed the Mark III was better. Interesting, I guess its lower weight is the advantage. The Mark II is very good but also very heavy and not good for my back (I used it hand held on safari - not a good idea)

My experience is limited to the Mark III, but for most of what I shoot with it (birds) the corners are out of focus anyway, so I have not yet come across poor corner sharpness issues.

 

[tron]

A 400 DO with built-in 1.4 would be more useful for me but everyone has different needs of course.

I will keep my white EF lenses since the difference in price would be huge and the difference in IQ small if any.

 

[neuroanatomist]

What's a zoom lens to do with anything? The topic is the big white mirrorless lenses. If you aren't interested in discussing the topic at hand, why bother replying?

You stated Canon should copy Nikon with a built-in 1.4x TC. The fact is, Nikon copied Canon…again. Are you one of those people who simply can’t admit when they’re wrong?

As far as I know, the Canon FDn 1200 f/5.6L 1.4x was the first supertele lens with a built-in ‘flippable’ 1.4x TC, used at the 1984 Olympics. In response to that, Nikon developed their own 1200mm + 1.4x (called a 1200-1700mm lens), although it took them 5 years to make the prototype.

 

[ERHP]

Would love to have the option with my RF600 f/4L to simply flip the lever when a subject moves either two close to frame properly or further away than optimal w/the bare lens. Adding/Removing the 1.4x simply takes to much time and often introduces a risk of spooking the subject(s).

 

[mxwphoto]

That’s what I was thinking, but built-in switchable TC might push it to $10K.

You may be right... The initial launch price of the EF mk II at $6600 translates into $8500 today, add in TC and improved IS/weight reduction surcharge so probably around $10k. Though one can still hope that strong Dollar vs Yen will push that down to $8999 at launch.