Patent: Canon RF mount Big White Lenses

[Chig]

With the new RF teleconverters these are going perform even better than before.

Perhaps but the RF adapters can't be stacked like the EF mark ii ones

 

[risto0]

I had a hope Canon will do a mount conversion service on the EF 600mm f/4L IS USM III and EF 400mm f/2.8L IS III, but if they are going to introduce new lens probably they are not going to do mount conversion on the EF version

why would you prefer to mount convert your lens? Isn't it so that one day when you decide to sell your lens, there are more potential buyers for EF than for RF mount because EF can be adapted to other systems as well? Wouldn't it more beneficial to purchase EF-RF adapter and leave it to the lens ( = more options in future)

 

[rawshooter]

Wow the difference between the first 400 2.8 IS and the III is 2.530g. That's almost half the weight. Yea if that drops the used prices I'll upgrade.

 

[risto0]

I wonder what benefits might RF 600mm F4 have over EF 600mm F4 III. (using EF-RF adapter is not a concern therefore mount difference does not matter here).

 

[Mr Majestyk]

I'm would be disappointed if the 300 weighs in at an more than 2kg and the 500 2.5kg. If they can reduce the weight in line with the EF 400 and 600 vIII I'll eventually swap both my older 300 v1 and 500 vII.

 

[Fischer]

Yes! Yes! Yes! RF 300mm f/2.8 - bring it on. I'm ready to preorder. It'll probably be an eye-watering 7.500$ - but its my biggest yearning having switched to Canon mirrorless.

 

[Fischer]

I'm would be disappointed if the 300 weighs in at an more than 2kg

wake up and face reality...

 

[tron]

My EF300mm f/2.8L IS II is just fine thank you

 

[tron]

I wonder what benefits might RF 600mm F4 have over EF 600mm F4 III. (using EF-RF adapter is not a concern therefore mount difference does not matter here).

It will certainly have an interesting RF designation in front of the 600 vs a rather boring EF one

 

[Jordan23]

I wonder what benefits might RF 600mm F4 have over EF 600mm F4 III. (using EF-RF adapter is not a concern therefore mount difference does not matter here).

I'll guess they'll be designed for faster fps.

 

[SwissFrank]

Fair enough, we all love the 150mm aperture series but this time around I want not only the 800/5.6 and 1200/8, but I also want a 300/2, 200/1.4, and 135/1.

 

[Antono Refa]

Fair enough, we all love the 150mm aperture series but this time around I want not only the 800/5.6 and 1200/8, but I also want a 300/2, 200/1.4, and 135/1.

Canon made a few 300mm f/1.8 for horse races, and Nikon made a commercial 300mm f/2 in the eighties. There's no technical barrier, so I guess its just a matter of insufficient demand to make it profitable.

 

[AlanF]

Fair enough, we all love the 150mm aperture series but this time around I want not only the 800/5.6 and 1200/8, but I also want a 300/2, 200/1.4, and 135/1.

You not only have to have deep pockets to pay for that lot but also strong musculature.

 

[Bert63]

Just thinking about the price makes me nervous..

 

[Mistkäfer]

I would like to see an RF 600 with inbuilt 1,4 converter like by the EF200-400mm

 

[tron]

I would like to see an RF 600 with inbuilt 1,4 converter like by the EF200-400mm

DO version or it will be a monster lens (like a 800 5.6)

 

[bbasiaga]

Just thinking about the price makes me nervous..

How many will be over $15k? Will there be any under 10k? My guess is MOST and NONE.

-Brian

 

[unfocused]

I'll guess they'll be designed for faster fps.

???

 

[AccipiterQ]

How big would an 800 F4 be?

 

[Mr Majestyk]

wake up and face reality...

I have, too bad you seem to be stuck in the past. Already the old 300 is only 2.3kg, so hardly a stretch to achieve 2kg with the new lightweight magnesium alloys and redesigned optics. I'll bet you also dismissed the idea of a 400 f/2.8 under 3kg too. LOL