Patent: Impressive super telephoto L zoom lenses for the RF mount

Blue Zurich

Traditional Grip
Jan 22, 2022
243
364
Swingtown
No doubt these patents are interesting. The RF 100-500 is a little slower at the long end than the EF 100-400, but by all accounts, it is at least as sharp and a little lighter. Again, you need a TC to equal the Tammy for reach, so if you are looking for 600, then one of the new ones would be nice. I have the EF 800L and just ordered the RF 800 f/11 because it is so much more portable and from the samples I have seen, it is sharper than the 100-400 with a 2x TC (but still not as sharp as the 800L by a fair bit). As the saying goes "horses for courses".
I dipped into the fixed aperture pool and picked up a 600 STM and got a bad copy, turned me off but made me realize after I returned it how specialized it is and the use cases I might use it for are very infrequent so I turned my resources towards patience and vaporware, lol.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dragon

EF 800L f/5.6, RF 800 f/11
May 29, 2019
1,202
1,682
Oregon
I dipped into the fixed aperture pool and picked up a 600 STM and got a bad copy, turned me off but made me realize after I returned it how specialized it is and the use cases I might use it for are very infrequent so I turned my resources towards patents and vaporware, lol.
Patience is a virtue, but impatience often captures opportunity .
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Unless maybe, just maybe you are trying to make it very small
As someone who has never studied optics, @mxwphoto's question is something I've pondered as well. Why would a 300-800 f/4-f/8 design become larger than a fixed aperture design?

Surely there are plenty of non-L zooms that are variable aperture zooms, and they are all relatively small?
 
Upvote 0
Canon has history with the 150-600mm - making the NFD15-600f5.6L. A very good lens, if somewhat unconventional in its focusing system. I used it (hand held) at the Reno Air Races many moons ago. Often used by surfing photographers. The focus gearbox was a bugger to repair/set up though. https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/nfd258.html
 
Upvote 0

AlanF

Desperately seeking birds
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
12,245
22,183
As someone who has never studied optics, @mxwphoto's question is something I've pondered as well. Why would a 300-800 f/4-f/8 design become larger than a fixed aperture design?

Surely there are plenty of non-L zooms that are variable aperture zooms, and they are all relatively small?
I think you may have misunderstood him in translation. He meant that the fixed aperture lens loses light (= photons) at short focal lens, not gains weight (light ≠ lightweight).
 
Upvote 0

Dragon

EF 800L f/5.6, RF 800 f/11
May 29, 2019
1,202
1,682
Oregon
As someone who has never studied optics, @mxwphoto's question is something I've pondered as well. Why would a 300-800 f/4-f/8 design become larger than a fixed aperture design?

Surely there are plenty of non-L zooms that are variable aperture zooms, and they are all relatively small?
Very true, but Canon has been thinking out of the box lately. The 600 and 800 F/11 lenses are good examples. Very light weight, inexpensive, and very decent IQ. The reason I said "maybe, just maybe" was to give credit to that out-of-box thinking. Size and weight reduction seems to have become a high priority with Canon since they adventured into mirrorless. This started with the M line (which is universally small and light), not with R, but it has propagated to a portion of the R line that is focused on portability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
Why is there no 300 2.8 in neither Canon nor Nikon's mirrorless lens road map? The most current version was introduced 11 years ago!
You would have to ask Canon and Nikon. Since it isn't on either one's roadmap, perhaps they don't see it as a high priority, possibly based on projected sales.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

Blue Zurich

Traditional Grip
Jan 22, 2022
243
364
Swingtown
You would have to ask Canon and Nikon....? So much for posing a point of discussion in a forum. Thx.
I thought that pretty much summed it up. If there's no update or refresh for an item, it's usually sales. We all know here that our wishlists mean squat to Canon shareholders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
D

Deleted member 381342

Guest
Why is there no 300 2.8 in neither Canon nor Nikon's mirrorless lens road map? The most current version was introduced 11 years ago!
I expect it when sales of the 400 f/2.8 lenses dry up. Nikon just pushed out a 120-300 f/2.8 lens in the f-mount so I would expect these zooms rather than a prime so they can make a more expensive lens/higher profit lens.
 
Upvote 0

unfocused

Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Jul 20, 2010
7,184
5,483
70
Springfield, IL
www.thecuriouseye.com
…Nikon just pushed out a 120-300 f/2.8 lens in the f-mount so I would expect these zooms rather than a prime so they can make a more expensive lens/higher profit lens.
Agree that a zoom might be more likely. Disagree that more expensive equals higher profit. More expensive also means more expensive to manufacture and more expensive means lower volume. Since we don’t have access to that information we can’t assume we know the profit.

Given what Canon has done with the RF mount I could see them releasing a 120-300 f3.5 lens instead.

Less expensive, more sales, more profit?
 
Upvote 0
Mar 25, 2011
16,848
1,834
Agree that a zoom might be more likely. Disagree that more expensive equals higher profit. More expensive also means more expensive to manufacture and more expensive means lower volume. Since we don’t have access to that information we can’t assume we know the profit.

Given what Canon has done with the RF mount I could see them releasing a 120-300 f3.5 lens instead.

Less expensive, more sales, more profit?
You are right, of course, there is a lot more profit from high volume sales, but if you look at profit as a percent of sales than the story may be different. It all depends on how the books are managed. The selling price is far more than the direct cost of production, so it's a matter of how they calculate costs for tooling, training, advertising, R&D, service ... all the related costs that are indirect. There is a risk factor as well, there is no guarantee that a product will sell well. Thats why prices of new products drop over time, the risk goes away, and many of the indirect costs are paid off. They amortize onetime costs over a certain number of units.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Sep 20, 2020
2,997
2,365
Huh? really? You want to go hiking, wigh 150-600? I own tamron 150-600 G2 and
Trust me, going from 500 to 600 is not that huge, miniscule compared to weight and extra siR you need to carry from 100-500

I zoomed my lens from 500 to 600 time to time to justify my next purchase of 100-500, trust me, the extra weight and length is not worth it, it's only 0.25 x magnification and you can easily regain that by maneuver closer and you have more energy to spare
I do not think we can assume a Canon version would be the same weight.
... or price.
 
Upvote 0

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
998
901
Frankfurt, Germany
The 150-600mm f/5-6.3 sounds an awful lot like the Tam/Sig lenses.
Interested in seeing what the Canon RF 150mm-600mm f/5-6.3L can do. I have the sigma version but its so horribly built that it broke easily after one trip. I'd love it if Canon finally made one but faster at focusing and with much better quality... Terrified about that price though
@ Neuro: regarding the 150-600mm I am with you, but given the popularity of those lenses it would be a logical decision to bring it out. A closer look to its specs then would be very interesting. Between the Tammys and the Sigmas, there is a hidden, but for me quite crucial difference which is missed by most reviewers (one commendable exception is Brian Carnathan whose reviews contain really solid facts instead of bla bla): both Tamrons still open up to f=5.6 @ 400mm, the Sigmas stop down to 6.3 @ 380 (C) and already @ 320mm (Sports, at least the original version for DLSRs). So more expensive Sports version is the dark lord of those 150-600 zooms.

@ The3o5FlyGuy: I've got the Tammy G2 as a lighter and more compact travel alternative to my EF 500mm. It's mechanical quality is quite good and optically it is good enough for satisfying results even @ 580mm (none of those zooms deliver true 600mm), but its AF performance at least on Canon's DSLRs doesn't match the speed and precision of any original Canon tele. That's the shortcoming of the reversal engineering of Canon's AF system (same with Sigma), but the G2's plus is that its AF performs much better than the original and cheaper "G1".
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0