Report: New Canon Super Telephoto Lenses Coming in May

[neuroanatomist]

Oh, BTW "prospective buyers" not "perspective buyers"

Maybe it's both?

 

[Canon Rumors]

I would like any telephoto lens to be as light as possible. I owned the FD 400mm 2.8 and at over 6Kg with a camera body it was very difficult to use. My EF 500mm ii is much more manageable at 3.97Kg on a R6ii with adapter. Currently the RF 600mm is 3.76 with a R6ii, how much heavier is acceptable for the 'benefit' of two built in extenders. I would prefer the extenders in my backpack for when I need them rather than supporting their weight in the my left hand when I don't.

I shot with the Nikon 400 4.5/600 6.3/800 6.3. I'd buy the trio if that sort of thing ever came to RF. I'd never look at another big white again.

 

[DocInfoSci]

Highly doubtful. One set of flip-out 1.4x elements, yes. Two sets of them, no.

I'm thinking more like a tommy gun implementation:



In which case we could also get 4x, 8x, and 16x extenders that spin into place for rapid duck action!

 

[Dragon]

A 600-1200 f/4-f/8 zoom would be a nice twist and much more useful that dual TCs.

 

[Canon Rumors]

A 600-1200 f/4-f/8 zoom would be a nice twist and much more useful that dual TCs.

... and it would cost $30,000

 

[AlanF]

... and it would cost $30,000

and weigh a large number of pounds

 

[John D P]

Since, the current 400 & 600 primes are EF lenses adapted to the RF mount; their due for a refresh. Before the world cup would make sense, but that doesn't mean they will do it.

As for a switchable teleconverter; I would prefer a completely separate unit. That way it can be used on other lenses and when it's needed. A built in teleconverter adds weight, length, and cost to the lens. I only need 1.4, not a fan of a 2.0 teleconverters ( my personal opinion). They have a working switchable teleconverter from the EF 200-400mm, that has shown reliability for years. Why haven't they adapted this into a separate teleconverter; there is no doubt in my mind it would sell. I would buy it.

In my opinion, since the introduction of the RF mount Canon has put the long glass needs on the back burner. During this time, Sony & Nikon have developed better options and it's time for Canon to step up. The classic example is the gap between the 100-500mm and 400/600mm primes in the "L" series lenses. If you want upgrade to 600mm or faster glass, your ONLY option is a $13 to 14k prime. Then there is the mythical 300-600mm that has been teased for years. This would be a great wildlife lens, if their smart enough to make it a variable aperture of f4 to 5.6. For those of us that shoot in low light and want better bokeh; a fixed f5.6 aperture is unacceptable at the 300 to 400mm range for the anticipated price.

 

[AlanF]

I met a retired dentist (how cliche is that) in Japan who owned both this Nikon and the EF 1200/5.6.

For what dental care costs here, ours could easily afford them.

 

[neuroanatomist]

As for a switchable teleconverter; I would prefer a completely separate unit. That way it can be used on other lenses and when it's needed. A built in teleconverter adds weight, length, and cost to the lens. I only need 1.4, not a fan of a 2.0 teleconverters ( my personal opinion). They have a working switchable teleconverter from the EF 200-400mm, that has shown reliability for years. Why haven't they adapted this into a separate teleconverter; there is no doubt in my mind it would sell. I would buy it.

A 1x-1.4x switchable TC is NOT just a matter of 'adapting it into a separate teleconverter'. A teleconverter mounted behind a lens, with the optics 'flipped out of the way' would be an empty tube between the camera and the lens...that's called an extension tube, and what it does is reduce the minimum focus distance at the cost of losing the ability to focus the lens on distant subjects. Probably not what you would want with teleconverter on a telephoto lens, y'know?

That hypothetical 1x-1.4x TC would require reducing optics for the 1x setting, a completely different set of optics than the extender optics that would need to flip in when the 1.4x elements flip out. Same thing as the magical unicorn 1x-1.4x-2x TC that people have been dreaming about after someone misinterpreted a Canon patent for something completely different that happened to have 1-1.5-2x markings on the diagram.

The reason a 1.4x flip in TC works in a lens is precisely because it's part of the lens design and not something that mounts behind the lens. There are lens optics that sit behind the 1.4x TC optics in the lens, as I labeled them in the EF 200-400/4, which is why the lens can maintain infinity focus with the TC flipped out.

 

[Dragon]

and weigh a large number of pounds

Any new 600 f/4 is going to be expensive, but if the zoom is built as a variable TC (i.e. magnifier), rather than the more elaborate approach used in most zooms, the size hit might not be that significant. The current approach to 800 and 1200 lenses takes the magnifier approach and making it variable is not impossible. I have an interesting Vivitar 2x macro TC (in FD mount) that is a combo of a 2x TC and a variable extension tube rolled into one. With some of Canon's recent exploits, it is not unreasonable to expect that they might take a new approach. Not much doubt that any sensible way to combine several Super Telephotos into one would be a big cost saver for Canon and might even reduce the price a bit thanks to increased production volume of the single design.