Report: New Canon Super Telephoto Lenses Coming in May

[homebodyMacro2]

Do we expect these potential 400mm and 600mm big whites to be comparable in cost to their predecessors? I wish I were in that market... sigh. I feel there's a fair chance this 300-600L zoom is perhaps destined to remain a rumor lol.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Do we expect these potential 400mm and 600mm big whites to be comparable in cost to their predecessors? I wish I were in that market... sigh. I feel there's a fair chance this 300-600L zoom is perhaps destined to remain a rumor lol.

No idea, but I'd expect that if the new 400mm and 600mm lenses have an integrated, switchable 1.4x TC (there were patents published on those about a year ago) then they'll go up in cost a bit over the current versions. Maybe $1K or $2K more? The 1.4x TC is selling for $600...

Even if the 300-600/5.6L is not a rumor, while it will likely be cheaper than the 400/2.8 and 600/4, it won't be 'cheap'. Likely a bit north of the RF 100-300/2.8, so figure on the order of $11.5-12.5K.

 

[Dragon]

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.

Not sure that even reducing optics would solve the problem. A friend of mine who worked for Canon for many years once pointed out to me that the reason no one made the equivalent of a Metabones Speed Booster for EF-to EF is that focal reducers do not extend the focal plane like extenders do so they can only be made to fit inside the existing back focus distance of a lens. Hence, we have focal reducers that replace the EF to M and EF to R adapters, but no focal reducers for EF to EF or R to R.

 

[neuroanatomist]

A friend of mine who worked for Canon for many years once pointed out to me that the reason no one made the equivalent of a Metabones Speed Booster for EF-to EF is that focal reducers do not extend the focal plane like extenders do so they can only be made to fit inside the existing back focus distance of a lens. Hence, we have focal reducers that replace the EF to M and EF to R adapters, but no focal reducers for EF to EF or R to R.

It's technically possible to have a focal reducer that maintains the same lens mount and flange focal distance - there is a 0.7x focal reducer for PL to PL. Of course, technically possible ≠ easy...that optic is 20 cm long, has 13 elements, rotates the image 180° and costs $5500. But it will give you 0.7x the focal length and an extra stop of light with a FF lens and an S35 sensor (or an S35 lens and an S16 sensor).

It might not be possible to accomplish that in a TC-sized optic, though the 'boost' would not need to anywhere near a full stop because the light loss from an extension tube (along with the magnification benefit) decreases with increasing focal length.

 

[homebodyMacro2]

No idea, but I'd expect that if the new 400mm and 600mm lenses have an integrated, switchable 1.4x TC (there were patents published on those about a year ago) then they'll go up in cost a bit over the current versions. Maybe $1K or $2K more? The 1.4x TC is selling for $600...

Even if the 300-600/5.6L is not a rumor, while it will likely be cheaper than the 400/2.8 and 600/4, it won't be 'cheap'. Likely a bit north of the RF 100-300/2.8, so figure on the order of $11.5-12.5K.

Yeah, the integrated TC would seemingly add a bit to it. Definitely would make for some steep prices

It does seem like a 300-600 f/5.6L should be in the ballpark of the 100-300L unless some magic happens. Given the identical front end size requirement, do you figure getting to 600mm adds more cost than the 2x (instead of 3x) zoom factor reduces it? Honestly, unless some magic happens, I'm not really in the market for this one either