Sooooo, f/11 you say? What’s Canon up to with these upcoming supertelephoto lenses?

[privatebydesign]

A 600 f8 would make far more sense. And it would be a great compromise but I imagin it would be north of 4k

I don’t see why, a 600 f8 is only slightly larger than a 400 f5.6 which Canon make and sell for under $1,200. I’d think Canon could easily make a very high quality 600mm f8 for under $2,500, which I think would be a much better compromise.

 

[stevelee]

A 600 f8 would make far more sense. And it would be a great compromise but I imagin it would be north of 4k

Wouldn't a 400mm f/5.6 with a 1.4x teleconverter give you a 560mm f/8 equivalent for a lot less money? Wouldn't a 2x on 400mm give you 800mm f/11?

 

[Aussie shooter]

I don’t see why, a 600 f8 is only slightly larger than a 400 f5.6 which Canon make and sell for under $1,200. I’d think Canon could easily make a very high quality 600mm f8 for under $2,500, which I think would be a much better compromise.

Good point. Although it is a very old lens but you are correct

 

[ahsanford]

Leaks are finally coming out. The two slow superteles appear to be collapsible for smaller bag carry. It looks like a zoom when extended (i.e. in use as a 600 or 800 prime) but the entire lens's control set extends outward -- control ring, focusing and all -- rather than the inner barrel extending like we're used to seeing on zooms. Nutty and kinda exciting.

Presume CR Guy will post it once he verifies so I shan't drop pics here.

- A

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

I don’t see why, a 600 f8 is only slightly larger than a 400 f5.6 which Canon make and sell for under $1,200. I’d think Canon could easily make a very high quality 600mm f8 for under $2,500, which I think would be a much better compromise.

If the new lenses are popular maybe we'd see that as an L lens. L build quality, AF and optics and I'd buy that in a heartbeat for $2500. That might throw a little too much shade on the big whites for Canon.

 

[Aussie shooter]

Leaks are finally coming out. The two slow superteles appear to be collapsible for smaller bag carry. It looks like a zoom when extended (i.e. in use as a 600 or 800 prime) but the entire lens's control set extends outward -- control ring, focusing and all -- rather than the inner barrel extending like we're used to seeing on zooms. Nutty and kinda exciting.

Presume CR Guy will post it once he verifies so I shan't drop pics here.

- A

I still think they are an odd way for cannon to go but............ If canon have produced an affordable 600 and 800 prime with excellent IQ that is collapsable for travelling(albeit with a limiting max aperture) then I will still be impressed. But the IQ will have to be noticeably better than the third party 150-600's for it to be a good choice(at least the 600 will be. The 800 will have an advantaged based on it's focal length)

 

[Joules]

But the IQ will have to be noticeably better than the third party 150-600's for it to be a good choice(at least the 600 will be. The 800 will have an advantaged based on it's focal length)

I'm not sure if just having the focal length advantage will translate to a real world advantage for the 800 f/11. It does have only a 72 mm aperture, vs 95 mm on the 150-600 mm third party options. So with a high MP sensor and a good copy, they could still outperform it.

But those lenses will be much lighter. And I am still betting that they will be just marginally more expensive than the third party zooms.

 

[Aussie shooter]

I'm not sure if just having the focal length advantage will translate to a real world advantage for the 800 f/11. It does have only a 72 mm aperture, vs 95 mm on the 150-600 mm third party options. So with a high MP sensor and a good copy, they could still outperform it.

But those lenses will be much lighter. And I am still betting that they will be just marginally more expensive than the third party zooms.

It is more that it has a 200mm Fl advantage over the 150-600offerings so that gives it a small factor of difference that the 600 wont have. having now seen the images of the lenses though they look tiny. So if the IQ is better then they will sell like hotcakes as travel lenses

 

[Joules]

It is more that it has a 200mm Fl advantage over the 150-600offerings so that gives it a small factor of difference that the 600 wont have. having now seen the images of the lenses though they look tiny. So if the IQ is better then they will sell like hotcakes as travel lenses

True. I may be completely wrong of course. But if a slow first party prime had been available at the time I bought my 150-600 mm C, I would have had a very hard time justifying paying significantly more for such a lens.

Maybe the size and weight savings are worth asking a higher price. But in that case I still am confused by the STM. So looking forward to the end of the week for more info.

 

[Aussie shooter]

True. I may be completely wrong of course. But if a slow first party prime had been available at the time I bought my 150-600 mm C, I would have had a very hard time justifying paying significantly more for such a lens.

Maybe the size and weight savings are worth asking a higher price. But in that case I still am confused by the STM. So looking forward to the end of the week for more info.

Agree. The price will be the clincher. It MUST be affordable. at the most no more than the third party offerings

 

[padam]

Canon RF 600mm f/11 IS STM Lens:

• 10 elements in 7 groups (including DO lens)
• Minimum shooting distance 4.5 m
• Maximum shooting magnification 0.14x
• Camera shake correction effect 5.0 steps
• Filter diameter 82 mm
• Size φ 93 x 199.5 mm (when retracted)/269.5mm (when shooting)
• Weight 930g

Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM Lens:

• 11 elements in 8 groups (including DO lens)
• Minimum shooting distance 6.0m
• Maximum shooting magnification 0.14x
• Camera shake correction effect 4.0 steps
• Filter diameter 95mm
• Size φ 101.6 × 281.8mm (when retracted)/351.8mm (when shooting)
• Weight 1260g

 

[koenkooi]

View attachment 191144View attachment 191145
[..]

I don't care about the lenses, where I can I buy hair like that!?!?!

 

[AlanF]

View attachment 191144View attachment 191145



Canon RF 600mm f/11 IS STM Lens:

• 10 elements in 7 groups (including DO lens)
• Minimum shooting distance 4.5 m
• Maximum shooting magnification 0.14x
• Camera shake correction effect 5.0 steps
• Filter diameter 82 mm
• Size φ 93 x 199.5 mm (when retracted)/269.5mm (when shooting)
• Weight 930g

Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM Lens:

• 11 elements in 8 groups (including DO lens)
• Minimum shooting distance 6.0m
• Maximum shooting magnification 0.14x
• Camera shake correction effect 4.0 steps
• Filter diameter 95mm
• Size φ 101.6 × 281.8mm (when retracted)/351.8mm (when shooting)
• Weight 1260g

Thanks for the heads up. The 600 is a nice size and weight. I calculate that it will have a similar effective resolution to a 500mm f/5.6 on a 50 Mpx FF sensor, and the 800mm about 700mm. If I go for an R5, I will go also for the 100-500mm as the zoom capabilities, mfd and fov will be so much more useful for me than the increase in resolution, and I can use a 1.4xTC.

 

[Joules]

Thanks for the heads up. The 600 is a nice size and weight. I calculate that it will have a similar effective resolution to a 500mm f/5.6 on a 50 Mpx FF sensor

May I ask you to share how you arrived at that number?

I would think a 500 mm f/5.6 out resolves a 600 mm f/11. On a 50 MP sensor, doesn't diffraction limit the 600 mm f/11 to effectively 24 MP? By the time you crop the 50 MP image from a 500 f/5.6 to 24 MP, you get a FoV equivalent to ~ 720 mm (500÷√(24÷50)) if I'm not mistaken.

If I am missing something, I would appreciate it if you could point it out.

 

[AlanF]

May I ask you to share how you arrived at that number?

I would think a 500 mm f/5.6 out resolves a 600 mm f/11. On a 50 MP sensor, doesn't diffraction limit the 600 mm f/11 to effectively 24 MP? By the time you crop the 50 MP image from a 500 f/5.6 to 24 MP, you get a FoV equivalent to ~ 720 mm (500÷√(24÷50)) if I'm not mistaken.

If I am missing something, I would appreciate it if you could point it out.

System resolution is determined by a combination of the MTFs of the lens and the sensor (plus complicating factors like from the Baeyer grid) and there is not a sharp diffraction cut-off. f/5.6 to f/11 is in a transition region where both MTFs affect the overall resolution. At much greater f-numbers where diffraction is purely limiting, you can easily calculate resolution from the diameter of the entrance pupil, but it is difficult in this f-number region with current sensors. So, I analysed experimental measurements. In one of my geekier moments, I plotted the MTF50 measurements by ePhotozine and lenstip of the best lenses where there are not aberrations on the 5DSR against f-number. On going from f/5.6 to f/11, the consensus best MTF50 values dropped by 12 or18%, depending on who measured them, say an average of ~15%. So the resolution of a 600mm f/11 would be the equivalent of ~0.85 x600mm for an f/5.6 lens, ie ~ 510mm on an f/5.6.

The usual wiseguys will jump in and point out that resolution is determined by MTF10 or MTF20 and not MTF50, but changes in MTF10 and 20 parallel changes in MTF50 (as measured by optyczne, the parent site of lenstip).

 

[ahsanford]

I'm not sure if just having the focal length advantage will translate to a real world advantage for the 800 f/11. It does have only a 72 mm aperture, vs 95 mm on the 150-600 mm third party options. So with a high MP sensor and a good copy, they could still outperform it.

But those lenses will be much lighter. And I am still betting that they will be just marginally more expensive than the third party zooms.

I'm reading the 800 f/11 will have a 95mm front element. No idea why -- it surely doesn't need to be that large.

- A

 

[Joules]

I'm reading the 800 f/11 will have a 95mm front element. No idea why -- it surely doesn't need to be that large.

- A

Read that too. Though I think that is the filter size, not necessarily the from element? Maybe the DO construction requires some extra.