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

Random Orbits

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 14, 2012
2,445
329
I don't have any DO lenses so this might be a dumb question: are they a little brighter than regular lenses somehow?

The first generation of Canon DO lenses had weird bokeh and had less contrast than the typical L lens. The 400mm f/4 IS DO II is a great lens. Reduction in length and the attendant reduction in weight are the primary benefits of DO.
 

Random Orbits

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 14, 2012
2,445
329
The version II of the EF telephotos removed the protective outer element and realized a significant weight savings. The version III shifted most of the elements toward the camera body and realized a significant weight savings. Will the RF version of the telephotos all use DO as a baseline technology to reduce size and weight and abandon the green ring for red?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HankMD and Eclipsed

Tom W

EOS R5
Sep 5, 2012
305
276
I pointed out on the other thread discussing the new lenses, but I'll repeat myself here:

I like birding. Sometimes, in very dark forests, even at high noon, I'm needing ISO 3200, even 6400, and on rare occasions, 12,800 to get the shot with my 5D4 and the Siggy 150-600 (f/6.3 at 600).

Simple math: if a shot requires, say, 1/1000 at f/5.6 at ISO 3200, it will require ISO 6400 at f/8, and ISO 12,800 at f/11. Unless the new cameras can produce the noise and DR characteristics at 12,800 of my 5D4 at 3200, the f/11 is a non-starter for me. As it is, the Sigma is pushing the limits, a bit of a compromise lens in terms of size/aperture/focal length/price. If it weren't a fixed focal length, and a bit heavy, I'd be toting my 500/4 with me very often.
 

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
814
1,108
www.instagram.com
Moon silhouette photos on a budget? That was an EF 800mm with a 2x TC....

F11 seems a bit out there to me, but creative applications which depend on a lot of reach and either have a lot of light or don't need a lot of light could fit. Ultra long-distance portraits pressed up against distant objects? Vacation pictures of animals in mid-day sun?
 

RMac

5Diii 7D M5 C300
As f/11 DO lenses, they'll potentially be the most portable lenses at these focal lengths that have ever been produced. f/11 should be good for daylight or things like shooting the moon. Can't the R focus down to f/11? I imagine that autofocus minimum brightness requirements was one of the major reasons we didn't see lenses like these for the EF system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stuart

Tom W

EOS R5
Sep 5, 2012
305
276
One more thing to point out - if you have the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, you already have available, with a teleconverter, 560 mm at f/8, and 800 at f/11 using the 1.4x or 2X respectively. Same with the 400/5.6L, but without IS.
 

H. Jones

Photojournalist
Aug 1, 2014
733
1,434
One more thing to point out - if you have the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6, you already have available, with a teleconverter, 560 mm at f/8, and 800 at f/11 using the 1.4x or 2X respectively. Same with the 400/5.6L, but without IS.

This is part of the reason why I'm almost entirely certain these will be cheaper than the 100-400. Add on the fact they're not L lenses and are listed as STM, I get the sense these are closer in price to the 24-240 STM than to even the 100-500. I think is this part of a much bigger plan by Canon.
 

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,857
1,784
This is part of the reason why I'm almost entirely certain these will be cheaper than the 100-400. Add on the fact they're not L lenses and are listed as STM, I get the sense these are closer in price to the 24-240 STM than to even the 100-500. I think is this part of a much bigger plan by Canon.

And I bet they'll be black, not white, with a green stripe.
 

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,464
649
35
Pune
Like I said in the other thread, I think these are going to be an incredibly good value and incredibly portable. $1000-$1500 for these as non-L STM lenses that can fit in basically any bag would be super impressive.

Here's something to consider: the biggest cause of the falling camera market is because of the use of cellphone cameras. What's one thing cellpbone cameras can't compete with simply because of physics? Zoom. Long, cheap zoom is a huge advantage of buying a camera, and 600mm even at f/11 could be a super exciting consumer lens. Especially considering the size.

I shoot almost all of my casual wildlife work with my 100-400 and 1.4 at F/8 to F/11, so I would be interested to grab the 800mm f/11 depending on how things look.
Use of STM instead of nano-USM is a big concern for Af speed. Already thanks to f11 they are going to have difficulty in tracking even in good light add to that STM and 1500$ asking price is looking too high.
 

MiJax

EOS M6 Mark II
Mar 30, 2016
56
57
California
www.flickr.com
I just don't see the logic. RF adapter and a 2x extender on the 400L 5.6 and you got the same light gathering and effective focal length (and likely cheaper). Of course I'd imagine they can get better IQ and focusing, but still F/11? Adding in budget DO optics, and this sounds like a dog. To me, this is a solution in search of a problem. Maybe there's something missing from the patent that ties it all together... like an internal 2 or 3x extender. Now that might help explain the odd nature of the rumor. For example, a 400 DO 5.6 with an internal 2x Extender (pushing it out to f/11) makes tons of sense, especially if they can produce the DO optics cheap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Antono Refa

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
3,916
822
It is for people who want to shoot in good light: Many sporting events and the safari tourists who leave camp only after a sumptuous breakfast and return for a cocktail before dinner. 'Bad' (actually good) light lasts for 90 mins in the morning and 60 mins at night. Rest of the day is fine for f11 especially with cameras now with good high ISO results. Not complicated at all
 

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
447
493
USA
I'm curious as a hobbyist. I like the thought of a long lens that i'd never be able to afford in 'big white' configuration. I know years ago they were talking about DO allowing some interesting designs. Maybe this is the first wave of those ideas seeing the light (pun fully intended).

I think its obvious too that Canon is looking at mirrorless as a different beast than DSLR - and is trying to do some different things to capture the difference in capability in creative ways. 7.1 zooms and 11 fixed lenses wouldn't be usable at all except in manual mode on DSLRs. It may take the market a little while to open their thinking up to new combos of gear and how they can be used.

Wouldn't be the first time. I remember so many people bellyaching 'why does my phone need a screen this big/internet/a camera? I can't believe i have to charge this every day...." etc. Now look at where we are.
 

bhf3737

---
CR Pro
Sep 9, 2015
671
1,520
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
The R series, even the lowly RP, can AF on f/11 and AF is quite fast and reliable. I think f/11 on affordable long lenses means that Canon is confident with AF speed and high ISO performance of the R series cameras, for those who do not mind slight image degradation due to defraction. I can imagine that the R5, R6 and beyond cameras would produce even better pictures at higher ISO with these rather cheap f/11 and of course better pictures with more pricey native RF long lenses to come.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lo lite and Mahk43
Apr 6, 2020
8
9
To answer your question. Airshows are an obvious example. The last time I saw the Thunderbirds it was in June under a cloudless sky. F11 is not an issue, but having enough reach sure was. I was wishing I had the Oly 100-300 or longer for my camera. A nice small, lower cost, high quality super telephoto would be amazing for Airshows. That's one of a few dozen examples I can think of.
 

Etienne

EOS R
Sep 19, 2010
1,478
286
Ottawa Ontario
"Not enough light" depends entirely on how good the high ISO performance is on the upcoming R5.

Also, filmmakers will shoot at 1/50 or 1/60 shutter speed no matter the focal length of the lens, unless they are capturing high frame rate for slomo use. So as long as the high ISO performance on the R5 is decent, these lenses should work fine throughout the day, and even during the gold hour.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: lo lite

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,257
915
I wouldn't be surprised to see the 800/11 being 3000$ and the 600/11 maybe 1500$.
If they are cheaper, that's all good I just don't see it, as every stop of light gathering seems to double the price, ans I think they do care about making them as sharp as possible.
 

Go Wild

EOS RP
Dec 8, 2014
290
354
So....It all depends on the user, your expectations, your demands and of course...your wallet. But even so....Unless this telephoto lenses are ridiculous small I only can justify the 800mm....For 600mm or close I would rather use a 400mm F5.6 small and cheap lens with great IQ attached to the new RF 1.4 teleconverter. I could benefict of a 560mm F8 lens.

F11 lens is just so dark....This would mean that it´s almost impossible to get good results in a cloudy day....Or for example only shoot from 10AM to 4 PM in Sunny days....Heck....that´s a hell of a limitation! I can understand that someone that do photography just for fun to buy one of these! It´s totally understandable! But.....Damn....You will be on the "dark side" :D :D :D

This reminds me one lens from Rokinon it was the 650-1300 F8-F16! The lens of course was not a success! First because the image quality was not good, then Without IS you would need very high shutterspeed! And then, combine a high shutterspeed with an aperture of F16! Total disaster! :D

So....Let´s see....If the lenses have no IS it can be problematic to shoot with...Unless IBIS is from another world!! Why? Well...If you shoot with an 800mm lens, you would need at least a shutter of 1/1600. To have that shutter you will loose light. Combine that with an F11 and you only could photograph with a lot of light! Or....Jumping ISO to 10.000!

Another thing is the bokeh.... At F11 you will have more problems to have blurry backgrounds and unless the subject is in a place with no close background....You will have a problem.

Again....for professional work maybe not...but for some enthusiasts that could work...I don´t know...There is a reason Why they are sooooo expensive.... :)