Stock Notice: Canon RF 600mm f/4L IS & Canon RF 400mm f/2.8L IS

[davidcl0nel]

Yes, the RF 400/2.8 and 600/4 take the RF extenders.

As the lenses seems to be no other than EF with an included internal adapter there should be no problem with a lens too close at the back. The first 2cm should be totally empty.
Or am I wrong?

 

[neuroanatomist]

As the lenses seems to be no other than EF with an included internal adapter there should be no problem with a lens too close at the back. The first 2cm should be totally empty.
Or am I wrong?

They are compatible, without issue. The confusion probably comes from the fact that on the RF extender pages on the Canon USA store page, the Compatibility section lists only the RF 100-500, 600/11 and 800/11.



On the main product page, the RF 400/2.8 and 600/4 are included on the list.

Since this is a thread on lens availability, I’ll point out (again) that the Canon product pages and the Canon store pages do not seem to be in sync. With many hard-to-find RF lenses, they show as in stock on the product page but when you go to the store and add them to your cart, they show as backordered.

 

[usern4cr]

It's worse than that - describing f/8 and f/7.1 as unusably slow is as dopey a remark as I have ever seen here.

I agree! I wrote my initial reply quite scathingly at the stupidity/trolling of the original poster, but I'm trying to be more "relaxed & polite" in my posts and thus I rewrote it in a "considerate tone" but one that got the point across that they'd be better off in Sony's website instead of unfairly trolling this one.

 

[AlanF]

I agree! I wrote my initial reply quite scathingly at the stupidity/trolling of the original poster, but I'm trying to be more "relaxed & polite" in my posts and thus I rewrote it in a "considerate tone" but one that got the point across that they'd be better off in Sony's website instead of unfairly trolling this one.

I try to be polite always. But, describing the Sony 200-600 mm f/6.3 lens as being "perfect" combination of speed etc and then the 100-500mm f/7.1 as being unusably slow was just too much, with just a 1/3rd of a stop from 6.3 to 7.1 somehow causing a catastrophic change in usability.

 

[eosuser1234]

The truth is the big whites are usually paid for by media companies, lens rental firms, etc. Those of us whom are married get stuck with F11.

 

[AlanF]

The truth is the big whites are usually paid for by media companies, lens rental firms, etc. Those of us whom are married get stuck with F11.

Lots of birders have these lenses, including a married couple Rob and Amy who post fabulous shots https://www.flickr.com/photos/robamyphotos/