I find my Mk II quite hand-holdable, so I'd take a smaller weight reduction and a 120-300mm zoom design over a fixed lens with bigger weight reduction.I really hope Canon makes this a 120-300 mm zoom, but if their objective is minimal weight they will likely go with a fixed 300 mm lens.
The Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 weighs nearly 3.7 kg in use. So I wonder how much could its weight be reduced using more modern construction. There aren't any more modern equivalents but a 120-300mm f/2.8 zoom would be roughly the same size and weight as a 240-600mm f/5.6. Sony's 200-600mm f/6.3 is ~2.1kg as is Nikon's 200-500mm f/5.6 and so I would expect the weight to be not less than 2.5 kg, not much more than the EF 300mm f/2.8 II.I find my Mk II quite hand-holdable, so I'd take a smaller weight reduction and a 120-300mm zoom design over a fixed lens with bigger weight reduction.
Assuming that they take TC equally well (which I would assume be more complicated for the zoom design, but I never took optics classes in Uni).
As a comparison, the 200-400 1.4x TC weighs 3.62kg. The front elements of that and a 300/2.8 is the same(ish) size but the 300mm II is significantly shorter and lighter (2.35kg).The Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 weighs nearly 3.7 kg in use. So I wonder how much could its weight be reduced using more modern construction.
You should sell. Got a very good price for mine.I barely use my EF 300mm 2.8L IS II so no I will not get the RF version. Also now I can use my lens with 5DIV, 5DsR and R5.
When I bought my 300, I simultaneously bought the 1.4X and 2X TCs. I use(d) the lens as a 300 f/2.8, 420 f/4 and 600 f/5.6 and it works quite well at all three focal lengths. I now use the 150-600 Sigma Sport much more than the 300 and want a 200-500 f/2.8-4. Buying a 120-300 seems rather pointless.I really hope Canon makes this a 120-300 mm zoom, but if their objective is minimal weight they will likely go with a fixed 300 mm lens.
I should not because I will not be able to find it - used in reasonable price - should I need it again. We do not all live in places where used big whites are available.You should sell. Got a very good price for mine.
I buy your decision!I find that the choice between buying a lens that exists and buying a lens that doesn’t is an easy one.
I wonder if the shorter length of the lens means that it will be a telescoping lens like the 800 f11?This is what I hate about Canon. I have the Ef 300mm 2.8 II. It’s a really good lens. I’d go so far as to say it’s the best Canon lens. Very happy to use it with an R5. No intention of buying an RF version (expecting same lens with a permanent adapter attached). Then Canon come along with an RF version that’s shorter and lighter. Please please please let the image quality be worse or I’ll be tempted by it. How could it be lighter and shorter. It was already reasonably light.
Very, very unlikely. Not much length to telescope, and it would greatly add to its weight.I wonder if the shorter length of the lens means that it will be a telescoping lens like the 800 f11?
I’d doubt it. It will just be more compact and desirable. I must resist at all costs.I wonder if the shorter length of the lens means that it will be a telescoping lens like the 800 f11?
I must resist at all costs.
Or an act of goddess Kwanon...As a comparison, the 200-400 1.4x TC weighs 3.62kg. The front elements of that and a 300/2.8 is the same(ish) size but the 300mm II is significantly shorter and lighter (2.35kg).
But yeah, anything less than 2kg would probably require a miracle or an act of god.
What price point would make you hesitate or think twice about it? I too want one, but have never spend what this will cost.Excellent news for me, especially with a CR3 rating.
I am definitely in the market for a 300/2.8. Literally a few minutes ago I looked them up on MPB and KEH. I'll be pre-ordering the RF version.
I’d have no problem with $8K, maybe it will be less.What price point would make you hesitate or think twice about it? I too want one, but have never spend what this will cost.
Not sure what Gen II has to do with this topic of their “bolting on” mounts and TCs to the Gen III recent designs.It’s not silly. Just read the-digital-picture review of the 800 RF, which has a bolted on slightly improved 2xTC. The 300mm f/2.8 II is not a 3 year old design either, it’s a generation back. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-800mm-F5-6-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx