The rest of 2019 for Canon will be about updating dated product lines [CR2]

[Don Haines]

Don
something wrong with your calculations I think. Pixels have full well (max. electron counts) in the order of 100,000, not 2^14.
DR is 20 log(full well/noise) so if noise is 10 electrons and FW 100,000 that makes 80dB DR, just over 13 bits. Though smaller pixels may not reach 10,000 electrons FW, and noise might not be as low as 10 but the best pixels can reach 2.

Mine were not really calculations, more like numbers pulled out of the air to illustrate a concept. Your numbers seem about right.... most DSLRs have a full well somewhere around 40,000, and your range of 10,000 to about 100,000 bracket that nicely.

 

[Don Haines]

It was called the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II.

A new version of the 400F5.6 should be lighter, cheaper, and sharper than the 100-400F5.6. It is not a replace for the 400, but a substitution. That said, Canon may feel that the market is not there... who knows, perhaps this lens will show up next as an R!

Personally, I would like to see a 500F5.6 or a 600F6.3...... something of L quality that gets you a bit more reach and is still easily portable and affordable

 

[QuisUtDeus]

A new version of the 400F5.6 should be lighter, cheaper, and sharper than the 100-400F5.6. It is not a replace for the 400, but a substitution. That said, Canon may feel that the market is not there... who knows, perhaps this lens will show up next as an R!

Personally, I would like to see a 500F5.6 or a 600F6.3...... something of L quality that gets you a bit more reach and is still easily portable and affordable

I really doubt a new 400L is coming. A budgety 500/5.6 (maybe L) would be awesome, though.

 

[neonlight]

Actually, I agree I'd like an L-ish 500 f5.6 (maybe a 600 f/6.3 but I think a wider aperture better) in preference to an upgraded 400. Perhaps a 600 f/5.6...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Actually, I agree I'd like an L-ish 500 f5.6 (maybe a 600 f/6.3 but I think a wider aperture better) in preference to an upgraded 400. Perhaps a 600 f/5.6...

600/5.6 = 300/2.8 = costly and large.

 

[TenPoundTabby]

So the thrust of this article is that a replacement for the 80d coming = boring, and so there's nothing interesting at all happening with Canon. I happen to think that the 80d replacement is important and exciting. I get it; it's your site; you can do what you want, but that attitude just strikes me as pretty elitist. Don't worry. I don't post here often and now I have even less reason to do so.

 

[Don Haines]

600/5.6 = 300/2.8 = costly and large.

This is why I was thinking 500F5.6 of 600F6.3..... it would be about the size of a Tamron or Sigma 150-600, except a wee bit lighter and should be sharper if not L quality, and considerable sharper if it is an L. A non-L 500F5.6 would compete well against the Nikon 200-500 and should outperform it.

 

[flip314]

This is why I was thinking 500F5.6 of 600F6.3..... it would be about the size of a Tamron or Sigma 150-600, except a wee bit lighter and should be sharper if not L quality, and considerable sharper if it is an L. A non-L 500F5.6 would compete well against the Nikon 200-500 and should outperform it.

I hope that some day Canon comes out with a lens comparable to the 150-600s (or even Nikon's 200-500)... IMO, it's a bit of a hole in their lineup. Maybe they think the 100-400 is good enough, but a little more reach never hurts.

 

[BillB]

I hope that some day Canon comes out with a lens comparable to the 150-600s (or even Nikon's 200-500)... IMO, it's a bit of a hole in their lineup. Maybe they think the 100-400 is good enough, but a little more reach never hurts.

But a little less weight and size is good too.

 

[3kramd5]

A long time ago (well, maybe a couple of years) it was reported that Canon were thinking of updating "all of the 400mm lenses". We've had upgrades to the 100-400, 400DO, 400 f/2.8 ... where's the one for 400 f/5.6?

Where? Or when?

 

[QuisUtDeus]

So the thrust of this article is that a replacement for the 80d coming = boring, and so there's nothing interesting at all happening with Canon. I happen to think that the 80d replacement is important and exciting. I get it; it's your site; you can do what you want, but that attitude just strikes me as pretty elitist. Don't worry. I don't post here often and now I have even less reason to do so.

Not everyone thinks a new 80D (90D) is boring, especially if it comes packing a legit all-new, 32mpx sensor instead of another we-swear-it's-new 24mpx.

It's also interesting to see how the narrative from the mirrorless faithful has switched from "Canon will never release another mirrorslapper" to "well this is the last round of updates" without acknowledging how wrong that would have made all their late-2018 pontification.

 

[TAF]

Don’t have a Harry fit!

In the real world, your photography is limited by the amount of light you gather. To go with more pixels in an area means that you have less photons hitting the sensor, and that means less dynamic range.

At base ISO, you need 2^14 pixels [EDIT] photons! I typed the wrong word![/EDIT]to get your 14 stops of DR. With the same scene, double the amount of pixels and that means dropping a stop of DR. You can go for bigger glass, but most of us are at the limit of what one can afford and/or the limits of what optics can achieve so unless you are shooting with a garbage lens, that option is out. You can double your exposure time, but that does not work when there is motion...

So, 100MP cell phones will never give you the results of a real camera because they do not gather enough light. You have to obey the laws of physics and mathematics, and no amount of marketing hype will change that.

Maybe we'll see a joint Canon/Apple product: the iPhone XI where they put an RF mount on the back...and Apple can use the extra thickness for some serious battery...and Canon can sell lots of lenses...etc.

Now that would be a crossover product.

 

[neonlight]

Where? Or when?

When turns out to be years. Probably never, now the R has been launched.

 

[neonlight]

This is why I was thinking 500F5.6 of 600F6.3..... it would be about the size of a Tamron or Sigma 150-600, except a wee bit lighter and should be sharper if not L quality, and considerable sharper if it is an L. A non-L 500F5.6 would compete well against the Nikon 200-500 and should outperform it.

Yes, if a 500f5.6 non-L is sharp that would be welcome. But difficult to see Canon introducing new EF lenses any time soon, they've got a few RF ones to deal with.
I'm also waiting for a 7DIII with no AA filter. 24 MPix would be good, sort of 80D sensor without the AA filter and lots of f/8 AF points.

 

[jedy]

So nothing doing for ALL the rest of the year - phew
See you again in Jan 2020?

Nice to look up the rumours from time to time but you’d think people would be happy with the perfectly adequate camera equipment they already own.

 

[dba101]

Why would I sob? We are talking about camera not life or death situation I deal with every day in my full time job.

If a certain camera sell more or less, I couldn't care less. I don't own any share in Canon, Nikon, Sony etc.

I own shares in other companies and I don't care either as long they make me money. A camera is just a tool for me.

Confucius say you cannot be proved wrong and say you don’t care anyway. He also say when dip toe in hot water make sure it’s not molten lava.

 

[Pape]

if they make new 7.5cm lens long tele prime. i hope it would also focus to 2meter or something . 400mm 5,6 isnt very usefull for little birds.
I know when i stand somehwere lurking flying birds passing ,its 100% sure tit comes inspect what i am doing on close distance.

 

[docsmith]

I hope that some day Canon comes out with a lens comparable to the 150-600s (or even Nikon's 200-500)... IMO, it's a bit of a hole in their lineup. Maybe they think the 100-400 is good enough, but a little more reach never hurts.

With modern cameras focusing at f/8, the EF 100-400 plus 1.4TC is actually very similar to the 150-600 cameras. Especially since they are not true 600 mm (or 400 mm for that matter). As long as you have a body that can focus at f/8, this really isn't a hole in the lineup.

 

[bokehmon22]

Confucius say you cannot be proved wrong and say you don’t care anyway. He also say when dip toe in hot water make sure it’s not molten lava.

It just a damn tool. Why do you care about sales or loyalty to a company?

Beside camera, I'm into alot of other electronics. If another companies has something that serve me better, I buy it. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and If I'm right, it doesn't matter. There are more important things to worry about than sales numbers of a camera. There are more to life than photography. I'm not going to cry about it like someone suggested I do. Repeat this to yourself. IT'S A TOOL.

 

[unfocused]

It just a damn tool. Why do you care about sales or loyalty to a company?

Beside camera, I'm into alot of other electronics. If another companies has something that serve me better, I buy it. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and If I'm right, it doesn't matter. There are more important things to worry about than sales numbers of a camera. There are more to life than photography. I'm not going to cry about it like someone suggested I do. Repeat this to yourself. IT'S A TOOL.

I think there is confusion because many of your posts sound as though you care very much, but yet you are saying you don't care at all.