What’s next from Canon?

Bert63

EOS RP
Dec 3, 2017
548
1,073
I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.

100-500 is L glass. 100-400 is not. Price.
 

blackcoffee17

EOS RP
Sep 17, 2014
390
427
What is up with all these STM lenses? You spend 4500 Euros on camera, thousands of Euros on cards, 15 000 on a PC, and then you go and buy yourself 300 Euro cheap lens? LOL IDK.
What's wrong with STM lenses? There are other people, not just the ones who can afford R5 + 100-500 for $7000. And nothing wrong with the image quality of STM lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kharan and Joules

JohanCruyff

EOS RP
Aug 9, 2012
334
21
53
Milano, Italy
I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.
The RF 100-500 L becomes F/6.3 @ 363mm.
https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=3652591&l=it

The non L could be a 100-400 F/4.5-F/7.1, lighter and cheaper: a Tamron / Sigma competitor.
 

neurorx

EOS 90D
May 12, 2015
110
59
I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.
There was a breakdown by Gordon Laing. The 100-400 had a lower comparable f stop than the 100-500 at higher end focal lengths. I would love an affordable 200-600 f6.3.
 

AlanF

Stay alert, control the camera, save photos
Aug 16, 2012
6,827
5,848
I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm. I am not sure if that is true but if it is true why another RF 100-400. If the reports of RF 100-400 is going to be true that is another area Canon missed out IMO. They could have made a 100-400 and then a 200-600.
It was claimed that the 100-500 was f/5.6 at 400mm but Gordon Laing's cameralabs video has this:
Cameralabs_100-500mm.png
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
588
352
It isnt about the cost, its a camera that I know can take any environment.
Maybe they make R6 b version with 7d level weather seal and 2k more price :) or maybe not ,their goal seems to be decrease camera lines
 

davidhfe

EOS RP
Sep 9, 2015
302
443
I feel this is where Canon is missing the point. The R5 is definitely great on paper but after seeing all the limitation with the video I don't even know why canon tried to pull off the 8k video in this body. They could have stopped at unlimited (yeah I know the stupid EU tax, few other manufacturers have ignored this and moved on. So why not you Canon?) 4k60p with some innovation (like a heat sink grip) instead Canon tried to create a marketing buzz with 8K and missed out yet again on the 4k too. They also have AA filter on the R5 (obviously we are yet to see how strong it is).

This is what Canon could have done instead, made the R5 more of a photography product even with just 4k30p limited to 29:59 mins of recording and AA filter cancellation effect like the 5DsR and made the R6 with AA filter and great video specs (FHD @ 240fps and 4k @ 120fps with AF). IMO the R5 is a product neither an exceptional photo centric product because of AA filter nor a good hybrid camera because of video limitations. Had Canon done that they do not need to come up with another low cost body with the same 45MP sensor. Obviously it is just my opinion and I know that will not count at all at this point :) I was very excited to hear the specs of R5 mostly I wanted to try my 600 f/4L V1 on this body. But after seeing there is a AA filter and priced at $3900 I did not pre-order. I guess the reports of overwhelming reports are BS like Sony and Fuji does. The R5 is already discounted if you know where to get it.
I would much, much rather have a situational-use 8K and 4K HFR modes in addition to the "standard" 4K/30 pixel binned mode than to not have them. And I get the AA filter thing but I think we're just going to have to wait and see how the sharpness is compared to the Z7/A7R4/etc. I don't think it's going to be a deal breaker; Canon keeps talking about how they're improving their AA and seems to be super aware of the need. They made a huge deal about this with the 1DX3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

PhotonShark

I'm New Here
Jun 10, 2020
11
11
I wonder why the RF 100-400 when there is the 100-500. I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm.
This looks like the non L version. It would be a game changer if it would do f5.6 to 300mm (or more). A huge temptation for APS-C users to switch to full frame if the pricing is right.

I'm currently using a 70D and the 70-300mm. This would be the perfect combo upgrade (equivalent) for me with an R6 without breaking the bank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Twinix

C100 III + R6?
May 6, 2020
49
24
Norway
I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.
Yea, my point was just that I wan’t good aps-c glass (24-105 is too thight etc) for the cinema line with IS.
 

miketcool

EOS 90D
Jun 29, 2017
134
229
Weather sealed macro flash. Olympus made one, and I really don't want to tape up pins and not get all the sync features.

I read somewhere the RF 100-500 stays at f/5.6 until 400mm.
Canon discussed it during their launch presentation. f/5.6 at 400mm when they were talking about engineering and design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldenhusky

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
5,043
3,103
Irving, Texas
I think EF-S line was dead even before the EF line. The last EF-S lens was in 2017, last EF - 2018. The production and sales will obviously last for quite a while, but not the development.
You are most probably correct. The low sellers will be closed out. I noticed now that Adorama has the EF 400mm f/5.6L on closeout. That surprised me as I would have thought it to be a strong seller because I loved the one I had. I ordered the 135mm f/2L just in case. I won't be able to afford an RF version for quite some time.