Close Menu

    Here is the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM

    By Updated:337 Comments1 Min Read Canon Lens Rumors
    canonrf100400 - Here is the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM

    An image and some specifications for the Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM have leaked out ahead of next week's official announcement. I will note that the lens is a bit slower at the long end than my original report of f/7.1.

    This lens looks to be extremely compact for what it is.

    The Canon RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 IS USM has a minimum focusing distance of 88cm at 200mm, a maximum magnification of 0.41x at 400mm, and up to 6 stops of IS when paired with the EOS R5 or EOS R6. When using this lens with the EOS R or EOS RP, image stabilization is about 5.5 stops of correction.

    Another interesting design choice is that this lens is compatible with both the RF 1.4x and RF 2.0x teleconverters. Canon has also added a dedicated control ring to the front of the lens.

    The Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM will be priced at $649 USD.

     

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    337 comments

    3. I'm assuming this is sort of an equivalent of the EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS II lens for the RF lineup. The loss of the 70-100 range is presumably countered by the fact that the standard kit lenses for the R range all cover the 24-105 range already.
    5. I think the price will be higher with the latest price increases. If this can use the RF extenders will anyone buy the 600 or 800 f11 lenses at a much higher price?
      IQ may not be as good
    7. I think the price will be higher with the latest price increases. If this can use the RF extenders will anyone buy the 600 or 800 f11 lenses at a much higher price?
      Well 800/11 is a heck of a lot better than 800/16 and having to use a 2xTC on a cheap zoom lens to get there. I don't even need to use the lenses to know which one will have better IQ.

      600 f/11...yeah that may be more competitive. 560/11 out of this lens but again needing a TC to get there. That remains to be seen how close they'd be for IQ.
    9. TC compatibility, I wonder if that’s limited like the 100-500. Regardless…1-2 stops lost from f/8 is dark.
      Who uses TC on these entry level tele zooms? I have seen people using TC on 70-200mm lenses(both f4 and f2.8) havent seen anyone using it on 70/75-300mm & 100-400mm(also equivalent 3rd party) lenses.
    11. Prediction: lots of bitching by non-owners, lots of really happy owners who are just fine with f/8.
      0.41x at 400mm for $649! If I didn't have the 100-500 already, I'd be getting this one for chasing dragonflies. And with the leftover money I can try to hire @AlanF to run the images through DxO PL for me :)
    12. And only $649? I was expecting north of $1000, honestly. That's just a bit more than the 70-300 II. I don't mind f/8 that much, since I shoot with the 2x on my 500 pretty regularly.
      Edit: Based on some quick and dirty math, the 100-400 is about 5.5 inches long, which makes it even shorter than the 70-300 II. Impressive. Rough mockup
      size comparison:
      E-vEUVMVgAA45wf.jpg
    13. I just can't find my feet in this new RF system. This is not the lens for me. I bought the 800, f11 and yeah it's light and compact, but unusable in most situations I found out, unless I really jackup the ISO. This is kinda the same. Really wish Canon come up with something like the Sony 200-600 f6.3 not just these low end toys. People much buy them because they are cheap i suppose.
    14. I just can't find my feet in this new RF system. This is not the lens for me. I bought the 800, f11 and yeah it's light and compact, but unusable in most situations I found out, unless I really jackup the ISO. This is kinda the same. Really wish Canon come up with something like the Sony 200-600 f6.3 not just these low end toys. People much buy them because they are cheap i suppose.
      Try the 100-500L. Or the 600/4. Those aren’t ‘low end toys’.
    17. I just can't find my feet in this new RF system. This is not the lens for me. I bought the 800, f11 and yeah it's light and compact, but unusable in most situations I found out, unless I really jackup the ISO. This is kinda the same. Really wish Canon come up with something like the Sony 200-600 f6.3 not just these low end toys. People much buy them because they are cheap i suppose.
      Cheap suggests poor quality. That remains to be seen. It does open up areas of photography that were beyond the financial reach of some though. That’s pretty exciting. And for Canon, it creates a crowd of future L buyers when we in the unwashed masses decide that the images just aren’t doing it for us anymore.

      I’m not seeing your middle of the road pricing outside of Sigma and Tamron though. I had a Sigma and it’s the only lens I’ve had that started to fall apart. The zoom grip quite literally fell off. It would telescope on its own unless locked. That was “cheap” to me.

      That Sony lens is $2,000.
    18. Should there be? Why…because you say so?

      Because the market says so. I see many people who would buy a bit higher end lenses without spending thousands on top L glass.
      For example a weather sealed 85mm 1.4 which has a focus motor at least as good as the original EF 85mm 1.8 from 30 years ago.

      Not the slow and noisy RF 85 F2 with external focusing. Or should we be happy the filter thread is not rotating?
    19. I think the price will be higher with the latest price increases. If this can use the RF extenders will anyone buy the 600 or 800 f11 lenses at a much higher price?
      Would be F/16 with a 2x to get to 800. And I'm sure the IQ would not be as good. The 800/11 is really sharp for its price point.

      -Brian

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment