svg+xml;base64,PHN2ZyB2aWV3Qm94PScwIDAgNzI4IDEwMjQnIHhtbG5zPSdodHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy8yMDAwL3N2Zyc+PC9zdmc+ - Patent: Canon RF 100-600mm f/8-11 IS STM optical formula

    Patent: Canon RF 100-600mm f/8-11 IS STM optical formula

    By 34 Comments1 Min Read Canon Patents

    A new optical formula patent application from Canon has been approved in the form of a Canon RF 100-600mm f/8-11 IS STM. As we have seen with the Canon RF 600mm f/11 IS STM and Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM, Canon isn't afraid of developing and releasing slower lenses. Canon has admitted to working on more of these types of lenses for the RF mount.

    Canon RF 100-600mm f/8-11 IS STM Optical Formula

    • Focal length: 153.00mm – 581.90mm
    • F value: 8.00 – 11.31
    • Half angle of view: 8.05° – 2.13°
    • Image height: 21.64mm
    • Overall length: 274.81mm – 354.89mm
    • Back focus: 68.40mm – 126.51mm

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    34 comments

    2. This looks to be a positive solution to the RF 600mm f/11 lens long MFD of 4.5m (14.8 feet) and losing shots when birds land close. The capacity to zoom out for short distances sounds promising! I'm guessing this also has aperture blades?
    3. This will be a very nice lens for folks that go to the zoo, or hike national parks in the day time. I may even consider it just for that purpose, to keep weight down vs travelling with my 100-400vII. The IQ on the 800 f/11 is very good. Not L good, but very good. This could be a real winner, especially since it should be smaller than the comparable range Sigma lens on the EF mount.

      -Brian
    4. I really wish they would make the lens at least a stop faster, but such as life. The Sony 200-600 mm f5.6-f6.3 is very popular on that platform and I would think such a lens would do well in the Canon ecosystem as well.
    5. I'm guessing if it was as fast as the Sigma 150-600mm in aperture, it wopuld probably be the same size. I'm curious as to how Canon will price this lens against the much larger and brighter (better bokeh) Sigma lens, especially if this is a fresnel lens DO design like the other f/11 primes.
    7. It's around one stop slower than similar lens (Sigma: 150-600mm F5-6.3 2100g; Sony 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 2115g; Tamron 150-500mm F5-6.7 1725g), interresting to know the weight. I think it would be the most portable one and smallest filter diameter (e.g. 67mm)

      Great to see this addition (I think it would come to production) to the small aperture zoom family after the 15-30mm, 24-105mm and 100-400mm.
    8. This will be a very nice lens for folks that go to the zoo, or hike national parks in the day time. I may even consider it just for that purpose, to keep weight down vs travelling with my 100-400vII. The IQ on the 800 f/11 is very good. Not L good, but very good. This could be a real winner, especially since it should be smaller than the comparable range Sigma lens on the EF mount.

      -Brian
      Try the RF 100-400. It's as sharp in the centre as the 100-400vii and very light.
    9. It's around one stop slower than similar lens (Sigma: 150-600mm F5-6.3 2100g; Sony 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 2115g; Tamron 150-500mm F5-6.7 1725g), interresting to know the weight. I think it would be the most portable one and smallest filter diameter (e.g. 67mm)

      Great to see this addition (I think it would come to production) to the small aperture zoom family after the 15-30mm, 24-105mm and 100-400mm.
      f/11 is 1.6 stops slower than f/6.3. f/11 is significantly worse for diffraction softening than f/6.3 on high resolution sensors like the R7's.
    10. There's a bit of a paradox. The f/11 lenses are suited best for the low resolution sensors like those on the R6 and R3 as their diffraction limited apertures are close to f/11, and they are less demanding on lens aberrations. But, most people who want long lenses for "reach" also like high resolution sensors for extra resolution. So, they need wider lenses for less diffraction. Anyway, I am happy to use the 800mm f/11 on the R7 but would like a shorter wider light lens.
    11. It's around one stop slower than similar lens (Sigma: 150-600mm F5-6.3 2100g; Sony 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 2115g; Tamron 150-500mm F5-6.7 1725g), interresting to know the weight. I think it would be the most portable one and smallest filter diameter (e.g. 67mm)

      Great to see this addition (I think it would come to production) to the small aperture zoom family after the 15-30mm, 24-105mm and 100-400mm.
      Looking at aperture and focal length comparisons, I would have to say this sounds a lot like the RF 100-400 f5.6-8 on 1.5x TC (results in 150-600 f8.4-12, but with fuzzy math call it 8-11), especially if they keep the 67mm filter thread (the 600mm f11 is 82mm filter by the way).

      Not knocking it as more affordable options are always good but it seems like a lot of duplication of lens purpose between this and the RF 100-400.

      That said, if Canon can maintain the prime image quality and turn the 600mm into a zoom with original optic design (no TC grouping) and close focus while keeping weight down to around 1kg, they may have another winner.
    12. There's a bit of a paradox. The f/11 lenses are suited best for the low resolution sensors like those on the R6 and R3 as their diffraction limited apertures are close to f/11, and they are less demanding on lens aberrations. But, most people who want long lenses for "reach" also like high resolution sensors for extra resolution. So, they need wider lenses for less diffraction. Anyway, I am happy to use the 800mm f/11 on the R7 but would like a shorter wider light lens.
      Maybe they are hoping buyers won't know about diffraction?
    13. I'd seriously like something that has a wider aperture than f/11. My Sigma is f/6.3 at 600, and that's already marginal in poorly-lit areas like dark forests.
    14. It's around one stop slower than similar lens (Sigma: 150-600mm F5-6.3 2100g; Sony 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 2115g; Tamron 150-500mm F5-6.7 1725g), interresting to know the weight. I think it would be the most portable one and smallest filter diameter (e.g. 67mm)

      Great to see this addition (I think it would come to production) to the small aperture zoom family after the 15-30mm, 24-105mm and 100-400mm.
      Sigma: 150-600mm F5-6.3 2100g;
      Sony 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 2115g;
      Tamron 150-500mm F5-6.7 1725g
      RF100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L 1365g
      Even adding a TC1.4x @ 224g is still lighter than the others, Slower of course.

      I have hundreds of puffin shots in critical or acceptably sharp shots after one session in Iceland given the R5's serious ability to crop and eye-AF. The worst part... choosing the best to share!
    16. If we ignore the fact that you are getting less light, I'm guessing the niche solution to those upgrading from APS-C as you get approximately f5-f7.1 for depth of field/bokeh of a crop body, but if you're already using FF you won't be impressed with it. On the other hand if you mount this lens on an R7 you're getting the equivalent to f13-f18 DOF. That's not to say you can't get good shots out of it but you will need to work harder separating backgrounds.

      I'm more disappointed this lens is STM, because I find the AF acqusition of the 800mm f11 rather sluggish in low light (it does do better with zone AF or object tracking turned off to some extent) and it would benefit greatly from USM.
    17. If we ignore the fact that you are getting less light, I'm guessing the niche solution to those upgrading from APS-C as you get approximately f5-f7.1 for depth of field/bokeh of a crop body, but if you're already using FF you won't be impressed with it. On the other hand if you mount this lens on an R7 you're getting the equivalent to f13-f18 DOF. That's not to say you can't get good shots out of it but you will need to work harder separating backgrounds.

      I'm more disappointed this lens is STM, because I find the AF acqusition of the 800mm f11 rather sluggish in low light (it does do better with zone AF or object tracking turned off to some extent) and it would benefit greatly from USM.
      Yes, the RF 100-500 with an RF 2x at 1000mm and f/14 has faster AF than the RF 800 f/11.
    18. Sigma: 150-600mm F5-6.3 2100g;
      Sony 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 2115g;
      Tamron 150-500mm F5-6.7 1725g
      RF100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L 1365g
      Even adding a TC1.4x @ 224g is still lighter than the others, Slower of course.

      I have hundreds of puffin shots in critical or acceptably sharp shots after one session in Iceland given the R5's serious ability to crop and eye-AF. The worst part... choosing the best to share!
      Iceland is a long way from Sydney! Could you post some shots as I am a sucker for Puffins and am suffering from Puffin-deprivation because of covid followed by avian flu restrictions.
    19. Focal length: 153.00mm – 581.90mm, wouldn't it be more fair to advertise the wide end as 150mm? Surely they couldn't advertise it as 100mm? Even if it is 153mm this looks like a good lens for the RP, R10 or R7. If they can get the minimum focus distance to around 1-1.5 meters or so it will be a great lens for butterflies and birding.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment