Canon Rumors Your best source for Canon news, rumors and more

In this patent application (2024-163673), Canon is exploring some lesser-quality super telephoto primes. Could be good news for us peons that don’t want to drop 5 digits on a super-telephoto prime.

The designs seem interesting, yet simplistic, so I wouldn’t necessarily expect these lenses to cost that much.

Canon RF 400mm F4.0

In this first design, we see elements that are consistent throughout all the designs in this patent application. This lens has a pretty basic design, and isn’t that heavy (the large front elements typically define a lot of the weight characteristics for super telephoto). With a back focus distance of 55mm, this lens is also very teleconverter-friendly.

Focal Length	388.73
F-Number	4.08
Half Angle of View	3.19
Image Height	21.64
Total Lens Length	310.74
Back Focus Distance	55.06

Canon RF 500mm F5.6

In a similar vein to the Canon RF 400mm F4.0, this lens is a little longer and slightly slower as it is a 500mm F5.6. Again, it’s teleconverter friendly with a 55mm back focus distance.

Focal Length	479.13
F-Number	5.65
Half Angle of View	2.59
Image Height	21.64
Total Lens Length	331.00
Back Focus Distance	55.35

Canon RF 600mm F5.6

This embodiment shows a 600mm F5.6 with a single large front element, and again, teleconverter friendly with a 67mm back focus distance.

Focal Length	583.80
F-Number	5.65
Half Angle of View	2.12
Image Height	21.64
Total Lens Length	366.23
Back Focus Distance	67.52

Canon RF 600mm F6.3

This embodiment shows a 600mm F6.3, I suspect slightly cheaper and lighter than the proceeding 600mm F5.6 It again, has a single large front element, and teleconverter friendly with a 70mm back focus distance.

Focal Length	584.06
F-Number	6.40
Half Angle of View	2.12
Image Height	21.64
Total Lens Length	366.13
Back Focus Distance	69.91

Canon RF 800mm F6.3

The longest lens in all the embodiments is this 800mm F6.3 showing a single large front element and a ton of space between that element in the next element group. I would suspect this lens would be easier to handhold as the center of balance would be nearer to the center of the lens. Again, it’s teleconverter friendly with a 62mm back focus distance.

Focal Length	789.38
F-Number	6.40
Half Angle of View	1.57
Image Height	21.64
Total Lens Length	600.18
Back Focus Distance	62.06

Source: Japan Patent Application 2024-163673

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.

Go to discussion...

26 comments

People wanting Canon to mimic Nikon’s ‘midrange’ supertele lenses will be happy IF some of these actually become products.

How would these compare to DO /pf lenses in design?

I would love an 800 F6.3! If it was under $6K I would purchase in a heartbeat.

People wanting Canon to mimic Nikon’s ‘midrange’ supertele lenses will be happy IF some of these actually become products.

That's a large 'IF' ........ really do hope we can see one or two of these designs come to reality.

That's a large 'IF' ........ really do hope we can see one or two of these designs come to reality.

Normally, new products by Nikon such as the 600mm f/6.3 trigger moves by Canon, but not always and sometimes very delayed. One famous example was the Nikkor 200-400mm f/4.0 lens with its different generations: the 1st gen fully MF version hit the market in 1983, followed by the 2nd gen with AF and VR in 2003, 3rd gen. in 2010. I learned that some wildlife shooters changed to Nikon because of that zoom lens. Canon waited until 2010 to bring out their EF 200-400mm f/4.0 , with the additional feature of a built-in TC of course. So, depending on which generation one considers as the real starter - MF or first AF version -, Canon waited 27 or 7 years to react here.

Canon waited until 2010 to bring out their EF 200-400mm f/4.0 , with the additional feature of a built-in TC of course.

Canon waited even longer ;) : the EF 200-400mm zoom is from 2013.
See: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef428.html

I love my EF 400mm f/5.6 USM L

If these are like that than I’d definitely pick one up.

Hello everyone. We all know that Canon will not produce such useless affordable lenses. RF 400, 500, 600 and 800 f22 will be released as an alternative to RF 600 and 800 f11. What's the need for F4, f5.6, f6.3!

Hello everyone. We all know that Canon will not produce such useless affordable lenses. RF 400, 500, 600 and 800 f22 will be released as an alternative to RF 600 and 800 f11. What's the need for F4, f5.6, f6.3!

Hello troll

Hello troll

This is not called 'troll', it's called sarcastic criticism. I don't know if you've noticed, Canon has a 600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%. I don't understand why it's produced at all. If your goal is to make a lens that is affordable, has relatively better focus, has less diffraction, is sharper, can take in more light, and is more durable, you don't produce such a lens.

This is not called 'troll', it's called sarcastic criticism. I don't know if you've noticed, Canon has a 600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%. I don't understand why it's produced at all. If your goal is to make a lens that is affordable, has relatively better focus, has less diffraction, is sharper, can take in more light, and is more durable, you don't produce such a lens.

What does "600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%." mean?

This is not called 'troll', it's called sarcastic criticism. I don't know if you've noticed, Canon has a 600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%. I don't understand why it's produced at all. If your goal is to make a lens that is affordable, has relatively better focus, has less diffraction, is sharper, can take in more light, and is more durable, you don't produce such a lens.

There is a difference between sarcastic criticism, and unrealistic criticism. Canon produced a 600/11 and an 800/11 that are ‘affordable’ – listing at $800 and $1000 and frequently available for $200 less than that from authorized dealers. Affordable was clearly the goal, and they achieve that with lenses that offer surprisingly good image quality.

No, those lenses do not have relatively closer focus, less diffraction, more sharpness, wider, aperture, and more durability than…wait, what lenses are you talking about, exactly? The >$12K Canon great whites? Nikon’s >$4K PF primes? 200-600mm zoom lenses costing close to triple? The DSLR-mount 150-600 zooms that weigh double and cost close to that? just curious to know what the benchmark is.

What does "600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%." mean?

Sorry. :( Focus area.
"When using this lens with or without the extenders, the camera's AF area is reduced to approximately 40% horizontal and 60% vertical coverage of the image area." *

There is a difference between sarcastic criticism, and unrealistic criticism. Canon produced a 600/11 and an 800/11 that are ‘affordable’ – listing at $800 and $1000 and frequently available for $200 less than that from authorized dealers. Affordable was clearly the goal, and they achieve that with lenses that offer surprisingly good image quality.

No, those lenses do not have relatively closer focus, less diffraction, more sharpness, wider, aperture, and more durability than…wait, what lenses are you talking about, exactly? The >$12K Canon great whites? Nikon’s >$4K PF primes? 200-600mm zoom lenses costing close to triple? The DSLR-mount 150-600 zooms that weigh double and cost close to that? just curious to know what the benchmark is.

Sorry. I should start like this. If you don't have $15,600 (in Turkey).

I criticize Canon in my own way. I have no intention of disrespecting anyone. Have a nice day.

* https://www.canon-europe.com/lenses/rf-600mm-f11-is-stm/specifications/

Canon waited even longer ;) : the EF 200-400mm zoom is from 2013.
See: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef428.html

You're right, thx! I had 2010 in mind. Well, it underlines what I basically said - Canon sometimes does take a really long time to "cook" such a lens ;)

I look at the Nikon forums on dpreview. No one has said "I wish there was no 600mm f6.3 and there was a 5.6". No one has said "600 f6.3 will stop selling 180-600". No one has said "I wish Nikon would release a reasonably priced I-know-what lens". Because they have all of them. There are alternatives. And they are not crazy expensive. If you want, buy a 500 pf because there is a new one on the market.

But I look at the forums here. The guy wrote "500mm f5.6 will stop selling 100-500 f7.1, Canon shouldn't release this"! Guys, we need more primes. No one would switch to Canon for a new body. Someone who needs a 400mm and a 600mm would never switch to a 600mm f11 and a 400mm which has no alternative anyway, they can never switch.

Sorry. I should start like this. If you don't have $15,600 (in Turkey).

That's fine, there are plenty of other options. There's the RF 200-800 zoom that is a bit faster. There's the RF 100-500 that gets you a mild crop from 600mm and is f/7.1 instead of f/11. There are a whole bunch of 3rd party 150-600mm EF mount zooms that are f/6.3 at the long end.

But maybe you want Canon to just make a 600mm f/6.3 and sell it for less than the 600/11. Good luck.

But maybe you want Canon to just make a 600mm f/6.3 and sell it for less than the 600/11. Good luck.

I want exactly this. Yes.
I'm also talking about primes. Fixed length. No zoom. No moving parts. More durable. more resistant to dust and humidity.

I want exactly this. Yes.
I'm also talking about primes. Fixed length. No zoom. No moving parts. More durable. more resistant to dust and humidity.

So you want a 600mm f/6.3 L for less than $800. :ROFLMAO:

Some will know what me ol' Irish Da would suggest: "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up first."

I repeat...good luck. When Canon launches it, you can use it to take pictures of pigs flying over fields of snow in hell.

Sorry. :( Focus area.
"When using this lens with or without the extenders, the camera's AF area is reduced to approximately 40% horizontal and 60% vertical coverage of the image area." *

Thanks for explaining. I have the 800/11. It's actually a pretty useful lens though I don't use it now I have the 200-800mm which is no sharper.

neuroanatomist

November 25, 2024 at 11:35 am

People wanting Canon to mimic Nikon’s ‘midrange’ supertele lenses will be happy IF some of these actually become products.
- Reply
- 0
David - Sydney

November 25, 2024 at 11:47 am

How would these compare to DO /pf lenses in design?
- Reply
- 0
Elmonducky

November 25, 2024 at 1:43 pm

I would love an 800 F6.3! If it was under $6K I would purchase in a heartbeat.
- Reply
- 0
zebratt

November 25, 2024 at 1:44 pm

People wanting Canon to mimic Nikon’s ‘midrange’ supertele lenses will be happy IF some of these actually become products.
That's a large 'IF' ........ really do hope we can see one or two of these designs come to reality.
- Reply
- 0
justaCanonuser

November 25, 2024 at 2:53 pm

That's a large 'IF' ........ really do hope we can see one or two of these designs come to reality.
Normally, new products by Nikon such as the 600mm f/6.3 trigger moves by Canon, but not always and sometimes very delayed. One famous example was the Nikkor 200-400mm f/4.0 lens with its different generations: the 1st gen fully MF version hit the market in 1983, followed by the 2nd gen with AF and VR in 2003, 3rd gen. in 2010. I learned that some wildlife shooters changed to Nikon because of that zoom lens. Canon waited until 2010 to bring out their EF 200-400mm f/4.0 , with the additional feature of a built-in TC of course. So, depending on which generation one considers as the real starter - MF or first AF version -, Canon waited 27 or 7 years to react here.
- Reply
- 0
P-visie

November 25, 2024 at 7:06 pm

Canon waited until 2010 to bring out their EF 200-400mm f/4.0 , with the additional feature of a built-in TC of course.
Canon waited even longer ;) : the EF 200-400mm zoom is from 2013.
See: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef428.html
- Reply
- 0
CanonGrunt

November 26, 2024 at 2:54 am

I love my EF 400mm f/5.6 USM L

If these are like that than I’d definitely pick one up.
- Reply
- 0
duzinsan

November 26, 2024 at 7:50 am

Hello everyone. We all know that Canon will not produce such useless affordable lenses. RF 400, 500, 600 and 800 f22 will be released as an alternative to RF 600 and 800 f11. What's the need for F4, f5.6, f6.3!
- Reply
- 0
EricN

November 26, 2024 at 8:10 am

Hello everyone. We all know that Canon will not produce such useless affordable lenses. RF 400, 500, 600 and 800 f22 will be released as an alternative to RF 600 and 800 f11. What's the need for F4, f5.6, f6.3!
Hello troll
- Reply
- 0
duzinsan

November 26, 2024 at 8:35 am

Hello troll
This is not called 'troll', it's called sarcastic criticism. I don't know if you've noticed, Canon has a 600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%. I don't understand why it's produced at all. If your goal is to make a lens that is affordable, has relatively better focus, has less diffraction, is sharper, can take in more light, and is more durable, you don't produce such a lens.
- Reply
- 0
AlanF

November 26, 2024 at 12:18 pm

This is not called 'troll', it's called sarcastic criticism. I don't know if you've noticed, Canon has a 600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%. I don't understand why it's produced at all. If your goal is to make a lens that is affordable, has relatively better focus, has less diffraction, is sharper, can take in more light, and is more durable, you don't produce such a lens.
What does "600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%." mean?
- Reply
- 0
neuroanatomist

November 26, 2024 at 12:59 pm

This is not called 'troll', it's called sarcastic criticism. I don't know if you've noticed, Canon has a 600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%. I don't understand why it's produced at all. If your goal is to make a lens that is affordable, has relatively better focus, has less diffraction, is sharper, can take in more light, and is more durable, you don't produce such a lens.
There is a difference between sarcastic criticism, and unrealistic criticism. Canon produced a 600/11 and an 800/11 that are ‘affordable’ – listing at $800 and $1000 and frequently available for $200 less than that from authorized dealers. Affordable was clearly the goal, and they achieve that with lenses that offer surprisingly good image quality.

No, those lenses do not have relatively closer focus, less diffraction, more sharpness, wider, aperture, and more durability than…wait, what lenses are you talking about, exactly? The >$12K Canon great whites? Nikon’s >$4K PF primes? 200-600mm zoom lenses costing close to triple? The DSLR-mount 150-600 zooms that weigh double and cost close to that? just curious to know what the benchmark is.
- Reply
- 0
duzinsan

November 26, 2024 at 1:47 pm

What does "600mm F11 lens with a focal range limited by about 50%." mean?
Sorry. :( Focus area.
"When using this lens with or without the extenders, the camera's AF area is reduced to approximately 40% horizontal and 60% vertical coverage of the image area." *

There is a difference between sarcastic criticism, and unrealistic criticism. Canon produced a 600/11 and an 800/11 that are ‘affordable’ – listing at $800 and $1000 and frequently available for $200 less than that from authorized dealers. Affordable was clearly the goal, and they achieve that with lenses that offer surprisingly good image quality.

No, those lenses do not have relatively closer focus, less diffraction, more sharpness, wider, aperture, and more durability than…wait, what lenses are you talking about, exactly? The >$12K Canon great whites? Nikon’s >$4K PF primes? 200-600mm zoom lenses costing close to triple? The DSLR-mount 150-600 zooms that weigh double and cost close to that? just curious to know what the benchmark is.
Sorry. I should start like this. If you don't have $15,600 (in Turkey).

I criticize Canon in my own way. I have no intention of disrespecting anyone. Have a nice day.

* https://www.canon-europe.com/lenses/rf-600mm-f11-is-stm/specifications/
- Reply
- 0
justaCanonuser

November 26, 2024 at 1:47 pm

Canon waited even longer ;) : the EF 200-400mm zoom is from 2013.
See: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef428.html
You're right, thx! I had 2010 in mind. Well, it underlines what I basically said - Canon sometimes does take a really long time to "cook" such a lens ;)
- Reply
- 0
duzinsan

November 26, 2024 at 2:23 pm

I look at the Nikon forums on dpreview. No one has said "I wish there was no 600mm f6.3 and there was a 5.6". No one has said "600 f6.3 will stop selling 180-600". No one has said "I wish Nikon would release a reasonably priced I-know-what lens". Because they have all of them. There are alternatives. And they are not crazy expensive. If you want, buy a 500 pf because there is a new one on the market.

But I look at the forums here. The guy wrote "500mm f5.6 will stop selling 100-500 f7.1, Canon shouldn't release this"! Guys, we need more primes. No one would switch to Canon for a new body. Someone who needs a 400mm and a 600mm would never switch to a 600mm f11 and a 400mm which has no alternative anyway, they can never switch.
- Reply
- 0
neuroanatomist

November 26, 2024 at 2:24 pm

Sorry. I should start like this. If you don't have $15,600 (in Turkey).
That's fine, there are plenty of other options. There's the RF 200-800 zoom that is a bit faster. There's the RF 100-500 that gets you a mild crop from 600mm and is f/7.1 instead of f/11. There are a whole bunch of 3rd party 150-600mm EF mount zooms that are f/6.3 at the long end.

But maybe you want Canon to just make a 600mm f/6.3 and sell it for less than the 600/11. Good luck.
- Reply
- 0
duzinsan

November 26, 2024 at 2:33 pm

But maybe you want Canon to just make a 600mm f/6.3 and sell it for less than the 600/11. Good luck.
I want exactly this. Yes.
I'm also talking about primes. Fixed length. No zoom. No moving parts. More durable. more resistant to dust and humidity.
- Reply
- 0
neuroanatomist

November 26, 2024 at 3:02 pm

I want exactly this. Yes.
I'm also talking about primes. Fixed length. No zoom. No moving parts. More durable. more resistant to dust and humidity.
So you want a 600mm f/6.3 L for less than $800. :ROFLMAO:

Some will know what me ol' Irish Da would suggest: "Wish in one hand, sh!t in the other, and see which fills up first."

I repeat...good luck. When Canon launches it, you can use it to take pictures of pigs flying over fields of snow in hell.
- Reply
- 0
AlanF

November 26, 2024 at 4:02 pm

Sorry. :( Focus area.
"When using this lens with or without the extenders, the camera's AF area is reduced to approximately 40% horizontal and 60% vertical coverage of the image area." *
Thanks for explaining. I have the 800/11. It's actually a pretty useful lens though I don't use it now I have the 200-800mm which is no sharper.
- Reply
- 0

Please log in to your forum account to comment

Patent Application: Super Telephoto Primes

26 comments

Leave a comment