Is a Canon RF 200-500mm f/5.6L IS USM a possibility?

#4
So again something in-between? It´s like the Sony FE 200-600mm 5.6-6.3 but with 100mm less and a fixed aperture ... that sounds confusing to me... most of the time I'm missing the 100mm more on my 100-500mm L not the aperture
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#5
H2Oplanet said:
5.6 is of zero appeal to me... Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L is of preorder value though
Click to expand...
Same here. A 200-500 mm f5.6 would be useless to me. Now if they compromised and made it f4.5 or f5 maybe??

Or maybe a 200-600 mm f5.6 with 1.25x built in TC?

I already have the 100-300 mm f2.8 that with a 2x TC gives me 200-600 mm f5.6 and honestly I would rather have that then at 200-500 mm f5.6.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#6
Instead off $11k, would they want $8k for it? Or would it get a lot closer to the 100-500, maybe around $5k? For the latter, I could consider getting rid of my 100-400 EF II and 200-800 for the 200-500 5.6.

Brrian
 
Upvote 0
#7
Apart from price and size, I don't know what aperture I would prefer here.
I think both could be interesting.
But I'll have to admit that at the long end 500/5.6 doesn't seem to be much far way from 500/7.1, that already exists.
So it would depend on more detailed specs, like IQ compared to existing lneses, MFD and max. magnification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#8
Why not go to 600 if you're going to drop to 5.6? If I'm carrying a telephoto I don't know if I've ever said "I'm sure glad this is 5.6 and not 4.0!" but I've definitely said "I really wish I had another 100/200/whatever of reach right now"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#9
f5.6 for this big white seems kind of redundant and pointless to me:
  • Cannibalize sales of another Canon lens? Meaning RF 100-300mm f2.8 + 2x Extender = 200-600mm f5.6?
  • RF 200-500mm f5.6 + 1.4x Extender = 280-700mm f/8...kind of like the RF 200-800mm f6.3-9?
  • RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 wider, brighter at the wide end, and possibly smaller?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
#10
I can see if they price it approximately the same as the Sony 200-600/5.6-6.3 (MSRP $2000, currently $1900). Obviously this would be an entirely different lens than a hypothetical $15,000 200-500mm f/4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#11
Telephoto designs are limited by the front element diameter. 500mm/5.6 = 89.3mm, 800mm/9 = 88.9mm. So a hypothetical 200-500/5.6 would be about the same diameter as and physically shorter than the existing RF 200-800. I think we'd be looking at $2000 for a non-L or ~$3000 for an L-series version (regardless, I doubt such a lens will be made because the 100-500L and 200-800 non-L already exist).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#12
I rarely say this about a rumor (not even the then rumored 600mm F11), but I simply don´t believe this one. People, who´d like a cheaper (not necessarily affordable) telezoom and lighter telecom, will buy the RF 100-500mm. Why cater to these folks? The RF 100-500mm is at f5.6 up to 350mm (actually, I think it is 363mm) and F6.3 up to 451mm. That's really, really close to the now mentioned specs. Despite the RF 100-500mm not beeing an internal zoom, I really can't see Canon stepping down to f5.6 with the professional zoom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#14
nwardrip said:
f5.6 for this big white seems kind of redundant and pointless to me:
  • Cannibalize sales of another Canon lens? Meaning RF 100-300mm f2.8 + 2x Extender = 200-600mm f5.6?
  • RF 200-500mm f5.6 + 1.4x Extender = 280-700mm f/8...kind of like the RF 200-800mm f6.3-9?
  • RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 wider, brighter at the wide end, and possibly smaller?
Click to expand...
Totally agree, considering the existing line-up it just doesn't make sense to me.
 
Upvote 0
#17
A 200-600 f4.5-f6.3 L is the wildlife lens that I would like to see to replace my 100-500 f4.5-f7.1.

Extra reach is what I am missing. Marginal additional brightness would not hurt.

I am not sure what a 200-500 f5.6 brings to the table compared to the 100-500. 2/3 of a stop might make a difference of about 10 to 15 minutes early in the morning and early in the evening on safari compared to the 100-500.

The 400 f4 DO with the 1.4X tele converter could be a more interesting companion to my 100-500 than the 200-500 as a potential replacement.

For the price point that I am interested in, focal length divided by aperture has to be just under 100 to avoid the quantum leap in the prices of front elements larger than 100.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#18
If the optical quality was a step up from the 100-500, and the weight and price were reasonable I would be a buyer. This would be the ultimately telephoto landscape lens (mountains, dunes, etc.). Especially if it was internal zoom.

I have been disappointed with the optical quality of the 100-500 for landscape. The center of the lens is decent and works for wildlife and birds, but the edges have been soft and prone to diffraction for me. Especially if I shoot above about f 8. I would welcome improvements optically with a replacement.

If it also took teleconverters and didn’t handicap the zoom and focal length to only 300-500 that would be welcome as well.
 
Upvote 0
#19
I’d be more interested in a 400-600 f/5.6 USM L (or 400-800 if they can swing it)

Kind of like the old EF 400mm f/5.6 USM L. It was sharp and budget friendly and fairly light. No is or teleconverter. Still does extremely well on my r6 with IBIS.

No IS, No teleconverter, give it some range. Price it well. I’d buy it. But I might be the only one…

I’d also take a replacement for the EF 300mm f/4 IS USM L as well!

While we’re at it, the Spectacular EF 180mm f/3.5 USM L Macro is my top choice for replacement. Give it IS and maybe a little faster… ‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#20
CanonGrunt said:
I’d be more interested in a 400-600 f/5.6 USM L (or 400-800 if they can swing it)

Kind of like the old EF 400mm f/5.6 USM L. It was sharp and budget friendly and fairly light. No is or teleconverter. Still does extremely well on my r6 with IBIS.

No IS, No teleconverter, give it some range. Price it well. I’d buy it. But I might be the only one…

I’d also take a replacement for the EF 300mm f/4 IS USM L as well!

While we’re at it, the Spectacular EF 180mm f/3.5 USM L Macro is my top choice for replacement. Give it IS and maybe a little faster… ‍♂️
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be able to swing a 400-800 f/5.6.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM to get that desired 1.4x built-in teleconverter?
Replies
51
Views
6K
GMCPhotographics
GMCPhotographics
Canon Rumors
Report: The RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM is delayed until 2025
Replies
46
Views
4K
upallnight
U
Canon Rumors
A timline for the Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM?
Replies
57
Views
7K
kaihp
K
Canon Rumors
Is a non-L RF 70-200 f/2.8 or similar lens on the horizon?
Replies
31
Views
2K
plusnq
P
Canon Rumors
Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM delayed to the second half of 2024
Replies
40
Views
15K
justaCanonuser
justaCanonuser
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu