Update on the Canon RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM

#161
chong67 said:
Here is where I find this information : https://fstoppers.com/reviews/ultim...eview-new-canon-rf-200-800mm-f63-9-usm-646982

Do a CTRL-F on handle if you dont want to read the whole article.

I am counting on it removeable, otherwise just a minor setback.
Click to expand...
I have a long, heavy lens with rotating, but non-removable tripod foot. Was disappointed at first, but soon realized that by rotating the foot 180 degrees, that grabbing the tripod foot is by far the best way to pick up the camera and lens, hold the camera and lens, take it out of the bag, etc. If the tripod foot was removable, I would never actually remove it. Better for the camera mount is terms of stress, and easier on the hand whenever you need to hold the camera with one hand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#162
EOS 4 Life said:
I have no idea how they got it to be that light.
It weights pretty much what I would expect a DO version of the EF 300 f/2.8 would weigh.
Click to expand...
The Sony is essentially the same size as the EF300 L II after correcting for flange distance, so most likely no DO in there. They do tout the extensive use of magnesium, alloy, but Canon has also used that for years. Sony also mentions that they limited the number of elements to save weight. Lastly, the use of linear motors eliminates the helicoids and that could save quite a bit of weight. It will be interesting to see how well the reduced element design works out in the real world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#163
Dragon said:
The Sony is essentially the same size as the EF300 L II after correcting for flange distance, so most likely no DO in there. They do tout the extensive use of magnesium, alloy, but Canon has also used that for years. Sony also mentions that they limited the number of elements to save weight. Lastly, the use of linear motors eliminates the helicoids and that could save quite a bit of weight. It will be interesting to see how well the reduced element design works out in the real world.
Click to expand...
It’s the same design as in the Canon version III/RF 400mm/2.8 and 600mm/4 and Sony equivalents. The large elements at the front of the lens are removed and replaced by small ones close to the back. It saves a lot of glass weight but it does seem it has a cost of some loss of IQ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#167
AlanF said:
It’s the same design as in the Canon version III/RF 400mm/2.8 and 600mm/4 and Sony equivalents. The large elements at the front of the lens are removed and replaced by small ones close to the back. It saves a lot of glass weight but it does seem it has a cost of some loss of IQ.
Click to expand...
Yep, the EF 400 II and particularly the 600 II were sharper. I have no incentive to get rid of my EF 800 f/5.6 since the RF 800 is the new design 400 with a built-in TC and it does not support additional TCs well. It will be interesting to see how that design philosophy works at 300mm.
 
Upvote 0
#169
I’m waiting for a comparison to the RF 800, with production models.

I find that when using my RF 24-240, if I need more tele, then I need A LOT MORE TELE: LIKE 800 OR 1120 with my 1.4 tele extender. 400 or 500 is not enough. And so, It might be nice to have a 400, 500, 700, I’m not sure that I will get enough use out of it. After all with the R5, I can crop off 25 mp and still have a 300 dpi 13 x 19 printed image--- effectively increasing the focal length of the RF 24-240 to almost 500.

For me its all about printed Images that most people look at from 2-3 feet away---not pixel poking.
 
Upvote 0
#170
I got a reply back from Canon on their FB post that the handle cannot be removed. Just a little set back for me as my camera strap is always around my neck when I shoot and when I dont shot, I always carry the lens on one hand to give me neck relieve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#171
zarathu said:
For me its all about printed Images that most people look at from 2-3 feet away---not pixel poking.
Click to expand...
This is a very good point to make with regards to resolution and print size. Next year I plan on printing a book of my wildlife photos for friends and family and am quickly realizing that the largest photo in the book would be an 8x10 and take up the entire page. For a 8x10 photo at 300 pixels per an inch one only needs 7.2 MP!
 
Upvote 0
#172
john1970 said:
This is a very good point to make with regards to resolution and print size. Next year I plan on printing a book of my wildlife photos for friends and family and am quickly realizing that the largest photo in the book would be an 8x10 and take up the entire page. For a 8x10 photo at 300 pixels per an inch one only needs 7.2 MP!
Click to expand...
Printing has long suffered from limited dynamic range and color gamut, so before making a big spend on multiple copies of a book, try printing some of your images on a good inkjet and see if you like the result. A very good printing process only has about 7 bits of contrast range (DMAX= 2.1), so all but the cheapest monitors will outperform the printing process and modern OLED TVs are stunning in comparison, so putting your images on a USB stick that can be plugged int the back of a TV will offer much more impressive images on a modern 4k or 8k TV. The advantage of printing is that all the viewers will see the same quality of image, whereas different monitors will have different calibrations. In the end, it depends on what you want to present. If a relatively low contrast,, artsy image is the goal, then printing is a good medium. If, OTOH you want to convey maximum reality, then a good monitor will win hands down.
 
Upvote 0
#173
chong67 said:
I got a reply back from Canon on their FB post that the handle cannot be removed. Just a little set back for me as my camera strap is always around my neck when I shoot and when I dont shot, I always carry the lens on one hand to give me neck relieve.
Click to expand...
You may find that turning the tripod collar so that the handle faces up is actually a preferable way to hold the camera/lens. I was initially annoyed when I bought a heavy telephoto that the tripod collar could not be removed. Now, I would leave the collar on even if it could be removed. Lifting and carrying the camera and lens with the tripod collar is much easier and will take the pressure off the mount for those that tend to carry the combo by holding the camera. Just a thought.
 
Upvote 0
#174
john1970 said:
This is a very good point to make with regards to resolution and print size. Next year I plan on printing a book of my wildlife photos for friends and family and am quickly realizing that the largest photo in the book would be an 8x10 and take up the entire page. For a 8x10 photo at 300 pixels per an inch one only needs 7.2 MP!
Click to expand...
My best selling print was shot on a 6mp original Canon digital camera, and when I did do some summer festivals, could easily print 8x12 inches.
 
Upvote 0
#175
H. Jones said:
Really excited to see how this lens turns out, I can totally see myself selling my EF 100-400 and 1.4x teleconverter and picking this up to replace the two.

On a totally different note: am I the only one one that feels like Canon could have easily slapped a red ring on this just for marketing purposes? At $2000, is there really anything Canon has to lose by calling this an L lens? The RF 24-105mm F/4L IS is an L lens, and it isn't particularly special optically.

Would Canon really lose any sales on a $12,000 telephoto like the upcoming 200-500mm F/4L if they put a red ring on this? It's not like the RF 24-105 having a red ring makes someone not buy the 28-70mm F/2L, but I guess Canon felt like a red ring would make them have to price this higher.
Click to expand...
Get your self some red nail polish and go for it... Just don't let the nail polish leak onto the lens as it has no weather sealing... lol
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#177
I picked mine up from my local camera shop on December 26. We've had cloudy/overcast weather in southern Wisconsin so I don't have notable photos to show yet, but I have a few comments. In terms of specifications and weight, the closest I have is the 400mm DO IS ii + 2X extender. For me, the 200-800mm is much easier to handhold for extended periods than the 400mm DO IS ii + 2X extender although I can shoot both handheld. The 200-800mm focuses very well with an R5 even following fast moving subjects including flying birds under low light. Images will follow in a later post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#178
PCM-madison said:
I picked mine up from my local camera shop on December 26. We've had cloudy/overcast weather in southern Wisconsin so I don't have notable photos to show yet, but I have a few comments. In terms of specifications and weight, the closest I have is the 400mm DO IS ii + 2X extender. For me, the 200-800mm is much easier to handhold for extended periods than the 400mm DO IS ii + 2X extender although I can shoot both handheld. The 200-800mm focuses very well with an R5 even following fast moving subjects including flying birds under low light. Images will follow in a later post.
Click to expand...
The 400mm DO II + hood+ 2xTC weighs just over 2.5kg, 0.5kg more than the 200-800. The DO at f/8 is no sharper than the RF 800/11 and I sold mine and kept the lighter one.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#179
AlanF said:
The 400mm DO II + hood+ 2xTC weighs just over 2.5kg, 0.5kg more than the 200-800. The DO at f/8 is no sharper than the RF 800/11 and I sold mine and kept the lighter one.
Click to expand...
But, but 400mm DO II is so nice. And there is also the 1.4XIII albeit only for a 560mm f/5.6 lens. I had some reservations for the IQ at 800 at f/8 too and you do not make it easy sir with your exceptional scientific tests. I still love it though (I just have to find a use for it :p : OK until I sell my last 2 FF DSLR Canon cameras it stays! )
 
Upvote 0
#180
tron said:
But, but 400mm DO II is so nice. And there is also the 1.4XIII albeit only for a 560mm f/5.6 lens. I had some reservations for the IQ at 800 at f/8 too and you do not make it easy sir with your exceptional scientific tests. I still love it though (I just have to find a use for it :p : OK until I sell my last 2 FF DSLR Canon cameras it stays! )
Click to expand...
Weight is a prime concern for me nowadays. I was significantly younger when I carried the 300/2.8 and 400/4 and I now have 2kg as my max weight. Also, the 100-500 is just so good and effectively only a stop dimmer. However, I do admit looking at the prices of used 400/4 and if they get cheap enough I might buy for a third time in case I do need f/4!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
Is a Canon RF 200-500mm f/5.6L IS USM a possibility?
Replies
113
Views
10K
Dragon
Dragon
Canon Rumors
Report: The RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM is delayed until 2025
Replies
46
Views
4K
upallnight
U
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
Canon RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS coming on November 2, 2023
Replies
212
Views
32K
tron
T
Canon Rumors
Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z to be announced this week
Replies
288
Views
41K
OldDudePhotog
O
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu