Ok all you wildlife gurus, how many times do you stop down to f/11. I have it on good authority from someone at Canon rumours it's all the time as they look to justify these lenses. I know for a fact unless I'm using my supertele for landscape I never stop down below f/8 and even then I mostly shoot wide open at f/5.6 or f/6.3. Of course if I have a 1.4xTC on an f/5.6 or f/6.3 then naturally I'm at f/8 or f/9.
I would have welcomed an 800 f/8 for sure, but honestly since these are DO lenses and 800 f/11 will still be more expensive than a 200-600 f/4.5-6.3 zoom in DO. An 800 f/8 DO would be at least as dear if not dearer than a 400 f/4 DO, so maybe an 800 f/11 is half that price or a bit less, so still $3K. I can put a 1.4x TC on my 200-600 f/6.3 and get 840 f/9 and that's a $2400 package. I can put a 1.7x TC on my Nikon 500 f/5.6 and that's a 850 f/9.5. But at least I have the option of f/5.6 or f/6.3 I can stop down if I need, but to be stuck at f/11, my god talk about a niche product.
EB-1 wrote:
That's just ridiculous. Suddenly the Sony 20-600/6.3 seems fast by comparison.
EBH
In the big picture, 600 mm f/6.3 is on the fast side of things.
800 mm f/11 is on the slow side of things, but not exceptionally slow.
Let's take a look at the range of equivalent apertures of some 800 mm options:
#1: 800 mm f5.6 is the fastest option you can get for money and practically use. Either as 400/2.8 +2X, 600 + 1.4 or as 800 mm native. It is extremely expensive and only a very few photographers will ever get to touch one.
#2: 800 mm f/8 is very expensive and rather rare, but more manageable than f/5.6. Only availabale by using teleconverters or sensor areas smaller than 36x24mm. It is avaliable in zooms, but they are then again extremely expensive and very heavy for the aperture.
#3: 800 mm f/9 is only slightly slower than option #2, but the fastest realistic option for most enthusiasts and broadly available even as zooms. It is only 1 1/3 stops slower than the fastest option available.
#4: 800 mm f/11 is the most common option for advanced users not dedicated to very long focal lengths. It can be acheived by using a 2X teleconverter on many popular lenses, but still not considered to be for the masses. The Canon RF 800 mm f/11 DO IS STM is targeting to change that.
#5: 800 mm f/16 equivalent with a 1" sensor (Nikkor 70-300 f/5.6 on Nikon 1 cameras or RX10 IV cropped). This is an extremely size effective 800 mm equivalent option, and believe it or not it is possible to take good pictures with it.
#6: 800 mm f/30 equivalent in the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS. This is considered a slow and poor option. Almost 2 stops slower than the acceptable #5.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Ok all you wildlife gurus, how many times do you stop down to f/11. I have it on good authority from someone at Canon rumours it's all the time as they look to justify these lenses. I know for a fact unless I'm using my supertele for landscape I never stop down below f/8 and even then I mostly shoot wide open at f/5.6 or f/6.3. Of course if I have a 1.4xTC on an f/5.6 or f/6.3 then naturally I'm at f/8 or f/9.
I would have welcomed an 800 f/8 for sure, but honestly since these are DO lenses and 800 f/11 will still be more expensive than a 200-600 f/4.5-6.3 zoom in DO. An 800 f/8 DO would be at least as dear if not dearer than a 400 f/4 DO, so maybe an 800 f/11 is half that price or a bit less, so still $3K. I can put a 1.4x TC on my 200-600 f/6.3 and get 840 f/9 and that's a $2400 package. I can put a 1.7x TC on my Nikon 500 f/5.6 and that's a 850 f/9.5. But at least I have the option of f/5.6 or f/6.3 I can stop down if I need, but to be stuck at f/11, my god talk about a niche product....Show more →
Whatever wildlife lens I’ve used, 99% I’ve used it wide open. It’s why I only buy lenses that are sharp wide open at the longest setting.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Ok all you wildlife gurus, how many times do you stop down to f/11. I have it on good authority from someone at Canon rumours it's all the time as they look to justify these lenses. I know for a fact unless I'm using my supertele for landscape I never stop down below f/8 and even then I mostly shoot wide open at f/5.6 or f/6.3. Of course if I have a 1.4xTC on an f/5.6 or f/6.3 then naturally I'm at f/8 or f/9.
I would have welcomed an 800 f/8 for sure, but honestly since these are DO lenses and 800 f/11 will still be more expensive than a 200-600 f/4.5-6.3 zoom in DO. An 800 f/8 DO would be at least as dear if not dearer than a 400 f/4 DO, so maybe an 800 f/11 is half that price or a bit less, so still $3K. I can put a 1.4x TC on my 200-600 f/6.3 and get 840 f/9 and that's a $2400 package. I can put a 1.7x TC on my Nikon 500 f/5.6 and that's a 850 f/9.5. But at least I have the option of f/5.6 or f/6.3 I can stop down if I need, but to be stuck at f/11, my god talk about a niche product....Show more →
I never stop down. The only time I had to start stopping down was with my Nikon 200-500 and my Sigma 150-600C as I did find a very noticeable improvement going to f/7.1 and f/8 vs wide open f/6.3 (at the long end of those lenses). But those are the two cheapest super telephoto lenses I've owned. I won't accept expensive long lenses that need to be stopped down for acceptable results.
But I've found ways to make f/9 work for a lot of things with the 200-600/1.4TC and have used f/8 all the time. So I'm sure I could work hard controlling backgrounds, getting super low for waterfowl and therefore make 800 f/11 work. But it needs to be a top sharpness at f/11, we are already past diffraction aperture on a 45MP R5 sensor so stopping down more will not be acceptable to me. Also this had better be a lot less expensive than $3K despite the DO.
I still don't see the point of the 600/11....they should have gone with the 600/8 patent which is shorter than the 600/11 (no idea why) and shorter than the 800/11. Then you could have 600/8 and 840/11 in your bag and actually have some use for the RF 1.4TC.
alundeb wrote:
In the big picture, 600 mm f/6.3 is on the fast side of things.
800 mm f/11 is on the slow side of things, but not exceptionally slow.
Let's take a look at the range of equivalent apertures of some 800 mm options:
#1: 800 mm f5.6 is the fastest option you can get for money and practically use. Either as 400/2.8 +2X, 600 + 1.4 or as 800 mm native. It is extremely expensive and only a very few photographers will ever get to touch one.
#2: 800 mm f/8 is very expensive and rather rare, but more manageable than f/5.6. Only availabale by using teleconverters or sensor areas smaller than 36x24mm. It is avaliable in zooms, but they are then again extremely expensive and very heavy for the aperture.
#3: 800 mm f/9 is only slightly slower than option #2, but the fastest realistic option for most enthusiasts and broadly available even as zooms. It is only 1 1/3 stops slower than the fastest option available.
#4: 800 mm f/11 is the most common option for advanced users not dedicated to very long focal lengths. It can be acheived by using a 2X teleconverter on many popular lenses, but still not considered to be for the masses. The Canon RF 800 mm f/11 DO IS STM is targeting to change that.
#5: 800 mm f/16 equivalent with a 1" sensor (Nikkor 70-300 f/5.6 on Nikon 1 cameras or RX10 IV cropped). This is an extremely size effective 800 mm equivalent option, and believe it or not it is possible to take good pictures with it.
#6: 800 mm f/30 equivalent in the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS. This is considered a slow and poor option. Almost 2 stops slower than the acceptable #5....Show more →
Mirrorless on sensor PDAF has made a lot of these options more feasible. DSLRs struggled or flat out didn't support AF at anything slower than f/5.6. Only recently have some of them become useful at f/8. Beyond f/8 Canon won't even attempt AF and Nikon will attempt but it is pretty bad and I stopped using my 500PF/1.7TC on my DSLRs (but that combo is useable on the Z series).
I am curious to see how slow of an aperture the R5/R6 will support for continuous AF. Sony only supports f/11 except for the A9 series that supports f/16.
EDIT: To not risk confusing more people, I am specifically talking about the AF limitations of nominal f/8 or slower lens or lens/TC combos on DSLRs via the OVF (ie not LV) AF systems.
arbitrage wrote:
Beyond f/8 Canon won't even attempt AF
Well then I've had it with the Canon cripple hammer! My lowly 6DII is apparently severely flawed because the AF had no problem in very crappy light at f/22 on this shot last weekend.
6D Mark II
EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III
ƒ/22
140mm
1/50
ISO 1600
6D Mark II
EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III
ƒ/16
560mm
1/80
ISO 1600
Not that any of that matters because the shots are destroyed by the notoriously pathetic DR of the 6DII anyhow.
I wish Canon would get their act together and actually make a camera that people can reliably use and take a few decent snap shots with.
ted1000 wrote:
We have one thread complaining Canon's new RF lenses are too fast (RF 2/100L macro rumor) and another thread complaining they are too slow.
If both sides are complaining maybe Canon has hit the sweet spot?
f11 for me is a no go but that doesn't mean there isn't a market for it. We've got big/heavy/expensive 600/4 and 800/5.6 options. Is an f11 option that is smaller/lighter/less expensive any less niche?
I think Canon are trying to show that they will make both extremes of lenses (f/11 superteles and f/1.2 primes) over time (to satisfy the broadest range of customer needs) so they are putting the first ones out in parallel (and intend to fill up the lineup over time). Personally I would think it would be better to cover the basics across the focal length range first, and then work on the exotics.
lighthound wrote:
Well then I've had it with the Canon cripple hammer! My lowly 6DII is apparently severely flawed because the AF had no problem in very crappy light at f/22 on this shot last weekend.
6D Mark II
EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III
ƒ/22
140mm
1/50
ISO 1600
6D Mark II
EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III
ƒ/16
560mm
1/80
ISO 1600
Not that any of that matters because the shots are destroyed by the notoriously pathetic DR of the 6DII anyhow.
I wish Canon would get their act together and actually make a camera that people can reliably use and take a few decent snap shots with.
I'm switching to Sony by god! Enough is enough! ...Show more →
Focusing stopped down to f/22 is not what I'm talking about and I think you know that. I'm talking about Canon not allowing AF via the non-LV AF system when the nominal aperture of a lens or lens/TC combo is slower than f/8. And on many cameras slower than f/5.6. Try putting the 2xTC on the 100-400 and focusing at f/11 via the OVF AF system on the 6DII and report back to me how that goes for you.
This has nothing to do with Sony vs Canon vs Nikon and switching to anything. This is standard DSLR stuff we've been dealing with for ever.
IME the best OVF AF system for f/8 combos is the Canon 1DXII and 1DXIII. The Nikon D500/D850 are close but I think Canon has value in supporting f/8 AF on all 61 points where as Nikon supports only a limited number of points (although it will still try with the non-supported points). However I haven't tried the D5/D6 for f/8 focusing so that may be as good or even better than the Canon but is still limited in the number of supported points.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
...but honestly since these are DO lenses and 800 f/11 will still be more expensive than a 200-600 f/4.5-6.3 zoom in DO. An 800 f/8 DO would be at least as dear if not dearer than a 400 f/4 DO, so maybe an 800 f/11 is half that price or a bit less, so still $3K.
I disagree about the price and think the 800 f/11 will come in at $1500 or less. These f/11 primes are lenses geared toward soccer parents and budding enthusiasts who yearn for reach over aperture. These lenses focus using STM, not USM. STM generally found in cheaper EF-S lenses, a good indication they will be "cheaply" made. Looking at the patent, the optical design is very simple, and making a 72mm front element for a DO lens will cost significantly less than on a 400mm f/4 by orders of magnitude. I'd be really disappointed if it was priced any higher than $1799.
arbitrage wrote:
Focusing stopped down to f/22 is not what I'm talking about and I think you know that. I'm talking about Canon not allowing AF via the non-LV AF system when the nominal aperture of a lens or lens/TC combo is slower than f/8.
Oh... okay. Why didn't you just say so then.
Don't mind me, I've just had too much coffee this morning.
Just to go back to the 100-500. One has to consider what this lens or any RF lens can do for you. Is the 7.1 worth it for this? Will it significantly outperform the R5 with 100-400 II and adapter. What will f11 do?
HIGH-CAPACITY & HIGH-SPEED DATA TRANSMISSION
Data Transmission through 12 pin Electrodes
A 12 pin connection between the camera and lens means communication at a higher speed with larger amounts of data transfer, enabling incredibly fast AF, high IS and image optimization. It’s a system designed to expedite operations that’s ready for future expansions.
Canon EOS R 12 PIN CONNECTION
Zenon Char wrote:
Just to go back to the 100-500. One has to consider what this lens or any RF lens can do for you. Is the 7.1 worth it for this? Will it significantly outperform the R5 with 100-400 II and adapter. What will f11 do?
HIGH-CAPACITY & HIGH-SPEED DATA TRANSMISSION
Data Transmission through 12 pin Electrodes
A 12 pin connection between the camera and lens means communication at a higher speed with larger amounts of data transfer, enabling incredibly fast AF, high IS and image optimization. It’s a system designed to expedite operations that’s ready for future expansions.
Canon EOS R 12 PIN CONNECTION
On one hand, I hope that there will be advantages to buying native RF lenses for things like the 12-pins and how the EOS R allowed a better EVF refresh with RF lenses. On the other hand, it would be nice to be able to pick up much less expensive used EF lenses and EF lenses that aren't available yet (or ever) in RF and adapt them onto an R5 or R1 body without thinking you are missing out.
The link to Adorama from that canon rumors link. How does she know this?
Written byLindsay Adler
The Canon R5 is my dream camera. It combines everything I love about the Canon 5DIV and the Canon EOS R into a single, fabulous camera. Beautiful color, amazing deal, face and eye tracking — all of these tools help me to produce striking imagery without having to fixate on my gear.
arbitrage wrote:
On one hand, I hope that there will be advantages to buying native RF lenses for things like the 12-pins and how the EOS R allowed a better EVF refresh with RF lenses. On the other hand, it would be nice to be able to pick up much less expensive used EF lenses and EF lenses that aren't available yet (or ever) in RF and adapt them onto an R5 or R1 body without thinking you are missing out.
Agree, but from a manufactures perspective, that's exactly what they want you to feel.
We already see the size and weight advantages from these recent rumored lenses but the icing on the cake will be getting a performance upgrade as well. That's how you sell new product.
I reckon Canon are trying to flesh out the system quickly, and perhaps have been influenced by the criticism that their current lenses are all high end. This way we get superteles on the cheap. I have no interest in 600-800mm lenses, and clearly there are compromises in use compared to typical supertele specs, but assuming these lenses are small, relatively cheap and, hopefully, have good perforemance then why not? You will probably be shooting on a tripod with IS engaged and with bumped-up ISO. Nowadays this might be less of an issue than you think. Not much good for BIFs: you just take that into consideration.
These lenses will make them get the customers from 1” and m43 systems. In those systems all the wildlife solutions have effective F11 aperture in full frame terms, and then there is fact that its a full frame sensor so ISO button will work better. So suddenly you have that small sensor capability on reach and equivalent light gathering capability plus in a minute you can attach a F1.2 lens if you so please.
Exception to this is 300 Pro and m43 combination which makes for 600 F8.
RX10 IV = F10.8
Light gathering capability = F4 neutralised by ISO capability of full frame sensor.
