Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2

4 … 10 11 end

Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

Optics Patent
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

What would these recent state of the art motors be upgraded to?

arbitrage wrote:
Do they say anything about the AF motors being upgraded?

Apr 15, 2021 at 05:15 AM

qc_mountain
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

Looking at my bank account i would need money to fill the gap . I guess i could afford the 600RF by selling a of one of my kidney's which are slightly used . A arm is out of the question because i would need them both to hold the lens. A leg might be doable by hopping on one leg but then i would need 35 stop of stabilization . Renting my house would be a idea and living in the cardboard box provided when you buy the lens. Or get 3 jobs day one and evening night shift but then no time to shoot with it . I think i am out of options now

Francois.

Apr 15, 2021 at 09:42 AM

jamato8
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

brad-man wrote:
You must be new to Canon. Canon's lens rings are always pricey, but quality third party ones are always available and all L series lenses come with the lens hood. My 100L is wicked sharp and the IS is wonderful...

No, Used Canon for 40 years. I am well aware of their pricing and gouging. Yes, I buy the after market rings etc. at a fraction of the price.

Apr 15, 2021 at 11:06 AM

CelesteForza
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

Whats wrong with Canon using the optics from the EF III lenses on the RF? Are they not exceptional?

Apr 15, 2021 at 11:17 AM

httivals
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

When I bought my first Canon camera back in the mid-90s, the Canon lens were a bit less expensive than comparable Nikon lenses for the most part. From what I read at the time, the Canon L lenses were considered of the highest quality back then, and the EF mount was considered superior to the Nikon F mount. Another feature that appealed to me at the time was Canon was the only brand with a full range of tilt-shift lenses. Also it's telephotos and L telephoto zooms were considered the best and my own experience has borne out that its L zooms in the 70-200 and 70-300 range have been exceptional . . . . Having used many different cameras over the last 25 years (including view cameras, m43, Canon, and Sony), and having just come from Sony (which I am now using concurrently withther R5 and for which I still have a full range of lenses), the quality control of the Canon L lenses appears to be superior to any other Japanese brand (but perhaps not Leica), at least based on my own anecdotal experience and based on some comments that Roger Cicala has said spread across various blog posts over the last few years, although Sony quality control has certainly improved. . . . I don't consider Canon to be price gouging at all. I've always had excellent samples of Canon L lenses that I've bought new, unlike with the Sony lenses for which I've always had to test multiple samples - although when you get an excellent sample of a Sony lens, it is also excellent. Also, the Canon lenses that I've used (albeit, never the exotic super long telephotos) have always provided excellent features. . . . For me, Canon has always been a brand that delivers on its promise both in quality and in distinguishing features or options, and for that I am willing to pay the prices Canon charges. To me, Canon prices are reasonable and fair.

Apr 15, 2021 at 11:32 AM

stanj
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

Optics Patent wrote:
What would these recent state of the art motors be upgraded to?

One thing that could have been upgraded is the IS unit/electronics to support "+" mode, cooperation with IBIS. Only RF lenses have that. Second, just like many EF lenses don't do H+, it's plausible that even these top lenses wouldn't do "H++" (30 vs. today's measly 20fps). A firm statement on both is what's missing. "Totally works with IBIS and the new R3's focus and drive modes" would have been helpful.

Apr 15, 2021 at 11:36 AM

httivals
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

One more thing to Canon's credit - it just made a qualitative shift to the R mount, but its adapters and implementation of the camera's firmware enable everyone to use EF mount lenses with full functionality. Many report that EF lenses work better on the R mount than they did on the EF mount and I don't think I've read any reports of the EF lenses not working as well on the R mount. So the functionality of EF lenses is as good as before. If the value has dropped its presumably because the R mount lenses offer something else - for example the 70-200mm L zooms are significantly more compact than the EF mount counterparts and offer better IS (along with the RF bodies), which is what made me decide to use both Sony and Canon systems simultaneously. And I haven't been disappointed in the least by this decision. The Canon lenses and R5 are extraordinary, as its lenses and EF mount have also been since the mid-90s.

Apr 15, 2021 at 11:43 AM

TarHoya
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

stanj wrote:
One thing that could have been upgraded is the IS unit/electronics to support "+" mode, cooperation with IBIS. Only RF lenses have that. Second, just like many EF lenses don't do H+, it's plausible that even these top lenses wouldn't do "H++" (30 vs. today's measly 20fps). A firm statement on both is what's missing. "Totally works with IBIS and the new R3's focus and drive modes" would have been helpful.

Several articles on the announcement have language similar to this: "Canon promises "incredible focusing speeds" for both thanks to a "double power drive" that will appear on future camera bodies — presumably including the R3." (from https://www.engadget.com/canon-confirms-development-eos-r3-mirrorless-camera-082035304.html)

If I had to guess, I would say that there are improvements to the motors themselves and/or the electronics/connection between the camera and the motors, to allow for the AF to still perform optimally when shooting at 30fps.

Apr 15, 2021 at 11:46 AM

stanj
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

TarHoya wrote:
Several articles on the announcement have language similar to this

You understand that some people would prefer to have that officially from Canon, because "articles" have been wrong. Along the same lines is the omission of a very obvious statement about "+" IS. This could be easily clarified by anyone who has access to the lens, mounting it to the R5, and checking if it's "IS" or "IS+" in the viewfinder. Boom. To me these are very relevant, very obvious questions which for some reason aren't answered in either direction. Yet.

Apr 15, 2021 at 12:14 PM

TarHoya
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

stanj wrote:
You understand that some people would prefer to have that officially from Canon, because "articles" have been wrong. Along the same lines is the omission of a very obvious statement about "+" IS. This could be easily clarified by anyone who has access to the lens, mounting it to the R5, and checking if it's "IS" or "IS+" in the viewfinder. Boom. To me these are very relevant, very obvious questions which for some reason aren't answered in either direction. Yet.

There is no reason to be condescending when we are all just speculating about possibilities based upon the information that is currently available to us. It wouldn't be speculation if it was coming straight from Canon, that is why this is a discussion in the first place.

But I also understand that Canon provided releases to and briefed folks on the lenses before the announcement was made, and generally when the same verbiage is being used across multiple outlets, the source of that verbiage was that background material they were provided.

Apr 15, 2021 at 12:30 PM

stanj
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

TarHoya wrote:
There is no reason to be condescending when we are all just speculating about possibilities based upon the information that is currently available to us. It wouldn't be speculation if it was coming straight from Canon, that is why this is a discussion in the first place.

But I also understand that Canon provided releases to and briefed folks on the lenses before the announcement was made, and generally when the same verbiage is being used across multiple outlets, the source of that verbiage was that background material they were provided.

Firstly, sorry if you saw my comments as condescending, or if they indeed were. That was not my intention. My beef is with Canon not with you. Now as for multiple outlets saying the same thing reinforcing the fact, we all know how it went with iron in spinach. I have the opposite feeling, that if the motors were indeed different, better, then Canon would have said that - not that it's just the same optical formula, _but this stuff is better_.

The IS question has not been answered by a single outlet, and sorry if it's condescending but it really takes one single look thru the viewfinder to answer it...

Apr 15, 2021 at 12:43 PM

TarHoya
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

stanj wrote:
Firstly, sorry if you saw my comments as condescending, or if they indeed were. That was not my intention. My beef is with Canon not with you. Now as for multiple outlets saying the same thing reinforcing the fact, we all know how it went with iron in spinach. I have the opposite feeling, that if the motors were indeed different, better, then Canon would have said that - not that it's just the same optical formula, _but this stuff is better_.

The IS question has not been answered by a single outlet, and sorry if it's condescending but it...Show more →

Agreed there -- it seems like Canon put pretty tight restrictions on the scope of this initial embargo lift for folks who got hands on with these lenses. The videos that have popped up for all three lenses pretty clearly avoid discussing a number of things about them, including the IS question on the 400 and 600.

It reminds me of when Sony and Microsoft did a "unboxing" embargo lift where they pretty much only let reviewers release videos of them physically taking the PS5 and XSX out of the box...and then made everyone wait another couple weeks for any real information.

Marketing games are pointlessly frustrating.

Apr 15, 2021 at 12:53 PM

kezeka
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

To the people asking for new motors in the 400/600 - they were designed using the current RF lens motors per the LR tear down. I don't think canon has a whole lot more to offer in terms of lens design. Removing the adapter likely reduces mount shift and improves tolerances. Seems like it costs them no money to release these with RF mount adapters integrated and improves the longevity of their investment in the redesign.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/12/the-great-400mm-f2-8-teardown-competition-part-1-the-canon-400mm-f2-8-l-is-iii/

Apr 15, 2021 at 01:20 PM

armd
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

So what's the consensus and will 600 EF owners switch to the RF lens? What will it do to the EF long lens market? Interestingly, I thought the prices of the 100-400 would drop off the map once the 100-500 came along and while there was a tiny downward blip the used prices have stayed steady or increased. From what I see, the 500 RF may be the first true game changing, big white RF lens (DO?) in terms of size/weight.

Apr 15, 2021 at 01:35 PM

cohenfive
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

My view is that, at least for now I don't see any big changes in pricing for the ef big whites. Nothing is in stock and the waits for the rf long lenses will likely be pretty long. Also, unlikely performance is materially different. So if the ef 600iii is worth $10-11k that's still a substantial savings from the rf (if you could find one) for no discernible performance change. As far as the 100-400ii goes, mint used ones cost 60% of the cost of a 100-500 and for that you still get a superb lens that is faster than the rf...so it holds value. Until canon gets to the point where they can stock any of this gear, everything will continue to hold value better than you might otherwise think...imo.

Apr 15, 2021 at 03:30 PM

Pius Sullivan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

cohenfive wrote:
My view is that, at least for now I don't see any big changes in pricing for the ef big whites. Nothing is in stock and the waits for the rf long lenses will likely be pretty long. Also, unlikely performance is materially different. So if the ef 600iii is worth $10-11k that's still a substantial savings from the rf (if you could find one) for no discernible performance change. As far as the 100-400ii goes, mint used ones cost 60% of the cost of a 100-500 and for that you still get a superb lens that is faster than...Show more →

I have the R5 and 600 III, in ES mode at 20fps with birds in flight I can get 85 to 95 % hit rate on any given day. How much better is the RF 600 and R3 going to be that's the question? I'm willing to bet that the R3 with the 600 III adapted will get 30fps, with an excellent hit rate with IS turned off for birds in flight.
So those extra pins are not going to help with birds inflight...

My prediction for the R3 and RF 600 to perform for birds in flight, IS would be best turned off.
That's pretty much been proven with the RF 100-500.

Apr 15, 2021 at 04:37 PM

arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

Pius Sullivan wrote:
I have the R5 and 600 III, in ES mode at 20fps with birds in flight I can get 85 to 95 % hit rate on any given day. How much better is the RF 600 and R3 going to be that's the question? I'm willing to bet that the R3 with the 600 III adapted will get 30fps, with an excellent hit rate with IS turned off for birds in flight.
So those extra pins are not going to help with birds inflight...

My prediction for the R3 and RF 600 to perform for birds in flight, IS...Show more →

I don't think there will be much value in the RF lens unless you don't already own the EF III lens.

However, I can see lots of potential value in the R3. Having no risk of distortion and having a live feed that doesn't jump around as you come off the shutter momentarily during a burst does make shooting BIF easier. Is it needed? Only you can be the judge. For me it was a big factor in deciding to stick with S and not continue with C for the time being.

Now the question will be whether the R3 has 20MP or 45MP or something else. If low MPs, and you are loving the 45MPs, then the R3 may not be the camera you want. Of course you are very well versed in shooting excellent images with "only" 20MP sensors so the R3 may still make sense for you if it is 20MPs.

If the R3 was 30 odd MPs it would be a no brainer for me to move from R5 to R3. Even if S brings out a 30 odd MP A9III I'd consider switching off the A1 for it. 30MP like the 5DIV was a sweet spot for me. There is still some magic in those lower MP sensors as you know well.

Apr 15, 2021 at 04:58 PM

Pius Sullivan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

arbitrage wrote:
I don't think there will be much value in the RF lens unless you don't already own the EF III lens.

However, I can see lots of potential value in the R3. Having no risk of distortion and having a live feed that doesn't jump around as you come off the shutter momentarily during a burst does make shooting BIF easier. Is it needed? Only you can be the judge. For me it was a big factor in deciding to stick with S and not continue with C for the time being.

Now the question will be whether the R3 has 20MP...Show more →

Would be in Canon's best interest to have flexibility with the MP's if they want to retain their customers. I think 60, 40 and 20 would be a great split. The extra's that come along with the stacked sensor will be welcomed for sure. Hopefully some specs in the next coming months.

Apr 15, 2021 at 05:13 PM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

I agree. Should be around 50MP so they can go toe-to-toe with the A1. You can always shoot in cRAW with little to no loss of resolution or IQ.

Pius Sullivan wrote:
Would be in Canon's best interest to have flexibility with the MP's if they want to retain their customers. I think 60, 40 and 20 would be a great split. The extra's that come along with the stacked sensor will be welcomed for sure. Hopefully some specs in the next coming months.

Apr 15, 2021 at 05:58 PM

Optics Patent
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Pre-order: RF 100mm f/2.8L, RF 400mm f/2.8L IS, RF 600mm f/4L IS

This RF lens is not for EF owners of a V3 lens to buy. It’s for owners of an R camera who need a big long lens to buy.
We don’t want to pay $12k for a lens that needs an adapter.

armd wrote:
So what's the consensus and will 600 EF owners switch to the RF lens? What will it do to the EF long lens market? Interestingly, I thought the prices of the 100-400 would drop off the map once the 100-500 came along and while there was a tiny downward blip the used prices have stayed steady or increased. From what I see, the 500 RF may be the first true game changing, big white RF lens (DO?) in terms of size/weight.

Apr 15, 2021 at 08:43 PM

1 2 3 4 … 10 11 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 … 10 11 end