marsguy wrote:
It's the wide angle shot that makes it look small. If you use his hand as a size reference, with the spacing between fingers when holding the lens, it looks more to scale.
We'll know soon enough, but I'd be shocked to see the front element is larger than 105mm based on that photo.
Trying to figure out a size reference for this lens too. I'm guessing slightly heavier/longer than the Sigma 105 f/1.4, and coming in around 2.2 kilos?
^ How about similar in size and weight to the EF300/2.8 vII?
IMO a 100-300/2.8 is the right move by Canon and makes way more sense than a fixed 300/2.8 due to the versatility of the zoom (assuming image quality on par with comparable 300 primes). Unfortunately it does not appear to have a built-in TC, but that could be offset by future Canon high MP, high performance bodies. I'm thinking R5/R5II will be a good pairing until there is an a1/Z9 equivalent from Canon.
Having just shot a few large youth hockey tournaments with the 200-400 on FF, the 100-300 would be a very interesting alternative. Some of the rinks approached ISO 20,000 to maintain at least 1/500 @ f/4, so an extra stop would have some benefit. 100mm would be nice for close action and crops at 300mm when more reach is required (these events are all shot in less than full resolution jpeg for on-site printing, so jumping over to APS-C crop would be the equivalent of a built-in TC). But there were a few games when I used the 200-400 a lot at 560mm when it was U9 and U11 kids on huge pads... but that situation isn't that frequent.
The only 'problem' I see with a 100-300 is that it's not really an ideal 'all purpose' sports lens if also covering a lot of field sports. Will be interesting to see if rumors of a 200-500/4 hold up. That would be a very interesting evolution of the 200-400/4 and would be a decent reach improvement to differentiate itself from the 100-300.
I shoot kids' soccer and 300mm would be pretty short for anything older than U10 unless you're part of a team and tasked with just one part of the field. f/2.8 sure would be nice though.
jgoetz4 wrote:
I would think it would take a TC since the 100-500 can, but it may limit the focal length at which you could attach it.
That limitation is due to the way the exteranl zoom works. I doubt that would be the case for a fixed-length tele, but who knows. It's not like they deliberately limited the usage, but that was what happened based on the marketing requirements for the lens without TC. At least it has a built-in tripod mount.
A $10K 100-300 and possible 200-500/4 leaves open options for Canon to release slower, smaller, lighter and less expensive primes at 300 and 500. Perhaps something like a 300/3.2 or f/3.5 DO and/or 500/4.5, 5.0 or 5.6 DO with built-in TC.
Again, to me, this would make sense. Fixed primes are optically great, but somewhat inflexible for non-reach limited situations (such as a lot of sports). Therefore, replace a couple of the big primes (300 & 500) with zooms (100-300, 200-500) and leave a couple of the faster primes that would be less practical as zooms (400/2.8, 600/4). Augment the zooms with slower, smaller, lighter, less expensive DO primes to address other niches.
marsguy wrote:
Good lord. That is indeed insane. I await those who come to tell me "it's worth whatever the market will bear, cry more."
Heaven help me if I break a lens hood. After spending nearly 5 grand on an R5 and 14-35 for hobbyist use, I'll have to cut out a milk jug and secure it with a rubber band. I'm sure the hoods in question are made to be pretty much bulletproof at that price though right? ....right?
I made a really good lens hood for a 70-210 out of cardboard one time. Anymore there's 3D printing
This lens would be pretty tempting at maybe $4-5k, but at 10k it's just not in the picture for hobbyists like me. I kind of figured it would be priced out of my budget, but was still a little surprised at a nearly 5 figure price tag.
The Nikon version takes 112mm threaded filter and weighs 3.25 kg. Since there is no signs of a drop in filter I imagine it will also be taking the enormous front filters. As for weight, I would be impressed if Canon could get this down to as low as 2.5kg.
【New Flagship RF Telephoto Zoom Lens │ Coming Soon】
📣Canon officially announced that the new RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM will be launched soon! As a flagship telephoto lens, the RF 100-300mm f/2.8L IS USM is suitable for professional photographers and videographers to shoot sports and ecology and other subjects. Here are the product features:
✔️Using a new optical design, a simplified mechanical structure with "electronic floating focus control" and the best materials, the weight is only 2,590 grams
✔️Extreme image quality throughout the zoom range
✨Using 1 fluorite lens and 4 UD lenses, the zoom range completely eliminates chromatic aberration
✨ Added 1 glass molded (GMo) aspherical lens to enhance the image quality from the center of the image to the edge
✨ASC air sphere coating is added to the mirror surface of the 3 lenses to reduce glare and ghosting caused by reflections
✔️Provides up to 5.5 levels of shockproof effect
✔️1.8m minimum focusing distance, providing 0.16x maximum magnification
✔️Compatible with teleconverters RF 1.4x and RF 2x, which can further increase the focal length to 140-420mm and 200-600mm respectively
💡The product is tentatively scheduled to be launched in May 2023
I'd be curious to see what the image quality is like as a 200-600/5.6. It's quite the product and reading the developer interview is does seem like Canon is trying to make a big step forward here.
Why give people a 300/2.8 when you can give them a 100-300/2.8 at the same size? Hopefully they'll also complement it with a DO design somewhere down the line for people that want to pack smaller.
For the sake of specs comparison, EF 300/2.8 IS v2 vs. RF100-300/2.8
EF 300/2.8 IS v2:
RF100-300/2.8:
100-300 about 75mm (3") longer, 300g (0.67lbs) heavier. Of course you have to add the EF-RF adapter to the 300/2.8 which adds about an inch IIRC, and slightly increases weight.
I have to say, this is a pretty exciting lens. It would be even more exciting if it had a built in teleconverter though :-) Nevertheless, it seems like the ultimate lens in the category.
