The 200-800/5.6-8 is an extending design. If memory serves me reasonably well, it is 330 mm at the short end and 440 at the long end. I believe all the other designs were extending also. The way the drawings are presented it is a little confusing as to whether they are extending or not. But the text indicates the ones I have looked at are of an extending design. Unfortunately, I have not been able to view the English translation of the text. The patent site is claiming server problems.
While if it is going to be an F8 lens at 800, the front diameter has to be at least 100 mm which most likely means a 105 mm filter diameter. If it takes a front filter. None of the designs show an internal removable filter. But it seems as if there is room to put on in.
Given that Canon was able to go from the superb EF 100-400 ii to the even more superb RF 100-500 and make it a bit smaller and lighter, but an appreciable bit smaller and lighter, there might be reason to hope a high quality 200-800/5.6-8 could be a bit smaller and lighter than the somewhat beastly 200-400/4 1.4x. If so, it could be quite attractive to a lot of people and not in the least an inconsequential product.
sebjmatthews wrote:
That is literally not at all how these things ever work, in any way whatsoever, and I can't fathom why you'd think that was even remotely a possibility.
I have friends who have previously worked in Canon EU/UK distribution and marketing, as well as other friends in similar roles at other companies. I also know a lot of people who have been in the photographic media, including multiple people who have been blacklisted by various companies for leaking or facilitating leaks of new products. I, myself, am still blacklisted by Fuji for being part of the X-T2 leaks, and that was in 2016.
There is absolutely, categorically, no possibility whatsoever that Canon are giving away their plans to C-tier YouTubers, let alone directing them to publicize rumours and speculation for marketing. That is an insane suggestion. Canon have taken people to court for leaking plans and products.
Please stop believing, let alone pushing on others, the idea that anyone on YouTube knows anything more than any random forum users, other than the very top A-tier channels who sign NDAs and only publish information on or after the official announcements. I mean people like Chris & Jordan, Gordon Laing, those are the kinds of outlets who actually are given information ahead of the public. They're also the ones who don't report rumours as facts, you'll notice.
95% of what you see on YouTube is just people desperately speculating in order to have an excuse to upload something and get more clicks. Please don't try to give it any more weight or meaning than that.
edit: To be clear, Jan has, what, 70k subscribers? Canon don't even give the Northrups much info these days, and they've got 1.6 million subscribers. I can't imagine what marketing value you think there is in giving leaks to such a small channel....Show more →
Oh, please. I can't show you receipts, but it's almost guaranteed Canon (and others) pay people to market stuff on YouTube. I am pretty skeptical about them never leaking anything for marketing purposes
I have no inside info, but I can't believe you are losing your mind over my post. Jan is awfully credible imo, very knowledgeable, and he's probably not getting enough clicks to make the clickbait argument very believable
juststeve wrote:
While if it is going to be an F8 lens at 800, the front diameter has to be at least 100 mm which most likely means a 105 mm filter diameter. If it takes a front filter. None of the designs show an internal removable filter. But it seems as if there is room to put on in.
Looking at my 200-400's front element, it measures 100mm in diameter, but accounting for the retaining ring and the front lip of the lens, its interior diameter where a filter thread would be if it had one, is about 115mm. A lot of the 200-400's weight is the metal body. It also has something like ~30 elements due in part to the built-in TC (which itself also adds weight). Canon could probably simplify the optical design of a 200-800 and it's virtually guaranteed to be the high quality plastic construction found in the majority of RF lenses to save as much weight as possible. Do you recall from the 200-800 patent how many elements are in the design?
Looking at my 33-year-old 300/2.8 the opening measures somewhere around 105-107 mm. 107 mm and a bit of plus is 300 divided by 2.8. My caliper legs don't extend far enough for an accurate measurement. I figured the actual diameter of the lens to be about 115 mm too. Have to wonder if there are manufacturing efficiencies tied to certain lens element diameters, at least with larger sizes.
Memory is the 200-800/5.6-8 is 26 elements and five moving groups. Canon Rumors has urls to the Japanese Patent Office. Getting the English translation to work has been problematic but the drawings are the drawings in any language.
sebjmatthews wrote:
That is literally not at all how these things ever work, in any way whatsoever, and I can't fathom why you'd think that was even remotely a possibility.
I have friends who have previously worked in Canon EU/UK distribution and marketing, as well as other friends in similar roles at other companies. I also know a lot of people who have been in the photographic media, including multiple people who have been blacklisted by various companies for leaking or facilitating leaks of new products. I, myself, am still blacklisted by Fuji for being part of the X-T2 leaks, and that was in 2016.
There is absolutely, categorically, no possibility whatsoever that Canon are giving away their plans to C-tier YouTubers, let alone directing them to publicize rumours and speculation for marketing. That is an insane suggestion. Canon have taken people to court for leaking plans and products.
Please stop believing, let alone pushing on others, the idea that anyone on YouTube knows anything more than any random forum users, other than the very top A-tier channels who sign NDAs and only publish information on or after the official announcements. I mean people like Chris & Jordan, Gordon Laing, those are the kinds of outlets who actually are given information ahead of the public. They're also the ones who don't report rumours as facts, you'll notice.
95% of what you see on YouTube is just people desperately speculating in order to have an excuse to upload something and get more clicks. Please don't try to give it any more weight or meaning than that.
edit: To be clear, Jan has, what, 70k subscribers? Canon don't even give the Northrups much info these days, and they've got 1.6 million subscribers. I can't imagine what marketing value you think there is in giving leaks to such a small channel....Show more →
Yes, it is completely insane to think that Canon (and others) are leaking info about upcoming lenses to a site people interested in buying said gear look at, in droves.
rscheffler wrote:
200-800 and f/8 at the long end will just be a 200-400/4 with 2x TC, which is not small. Sure, they can make it slower and an extending design to reduce diameter and packing size somewhat. It would need to be substantially slower than f/8 to shrink closer to the 100-500's diameter, and that lens is f/10 at 700mm with the 1.4x TC.
Yes 400mm f/4 gives same diameter as 800/8, good point. So they might be f/9, to give it the same size as the various 600/6.3 long end zooms.
The 400/4 DO is about the same size as 200 600, I don't actually think they'll use DO elements in this lens, but interesting to consider, thought I'd mention it. They used DO in the 70-300
Canon might use DO to shorten overall length. They used it in the inexpensive 600/11 and 800/11, so IMO would be a reasonable expectation to see it in a 200-800, though it would be larger in diameter for an 800/9 design, which would affect pricing. It would be another selling point if it can make the lens similar in size to those of the competition that top out at 600mm.
Below is the 800/11 block diagram. The DO group is the second from left in yellow. The configuration of the first three elements looks similar to the first and fourth 200-800 lens designs above in the patent document. Unclear to me is if DO would specifically be mentioned in the patent.
This thread took two distinct paths didn't it? The 'I want/don't want this lens' path and the 'Clickbate!' path.
Does Canon leak information? I *suspect* they do but I have no idea and quite honestly couldn't care less. When something is on sale at B&H I'll get serious.
I don't know how many guitar players we have here but I follow as many guitar channels as photography based channels. YouTube absolutely has influence. Epiphone has recently released a Marty Schwartz ES-335 Semi-hollowbody Guitar. Marty is a guitar player and YouTuber. (And not an overly skilled one although he has found his niche) Signature guitars used to be reserved for famous well known players. Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck, Slash, etc. Marty isn't a household name by any definition but here is is with a signature guitar on the market based solely on his YT channel. It makes some semblance of sense to me Canon would leak information via YT.
Regarding Jan, his channel is about 50% tutorial and 50% rumor. So what if he posts a little clickbate from time to time? What's the harm? He's trying to grow his channel. His channel doesn't strike me as particularly clickbaity unlike 'Ordinary Filmaker' for example who is absolutely AWFUL.
Dilemma wrote:
This thread took two distinct paths didn't it? The 'I want/don't want this lens' path and the 'Clickbate!' path.
Does Canon leak information? I *suspect* they do but I have no idea and quite honestly couldn't care less. When something is on sale at B&H I'll get serious.
I don't know how many guitar players we have here but I follow as many guitar channels as photography based channels. YouTube absolutely has influence. Epiphone has recently released a Marty Schwartz ES-335 Semi-hollowbody Guitar. Marty is a guitar player and YouTuber. (And not an overly skilled one although he has found his niche) Signature guitars used to be reserved for famous well known players. Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck, Slash, etc. Marty isn't a household name by any definition but here is is with a signature guitar on the market based solely on his YT channel. It makes some semblance of sense to me Canon would leak information via YT.
Regarding Jan, his channel is about 50% tutorial and 50% rumor. So what if he posts a little clickbate from time to time? What's the harm? He's trying to grow his channel. His channel doesn't strike me as particularly clickbaity unlike 'Ordinary Filmaker' for example who is absolutely AWFUL.
Unfortunately, click bait is the name of the game in the algorithm-driven social media world. That's why I could never do it, but I won't fault those who do as long as it's not too over the top. It didn't take me long to figure out that a 10 minute Ordinary Filmaker video has the same actual content as the two sentence Canon Rumors post he lifted.
Dilemma wrote:
This thread took two distinct paths didn't it? The 'I want/don't want this lens' path and the 'Clickbate!' path.
Does Canon leak information? I *suspect* they do but I have no idea and quite honestly couldn't care less. When something is on sale at B&H I'll get serious.
I don't know how many guitar players we have here but I follow as many guitar channels as photography based channels. YouTube absolutely has influence. Epiphone has recently released a Marty Schwartz ES-335 Semi-hollowbody Guitar. Marty is a guitar player and YouTuber. (And not an overly skilled one although he has found his niche) Signature guitars used to be reserved for famous well known players. Eric Clapton, Jeff Beck, Slash, etc. Marty isn't a household name by any definition but here is is with a signature guitar on the market based solely on his YT channel. It makes some semblance of sense to me Canon would leak information via YT.
Regarding Jan, his channel is about 50% tutorial and 50% rumor. So what if he posts a little clickbate from time to time? What's the harm? He's trying to grow his channel. His channel doesn't strike me as particularly clickbaity unlike 'Ordinary Filmaker' for example who is absolutely AWFUL.
Move over Clapton here comes YouTube! Crazy. Interesting you bring up music I've been watching Professor of Rock on YouTube. He does documentaries (or should we call them rockumentaries ) of mostly 70's and 80's hits and the bands and the stories behind them. 850k subscribers and he gets interviews with Huey Lewis, one of the Heart lead singers, Berlin lead that sang and re-did "Take My Breath Away" (Top Gun) etc. You mentioned Slash, I watched one on Poison the other day, Slash finished 2nd on that group before G&R fame which was probably a better fit anyway
I didn't realize Jan did that many rumors thought he didn't do much of that or I might not have posted. Certainly don't have any inside information myself, don't work for Canon or know anyone there
But it's pretty much guaranteed Fro gets paid, for one. At some point they had to realize they could hire YouTubers to sell cameras cheaper than magazine ads. And does Canon really ignore Canon Rumors? It doesn't make any sense they'd ignore a site dedicated to lots of people who are looking to buy new gear. Sony apparently takes top click through sellers on trips per the guy who got out of it and made a video. He made $500k B&H alone since 2009
rscheffler wrote:
IIRC, Canon tried to shut down Canon Rumors because they used the Canon name in their business.
No kidding? Makes no sense. Presumably millions of hits looking to buy new Canon gear
Wow, maybe they'd use DO elements after all, then, if this lens comes to fruitiom. I didn't realize they used them in the 600/11 & 800/11. 800/8 might be possible with similar weight to the 200-600's although I think it might be aimed at 800pf, as well, lighter and less expensive
Dilemma wrote:
Regarding Jan, his channel is about 50% tutorial and 50% rumor. So what if he posts a little clickbate from time to time? What's the harm? He's trying to grow his channel. His channel doesn't strike me as particularly clickbaity unlike 'Ordinary Filmaker' for example who is absolutely AWFUL.
Last Fall I made what was for me a huge once in a lifetime decision - I switched camera brands from Nikon to Canon, plus I went from DSLRs to mirrorless. I had been a Nikon user since 1978 and I knew virtually nothing about Canon or the mirrorless world. Nevertheless, I really wanted to get serious about doing short wildlife videos and Nikon only had the Z9 at the time which was far too heavy and too expensive for me and still had lots of AF problems back then.
I did a lot of reading and watched a lot of videos and Jan Wegener's high-integrity, low-key, no-BS demeaner, plus his many excellent, experience-based instructive videos about the Canon R5 and the RF100-500 L are what gave me the information and the confidence I needed to finally take the plunge. I bought an R5 and a RF100-500 a year ago and am still loving them every day.
I'm not quite sure that 50% of Jan's channel is rumour. My sense is that it's quite a bit less than that. I totally agree with your assessment of the "Ordinary Filmmaker" site — it's simply awful.
800 f/9 is on par with the Nikon and Sony 180(200)-600 f/6.3 lenses with a TC.
But I wonder if they will have 600 be f/6.3 or if it will already be 7.1 or 8 or 9?
arbitrage wrote:
CR says this is officially coming Nov 2nd.
200-800 f/6.3-f/9
800 f/9 is on par with the Nikon and Sony 180(200)-600 f/6.3 lenses with a TC.
But I wonder if they will have 600 be f/6.3 or if it will already be 7.1 or 8 or 9?
I'd guess it'll be slower since it's already f/6.3 wide open and 600 is much closer to the 800 end than the wide end.
However, 800mm f/9 is an ~89mm front element. 600/89 = 6.7, so who knows, maybe it'll be f/7.1. Not sure what is internally restricting the max aperture speed at 200mm for that size front element (which would theoretically put it at ~f/2.2).
Crazy. Interesting you bring up music I've been watching Professor of Rock on YouTube. He does documentaries (or should we call them rockumentaries 