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 … 7 8 end

Super telephoto lens rumors?

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

p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

For whatever reason, Canon has chosen not to compete with Nikon in the long end. The pf lenses are amazing and great fun to use, as is the really sharp 400mm 4.5. The tc big primes are without competition either, and the big holdup is price (but they have been coming down of late). The R5ii is a very important camera release for Canon, it has to be fully competitive with the Nikon and Sony offerings which means 100% it has to have a stacked sensor. I've been straddling both systems for a while now, trying to see what Canon does relative to the other 'big two'...If the R5ii is at least as good as the Z8 that will probably hold Canon in for now, but they really could use some more modern long lenses to compete with the PF offerings which have garnered market share.

Apr 03, 2024 at 10:34 AM

artsupreme
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

Apr 03, 2024 at 10:38 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

the 800pf looked appealing at first. Only 5+ lbs , $6500!!! But, that's not much lighter than the 600/4, and $6500 is still a lot.

The 500 PF looked appealing, then some guy got on here saying how bad the 100 500 is vs the 500pf, and I looked more. One zooms, one is 2/3 stop faster, I'd probably pick the zoom, myself, weight about the same. Saying Canon is asleep at the wheel and Nikon is so much better doesn't really make much sense imo

And I never really got the excitement over the 200 600, it's pretty big and heavy and not particularly fast. The 200 800 looks pretty appealing, and the 600 & 800 f/11 look pretty usable vs 7.1 on aps, which I've used a ton (2/3 down to improve 55-250 performance.) FF should be 1.3 stops better at high iso, and the IS looks better, so in theory better in low light

Apr 03, 2024 at 10:51 AM

nmerc_photos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

AmbientMike wrote:
If you want to talk about old lenses, the 150-600's have been around forever and the 200-600 & 180-200 have less zoom range even though they cost 2x as much. And aren't lighter

Canon has 200-800 & 100-300 nobody else has, and yes they are absolutely competing. I find it ridiculous that you don't think so

I don't want to talk about old lenses at all. For me, anything prior to mirrorless is irrelevant. Even early mirrorless (think 2018) is old. My point is that if you are interested in wildlife photography TODAY, starting from scratch - Canon isn't even worth thinking about. No PF lenses, the "worst" primes in terms of price to performance, etc. Even their bodies without stacked sensors are funny lol.

The only place Canon is competing for wildlife is on the budget/zoom. In which case they are no longer competing against Nikon/Sony - but instead against OM-1/Fuji which aren't FF. Perhaps that was their entire goal. Maybe that's where the money is. I wouldn't be surprised. Their strategy appears to be that they want to be the best for professional and expensive photojournalism, as well as scoop up entry level wildlife photographers, and any casual players in-between like wedding, portrait, etc.

The 100-300 is a sports lens, not a wildlife lens. Even more so that they neutered by deciding not to put a built in 1.4x.

The 100-500 is probably the most impressive lens Canon has, imo. The 200-800 is pretty unique as well. So I give them full credit there.

molson wrote:
Like many people, I've praised the Sony 200-600 and Nikon 180-600 zooms for their internal focusing, but I've gradually come around to liking Canon's telescoping zooms just to be able to fit them in a sensible-sized camera bag. There's no perfect solution, unfortunately.

Agree again. When I shot Canon I hated my RF 70-200 and RF 100-500 for being telescoping.

I thought it was so funny when the rumor came out for a 70-200 MK II with internal zoom.

But now that my Nikon setup has so many different options, I yearn for an external zoom just to reduce the initial size when traveling. The RF 70-200 + RF 100-500 is so small it's insane.

Edited on Apr 03, 2024 at 11:07 AM · View previous versions

Apr 03, 2024 at 10:55 AM

molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

AmbientMike wrote:
The 500 PF looked appealing, then some guy got on here saying how bad the 100 500 is vs the 500pf, and I looked more. One zooms, one is 2/3 stop faster, I'd probably pick the zoom, myself, weight about the same.

There are issues with using the Nikon 500PF on the mirrorless bodies, like having the VR running constantly, which reduces the already short battery life of the Z8... but it is a remarkably sharp lens.

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:04 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

nmerc_photos wrote:
I don't want to talk about old lenses at all. For me, anything prior to mirrorless is irrelevant. Even early mirrorless (think 2018) is old. My entire argument and basis is that if you were interested in wildlife photography TODAY, starting from scratch - Canon is absolutely not competing at the upper end.

I'm not sure if any OEM's make actual 150-600s or if they were all 3rd party (Tamron/Sigma) in which case I've been very unimpressed with the images, sizes, and weights of those lenses.

Canon is competing heavily on the budget and zoom end, and nowhere to be seen on...Show more →

Idk why you'd ignore DSLR lenses, given the excellent superteles and adapter.

The 150-600 C about the same weight as 200-600, but more zoom range, even though it's been around forever and costs half as much.

Apparently the 70-200/4 is small, but not really any lighter. Watching Fro's video on the 100-300, I didn't really care about an internal tc, just adds weight and if the 1x-2x ever materializes, you'd probably prefer that

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:07 AM

nmerc_photos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

AmbientMike wrote:
Idk why you'd ignore DSLR lenses, given the excellent superteles and adapter.

The 150-600 C about the same weight as 200-600, but more zoom range, even though it's been around forever and costs half as much.

Apparently the 70-200/4 is small, but not really any lighter. Watching Fro's video on the 100-300, I didn't really care about an internal tc, just adds weight and if the 1x-2x ever materializes, you'd probably prefer that

For people on a budget, DSLR may make sense. But I am fortunate not to have to consider budget when making gear choices. I am interested in the best of the best for myself. And for others - I am interested in the best price to performance, but only on modern gear. I don't want to suggest old DSLR gear that is no longer serviceable, or will soon be.

I am intrigued by the possibility of a Canon 1x-2x. I think it's the only shot they have to captivate the long lens crowd. But I still think (at least in theory) that a built in 1.4x provides more versatility than an external 1x-2x.

AmbientMike wrote:
the 800pf looked appealing at first. Only 5+ lbs , $6500!!! But, that's not much lighter than the 600/4, and $6500 is still a lot.

The 500 PF looked appealing, then some guy got on here saying how bad the 100 500 is vs the 500pf, and I looked more. One zooms, one is 2/3 stop faster, I'd probably pick the zoom, myself, weight about the same. Saying Canon is asleep at the wheel and Nikon is so much better doesn't really make much sense imo

And I never really got the excitement over the 200 600, it's pretty big and heavy...Show more →

The 800PF blows the RF 600 + 1.4x and RF 800 5.6 out of the water in nearly all regards except MFD.

RF 600 F4
MSRP - $12,999
Used - $9,000
Weight - 6.81lbs
Length - 18.58"
MFD - 13.78'

RF 800 F5.6
MSRP - $16,999
Used - $11,000
Weight - 6.92lbs
Length - 17.01"
MFD - 8.53'

Z 800 F6.3
MSRP - $6,500
Used - $5,000
Weight - 5.26lbs
Length - 15.16"
MFD - 16.4'

The 800PF is 50%+ cheaper, 39% lighter, and 41% shorter than the RF 600 + RF 1.4x combo - with IQ and sharpness that are as good or better. "Not that much lighter" lol. Every single one of those attributes is significant.

Having used the RF 100-500 and 500PF extensively, I personally lean towards the RF 100-500. I love that zoom. Although the 500PF is sharper, it doesn't have the flexibility of a zoom. And since the 100-500 is more modern, it has better AF, less external parts needed, etc.

I think the 200-600 is the staple of the budget wildlife photographer's kit. I personally don't often find a use for one - because agree, they are the weight of a prime. but in my local circle, nearly all of the photographers I shoot with use a 200-600 explicitly, or at least start with one until they can afford a prime. So it's clearly a lens that has value.

Edited on Apr 03, 2024 at 11:34 AM · View previous versions

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:08 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:09 AM

mawz
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

molson wrote:
I recently bought my wife a Canon R7 and the little RF 100-400 zoom to replace her old Lumix G95, to take on a whale watching trip. I was so impressed with the R7's AF performance compared to my Z8 that I decided to take the plunge and switch completely over to Canon. My new gear is scheduled to arrive tomorrow...

It does what I need it to for the most part, for the rest I have my R6.

High-end APS-C is a bit of a desert for wildlife/sports though, no really good options between Sony's poor ergonomics, AF performance challenges with Canon and Fuji and no high-end Nikon offering. For landscape work, Fuji and Canon do pretty well (although a top-notch UWA for the R7 is pretty pricey since you have to go to the 10-20/4L, at which point you are bouncing off used R5/14-35L pricing)

For light carry though, the R7/100-400 is pretty unbeatable. m43 reach but an even smaller package than m43 offers on a modern body. AF isn't up to an OM-1 though, at least for anything using subject recognition.

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:18 AM

drobertfranz
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

artsupreme wrote:
I've seen the same. A lot of long time Canon shooters have been jumping ship to Sony and Nikon.

I get why you don't like the 100-500 or 200-800, but what is wrong with the RF 70-200 f/2.8?

Generally I just much prefer internal zooms over external zoom. It's a matter of form over functionality. I like and appreciate the smaller size and ease of packing but really see a performance deficit when it comes to zooming especially in fast action situations which is important to me.

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:44 AM

artsupreme
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

drobertfranz wrote:
Generally I just much prefer internal zooms over external zoom. It's a matter of form over functionality. I like and appreciate the smaller size and ease of packing but really see a performance deficit when it comes to zooming especially in fast action situations which is important to me.

I'm not a big fan of the telescoping zooms either but I've put a ton of mileage on the RF 70-200 f/2.8 and haven't had any issues with performance with fast action.

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:49 AM

drobertfranz
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

cohenfive wrote:
For whatever reason, Canon has chosen not to compete with Nikon in the long end. The pf lenses are amazing and great fun to use, as is the really sharp 400mm 4.5. The tc big primes are without competition either, and the big holdup is price (but they have been coming down of late). The R5ii is a very important camera release for Canon, it has to be fully competitive with the Nikon and Sony offerings which means 100% it has to have a stacked sensor. I've been straddling both systems for a while now, trying to see what Canon...Show more →

I got to use the PF600mm F6.3 on my Alaska tour. Impressive lens and a joy to handhold. I handheld my RF600mm F4 but definitely struggled with the weight after a while. With shoulder issues and age I appreciate the lighter lenses. I did use my 100-500mm more because of weight and while it performed well the struggle zooming the lens with subject moving very fast was a huge issue. I then had the chance to use the Nikon 180-600mm and was SO nice being able to quickly zoom and stay on subject. Throw in the Z8 with the fast readout and no viewfinder blackout while shooting bursts it was a revelation... Canon absolutely has to nail it with the R52 and the R1... Stacked sensor for the R52 with as good as or better specs the the Z8 and a global sensor for the R1 that could challenge to A93 and out spec it would really make a statement!

Edited on Apr 03, 2024 at 02:00 PM · View previous versions

Apr 03, 2024 at 11:59 AM

drobertfranz
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

artsupreme wrote:
I'm not a big fan of the telescoping zooms either but I've put a ton of mileage on the RF 70-200 f/2.8 and haven't had any issues with performance with fast action.

Agree a much bigger issue on the longer zooms. Just a personal preference of mine

Apr 03, 2024 at 12:02 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

nmerc_photos wrote:
For people on a budget, DSLR may make sense. But I am fortunate not to have to consider budget when making gear choices. I am interested in the best of the best for myself. And for others - I am interested in the best price to performance, but only on modern gear. I don't want to suggest old DSLR gear that is no longer serviceable, or will soon be.

I am intrigued by the possibility of a Canon 1x-2x. I think it's the only shot they have to captivate the long lens crowd. But I still think (at least in theory)...Show more →

The Rf 800/5.6 is considerably lighter (3+ lbs) than the Nikon 800/5.6. About the same price, Nikon is over $16k and currently out of stock.

Apr 03, 2024 at 12:04 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

molson wrote:
There are issues with using the Nikon 500PF on the mirrorless bodies, like having the VR running constantly, which reduces the already short battery life of the Z8... but it is a remarkably sharp lens.

I think Canon has the best adapter, I'd probably need DSLR to get AF on my pre-D 35/2. And before Sony had any superteles, the adapters we were supposed to dump our DSLR's and use now rife with problems, now that Sony has expandedits lens lineup (whatever is going on there.)

Apr 03, 2024 at 12:45 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

nmerc_photos wrote:
For people on a budget, DSLR may make sense. But I am fortunate not to have to consider budget when making gear choices. I am interested in the best of the best for myself. And for others - I am interested in the best price to performance, but only on modern gear. I don't want to suggest old DSLR gear that is no longer serviceable, or will soon be.

I am intrigued by the possibility of a Canon 1x-2x. I think it's the only shot they have to captivate the long lens crowd. But I still think (at least in theory)...Show more →

I think one place the 800PF doesn't blow the 600/4 out of the water is pulling off the tc and using f/4. 1.5 lbs isn't 0 but over 5lbs still a pretty big kens. Thru still seen to be selling the much larger 800/5.6, I believe the optics supposedly better

Apr 03, 2024 at 12:49 PM

nmerc_photos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

AmbientMike wrote:
The Rf 800/5.6 is considerably lighter (3+ lbs) than the Nikon 800/5.6. About the same price, Nikon is over $16k and currently out of stock.

And the Nikon 800/5.6 is a considerably better lens than the RF 800/5.6 which is just a 400 with 2x attached lol.

The Nikon 800/5.6 is also considerably cheaper than the RF 800/5.6 when you account for used prices, which are the only prices that should matter - because only an idiot would pay $16K for a 10 year old lens.

Is Canon really so bad that you have to compare one of their most recent lenses to a Nikon lens that's over a decade old??

AmbientMike wrote:
I think one place the 800PF doesn't blow the 600/4 out of the water is pulling off the tc and using f/4. 1.5 lbs isn't 0 but over 5lbs still a pretty big kens. Thru still seen to be selling the much larger 800/5.6, I believe the optics supposedly better

Correct. One of only 3 advantages the RF600 has over the 800PF.

1) If you need 600mm, it's a clear winner
2) If 3' of MFD matters to you, it's a winner
3) If you think you value 1/3 stop of aperture, it's a winner

If you've never used both the RF600 and the 800PF, that could explain why you don't understand how much lighter it is.

The RF600 is difficult to handhold. You can handhold the 800PF all day without issue. A combination of both how much lighter, and shorter it is.

Apr 03, 2024 at 06:31 PM

Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

The RF600 f4 is not difficult to handhold. It has a very good weight distribution.

Apr 03, 2024 at 10:05 PM

molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

nmerc_photos wrote:
The RF600 is difficult to handhold. You can handhold the 800PF all day without issue. A combination of both how much lighter, and shorter it is.

I found the 800PF to be a bit on the heavy side for extended hand-holding, but the biggest liability for me was the long MFD for photographing small birds. I sold it after about a month.

Apr 03, 2024 at 10:18 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Super telephoto lens rumors?

nmerc_photos wrote:
And the Nikon 800/5.6 is a considerably better lens than the RF 800/5.6 which is just a 400 with 2x attached lol.

The Nikon 800/5.6 is also considerably cheaper than the RF 800/5.6 when you account for used prices, which are the only prices that should matter - because only an idiot would pay $16K for a 10 year old lens.

Is Canon really so bad that you have to compare one of their most recent lenses to a Nikon lens that's over a decade old??

Correct. One of only 3 advantages the RF600 has over the 800PF.

1) If you need 600mm,...Show more →

How did your test of the Nikon 800/5.6 vs the 800pf go? Since you have used everything.

Apr 03, 2024 at 10:57 PM

1 2 3 4 … 7 8 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 … 7 8 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.