p.1 #1 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
Newbie here on FM. Long time Canon user. Lots of talk on Canon Rumors about a new RF 600 with a built in 1.4x teleconverter that is supposedly being announced in Q4 this year and shipped early Q1 next year. The latest article dropped yesterday about it. But rumors are rumors, may not even come to fruition for a long time. Already let down not getting an R7 ii upgrade this year. Could have used that for Yellowstone. Long story short. I just got back from Yellowstone. Brought my RF 400 2.8, my 1.4x and 2x extenders with my R5ii. Loved it for the most part. But realized I never shoot bare 400, always with an extender in Yellowstone. Even with the roadside bears most were shot at 560 or 800. So I’ll be listing my Rf 400 for sale soon. Was going to pull the trigger on an RF 600. But I think I might wait to see if this new lens comes to fruition. Changing out teleconverters while you’re watching the wildlife on the move gets old rather quickly. Just curious of everyone’s thots on it all.
p.1 #2 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
If you can get a good price on a current 600/4 and can make good use of it for at least 6-9-12 months, why not? It's highly unlikely that a 600/4 with built-in TC will sell for the same price. Figure some premium will be tacked onto the current MSRP and it will take some time for its street price to settle. If you can find a minty used copy, you might be able to resell it later for very little loss because the new one will be more expensive and the old one may hold value better than if the new version is very closely priced.
Based on a handful of members here who have cycled through most of Canon's RF super-tele lenses, it seems some come back to the 400/2.8 as the most versatile option. It's somewhat smaller and more hand-holdable than the 600 and I believe it has a considerably shorter MFD. Perhaps not super relevant for Yellowstone, but might be for other things you photograph?
Anyway, if you're not that price sensitive and put more value in immediate benefits, then switching to the 600/4 might be worthwhile for the short term. Then sell it for the TC version once available. I'd be surprised if Canon releases a 600 TC and not also a 400 TC.
p.1 #3 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
SoCalJorden wrote:
Newbie here on FM. Long time Canon user. Lots of talk on Canon Rumors about a new RF 600 with a built in 1.4x teleconverter that is supposedly being announced in Q4 this year and shipped early Q1 next year. The latest article dropped yesterday about it. But rumors are rumors, may not even come to fruition for a long time. Already let down not getting an R7 ii upgrade this year. Could have used that for Yellowstone. Long story short. I just got back from Yellowstone. Brought my RF 400 2.8, my 1.4x and 2x extenders with my R5ii. Loved it for the most part. But realized I never shoot bare 400, always with an extender in Yellowstone. Even with the roadside bears most were shot at 560 or 800. So I’ll be listing my Rf 400 for sale soon. Was going to pull the trigger on an RF 600. But I think I might wait to see if this new lens comes to fruition. Changing out teleconverters while you’re watching the wildlife on the move gets old rather quickly. Just curious of everyone’s thots on it all.
I've used the RF 600 enough to not find it best for me, especially the ridiculous length that busts the camera bags. I suppose if you need 840/5.6 in RF it makes sense compared to other options like the 600/4 IS III +1.4x EF. I just decided to keep using my 500/4 IS II + 1.4x until or if Canon ever makes some modern big teles. Canon seem to have lost the plot and being focused on video. The mid-res 45MP and low-res pro bodies futher lessen my interest. Sony now has 50% more pixels. Nikon has some nice lenses but other issues. You have to live in the present though.
p.1 #5 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
Another vote for RF 600. If you can find one for a good deal, grab it. You probably won't lose much when reselling it. As well, who knows when the new version will make its debut. It was rumored to have already been released and we see how that went!
p.1 #6 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
Don't sell the built in 1.4x short. We'll see if it shows up. Very helpful for bird photography. After a trip with those whose equipment had it, it made me think about switching systems. For years the 500 was my general purpose nature telephoto and the 600 when birds were the primary subject. Only used the 400 f2.8 on Midway for compactness and shallow DOF. In New Zeland the 400 DO for weight and compactness and seeing the trip as mainly scenic.
p.1 #7 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
I'd wait for the new lens, personally.
But if I were on a budget, I would also strongly consider a gently used EF 600mm f/4L IS III. It is, after all, identical to the current RF model, absent the native RF lens protocols. I imagine you could save thousands.
Performance of the 3rd gen EF IS lenses does not seem to be a limitation with current cameras, EF lens protocols or not (but someone with hands-on experience with both lenses should correct me if I am wrong).
p.1 #9 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
For song birds I use the Canon RF 800/5.6 a lot.It has amazing close focusing ability. Sometimes you need the light or the field of view to crop when tracking and the RF 600/4 is best. A hypothetical 600/4 with a built in 1.4x has a lot of "ifs" for me. How much does it weigh? I have the 200-400 with built in tele and rarely use it. It's great when I need it for a bike race or motor sports but you need a tripod always. How close can it focus? Is it really a new design optically or have they just glued on the existing 1.4x? If the latter I rarely take the 1.4x on and off a lot because for a certain shooting range I either need it or I don't. So why not keep the flexibility? Will the focusing speed of the lens improve? That's a big question - I'm questioning if it really will. Having used version I, II, III EF and now RF I'm pretty much in my sweet spot with all RF plus a couple of old EF 300 II and EF 500 II lenses. I've even tried the 1200 RF but it wasn't for me. At least not where I live now due to the climate. To me I like Nikon's design of a slightly slower lens with a built in tele - less weight but the option for reach. I think that is handy. However, I'm very happy with what Canon has before us right now! If it really is a 600/4+1.4x built in I'm not sure I'd buy it based on that alone. In fact I doubt I would unless there was a material improvement that can be demonstrated in real world performance. On the long end I can't argue with what Canon has to offer! There is a reason the big white dominate in sports.
p.1 #11 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
garyvot wrote:
I'd wait for the new lens, personally.
But if I were on a budget, I would also strongly consider a gently used EF 600mm f/4L IS III. It is, after all, identical to the current RF model, absent the native RF lens protocols. I imagine you could save thousands.
Performance of the 3rd gen EF IS lenses does not seem to be a limitation with current cameras, EF lens protocols or not (but someone with hands-on experience with both lenses should correct me if I am wrong).
100% - the EF Mk3 version optically identical to the RF version.
p.1 #12 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
I've been hanging on to my EF600II waiting for either an RF600 TC or some kind of zoom that covers that range/aperture. The RF600 f4 hasn't enticed me in any way. It is technically to large for carry-on and was never really designed around the RF system (control ring etc). I'd wait.
p.1 #13 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
Pete73 wrote:
It is technically to large for carry-on and was never really designed around the RF system (control ring etc). I'd wait.
I haven't flown with a big white in a few years; last time was 2022. I flew with the EF 800/5.6 and didn't have an issue. Have the limits changed in the past few years?
p.1 #14 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
Carry on limits haven't changed AFAIK for US carriers. Air Canada tweaked theirs recently, increasing width to 15.5" and reducing length by 0.5", I think to purposely screw with everyone who has 22" long bags and cases based on US carry-on "standards" of 9x14x22" (also Air Canada's previous carry-on limits), though I have yet to be challenged by Air Canada on recent flights. The aircraft overhead bins certainly haven't changed and still fit 22" luggage.
I believe the big changes with carry-on are in the EU where there is a proposed new standard for all airlines flying into and out of the EU. Sounds like it will be ~39"/100cm total length (L+W+D) (US airlines allow 45" total length with no weight restriction)... and a measly 7kg.
Back in the days with the EF 600/4L IS v1, which at 18" long, I was able to just barely fit it in a Pelican 1510 case, which is 9x14x22" externally. IIRC it wasn't really a problem of length but rather the diameter of the hood was such that there was some deformation of the lid when closed. FWIW, the RF 600 is 18.6" long.
The RF 800/5.6 is actually slightly smaller than the RF 600/4; both in diameter and about 1.5" shorter. Therefore theoretically easier to pack for carry-on.
Last year I had a weekend motorsports event with the RF 600/4 and my impression was that it was basically an EF lens in respect to AF and IS performance, which of course wasn't surprising because it's the EF version with an RF mount on it instead. AF was fast and IS worked, but not as seemingly instantaneous compared to a true ground up RF design, such as the 100-300, which IMO demonstrates faster AF and IS that 'spins up' faster without the 'floating' effect not uncommon with IS in EF lenses. Therefore I think a set of true redesigned-for-mirrorless super-teles would bring faster AF and more stable IS like in the 100-300 and 70-200Z. I'm not saying the RF 400 or 600 are poor performers. Just saying that there is room for improvement as Canon has demonstrated with the 100-300 and the competition has with their native mirrorless super-teles.
p.1 #15 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
The question to ask yourself is can you wait and hope the 600 materializes while selling your 400. By waiting you are maximizing the selling price of your 400 but you are without a big white for shooting.
By buying a 600 now if you decide you want the rumoured 600 if it comes to fruition you will then need to sell the 600 to buy the new 600. As others have mentioned the new 600 will cost more and the resell price of the 600 you bought will drop on the announcement.
Myself I asked the question about my 400 and I decided to sell now while the price is high. Mind you I have a backup option to cover the 400. I can use my 100-500L or 800L. Mind you neither is an F2.8 but I can make do with no additional expense until such time the new big whites are announced.
p.1 #16 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
As to flying - The size and weight limits are a non-issue if you carry your gear in a backpack and have it on your back. The following is my standard kit and it fits into a single Lowepro that fits into every overhead on Earth.
EF 600 II w/ 1.4x TC II attached
RF 100-500
R5
Swaro ATX-65 spotting scope
Zeiss Victory SF 8x42 binoculars
MacBook Air
Bose noise cancelling headphones
Chargers, cables, batteries, etc
I am a birding/photo guide for Tropical Birding and am currently in Iceland. I had no issues on my internal flight from Reykjavik to Akureyri - and that was on a small prop plane with a 2x2 seat layout. Nor did I have any issues in traveling to (and all internal flights within) Ghana, Colombia, Vietnam, Thailand, Chile, Australia, UK, Germany, and South Africa in the last year. Much is made of airline restrictions, but I don't have issues despite carrying a bag that weighs upwards of 30 pounds on 30+ flights per year. In ten years of non-stop birding and photo travel, I have had the backpack weighed once, on a Turkish Airlines flight from San Francisco to Istanbul in 2022. Carry on limit was 8kg; my bag was 18kg. I showed them what was in the bag, explained the equipment and cost; They said, "Carry it on. We want nothing to do with that."
p.1 #17 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
Which is why in Canada and the USA I'm glad that carry-on weight restrictions were eliminated around 10 years ago (though some LCCs have retained them). It's just one less potential hassle to deal with. And my recent trip to Asia a month ago also went smoothly despite those airlines all publishing 7-10kg limits.
But, based on my own several decades of experience traveling with this type of gear, it does not mean it won't or can't happen. In my own case when Air Canada used to have a 10kg limit, several times I had to deal with check-in staff who would not allow my carry-on because it was over 10kg, even though the aircraft could easily handle the Pelican 1510 case. They required me to check the case, which meant I basically repacked everything in other bags (brought as back up) and also carried the super-tele bare onto the plane. It was stupid, but it happened. Other times they would require me to remove equipment to meet the weight limit, but of course, once away from the counter, I'd just put it back in and never be challenged about it at the gate. It got to the point where I would park at the airport, go to the check-in counter without my carry-on to check-in my luggage, then retrieve my carry-on from the car. And sometimes even re-park my car at a lower cost offsite lot for longer trips. I'm so glad that's pretty much over here in Canada.
Some commuter type aircraft do have very tight overhead bins that will not fit, or might just fit 9" thick cases/bags (based on my own experience). Indeed a backpack offers more flexibility because it's not rigid, so with creative packing it can be stuffed into tighter spaces and is one reason I'm now using a Tenba Roadie Backpack 22 rather than a roller case. It's certainly wise to have additional options and a plan in case that airline agent won't back down. You may never need it, but when you do...
p.1 #18 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
After the whole 200-500 f/4 / 300-600 and R72 predictions, you trust that site?
hypothetically if a new rf 600 f/4 is was coming out, the question i will have is, what will the quality and durability be with the built in TC and what will the price be? I am betting it will be $2000-$3000 more than the current option. but it's all speculation. You also have the factor of the built in 1.4x. Will it create any issues or will it be flawless and produce flawless results. Built in TC has moving parts and is not as simple as just slapping a piece of glass that magnifies your focal length. We shall see.
I have access to new RF 600 f/4 and will be selling my personal RF 600 f/4 at the end of June - not because of some rumored lens, but because i believe the RF 400 2.8 fits my needs much better. The wildlife trips i lead and the amount of time i spend in yellowstone each year - 7-8 months, I can make the RF 400 2.8 work. Do i use the 400 w/ the 1.4x or 2x attached, yes, quite often, but i can switch on and off extremely fast. Is the 600 a better lens for yellowstone, maybe. Sometimes that 2.8 comes is really handy in low light.
Also i have a EF 400 2.8 IS III (that is now for sale) and have used both the EF 1.4x iii and 2x iii and got extremely sharp results with both. Maybe you can "lessen the blow" by buying an 600 f/4 EF III lens.
I have several clients i helped acquire the RF 600 f/4 recently and they do not care about a rumored lens that may show up in 2027 or beyond. They care about being able to use a tool now, and they are upping their wildlife game.
At the end of the day it's all about you. Do you want it now? will it benefit your life now? If not wait - but who knows when those rumored new lenses will be available for purchase and you could be waiting a long long time and creating
p.1 #19 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
The "New type of teleconverter" was also coming (as in the then-current quarter or next) 3 years ago. I won't post a link, you can google it. If you are holding your breath, your face will turn purple.
p.1 #20 · Would you buy an RF 600 f/4 now? Or wait for the new RF 600 f4 with built in 1.4x teleconverter?
A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. I'd buy what's available now. It will hold its value. If you want to save a bit up front and are Ok with it, buying one lightly used is also a good idea. That way, your selling price (assuming you intend to buy the new one eventually) will be even closer to your purchase price.
