Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

  

  Previous versions of nmerc_photos's message #16524008 « Super telephoto lens rumors? »

  

nmerc_photos
Online
Upload & Sell: On
Re: Super telephoto lens rumors?


AmbientMike wrote:
Canon Rf 800/5.6 is over 3 lbs lighter than the 10lb Nikon 800/5.6 some are apparently still using over the 800pf. So the Canon is not so embarrassing, after all

Canon has more super telephotos than anyone else. Led with the 1st <7lb 600/4, lighter 100-500 vs the 200-600 and 200-500 and then came out going to 800mm on their zoom. Rhe Rf 100-400 is probably the lightest 100-400 available, and you might not like f/11, but it looks pretty usable especially on ff. And the competition on under 3lb 800mm (the 600/11 is closer to 2lbs IIRC) is pretty thin.

So i don't buy into arguments that Canon isn't competing or innovating. They are.



As everyone has already said, the RF 800 F5.6 is garbage when considering price to performance. You need to stop picking the worst parts of Canon's lineup and trying to use them in your arguments lol.

You can't argue about the RF 800/5.6 being so much lighter, when the IQ is so much lesser. It would be one thing if the two lenses were comparable in IQ - but they're not.

Canon's wildlife lenses are embarrassing currently. Full stop. No ifs, ands, or butts.

Based on your responses, I'm guessing you've never used many of the lenses and bodies that you're trying to discuss. Which is pretty silly.

Canon only has "more super telephotos than anyone else" if you include decades of old lenses that nobody wants to use. People only use them if they don't have a choice.

the RF 100-500 and RF 200-800 are the only innovations Canon has shown for wildlife in a long time



Apr 15, 2024 at 09:13 AM
nmerc_photos
Online
Upload & Sell: On
Re: Super telephoto lens rumors?


AmbientMike wrote:
Canon Rf 800/5.6 is over 3 lbs lighter than the 10lb Nikon 800/5.6 some are apparently still using over the 800pf. So the Canon is not so embarrassing, after all

Canon has more super telephotos than anyone else. Led with the 1st <7lb 600/4, lighter 100-500 vs the 200-600 and 200-500 and then came out going to 800mm on their zoom. Rhe Rf 100-400 is probably the lightest 100-400 available, and you might not like f/11, but it looks pretty usable especially on ff. And the competition on under 3lb 800mm (the 600/11 is closer to 2lbs IIRC) is pretty thin.

So i don't buy into arguments that Canon isn't competing or innovating. They are.



As everyone has already said, the RF 800 F5.6 is garbage when considering price to performance. You need to stop picking the worst parts of Canon's lineup and trying to use them in your arguments lol.

You can't argue about the RF 800/5.6 being so much lighter, when the IQ is so much lesser. It would be one thing if the two lenses were comparable in IQ - but they're not.

Canon's wildlife lenses are embarrassing currently. Full stop. No ifs, ands, or butts.

Based on your responses, I'm guessing you've never used many of the lenses and bodies that you're trying to discuss. Which is pretty silly.

Canon only has "more super telephotos than anyone else" if you include decades of old lenses that nobody wants to use. People only use them if they don't have a choice.

the RF 100-500 and RF 200-800 are the only innovations Canon has shown for wildlife in a long time




Apr 15, 2024 at 08:22 AM





  Previous versions of nmerc_photos's message #16524008 « Super telephoto lens rumors? »

 




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