A new super telephoto lens will be announced soon

Bonich said:

I doubt you have ever seriously used a 800 f11 for birds, ...
Other than WalMart they offer sharpness, great IS and good AF.

But the most relevant thing: They provide a market opener with unbeaten price, weight and size for an 800mm prime lens.

Click to expand...

I doubted the RF 600/800mm F11´s as well, until I actually purchased the 600mm. Honestly, it is a great package and IQ is really good. I even took some shots with the RF 2x extender at F22 and they look great. It is an option no other system offers and that really opens up opportunity to people who'd never in a million years could a big white 600/800mm. I'd love to see more of these lenses and I might get the 800mm one day. I only sold the 600mm because its focal length was so close to the RF 100-500mm.

neuroanatomist said:

Unlike many regular posters here, you have never shared images, and from a quick peruse never helped anyone out with technical advice. Your comments seem to mainly be in the form of complaints, about Canon or other forum members. Given that, if you're really 'out' then it's no real loss to the community.

Click to expand...

You couldn't miss an opportunity to insult another poster. Dealing with you is like dealing with my sister, and that is a serious insult indeed.

rontele7 said:

Please no more f/11 lenses. WalMart sells disposable film cameras with faster lenses

Click to expand...

My RF 600mm f/11 is great, and I'm pretty sure it easily outresolves any disposables from Walmart. The f/11 is the only reason I can afford/justify buying a long prime, so I say: release more and longer f/11s!

Somewhere in this thread i read about the very old 200mm 1.8 L and the also aged 300 4.0 which would be quiet amazing lenses if Canon would redesign them and hurl them at the market at reasonable prices....but there are barriers of course some obvious some not.

I live in Germany but from time to time I visit China and despite wight limits to my baggage usually bring one of my old veteran lenses with me for repair or an overhaul. The Wukesong camera city has some marvelous old maitenance guys and the used equipment dealers provide them with many a sparepart from their camera graveyards.

For the 200mm 1.8 L and my quiet old 400 2.8 L I was told by those maintenance veterans that any new lens like the 1.8 would crash through the price barrier because of the lead they used to make the lens at the time. I'm not talking about the lead in the solder for the electric part but the lead thy used when creating and polishing the lenses. According to them the years long gap between the last sold 200 1.8 and the later 200 2.0 was due to developing a substitute process for using lead and the prices started climbing significantly afterwards

Furthermore I believe the samurai who wanted to have the quickest draw have left the management of Canon long ago. All the disadvantages the 50mm 1.0 has compared to slower lenses, The awkward handling and size of the 200 1.8 versus the 200 2.8 seemed to have tamed the Canoneers who aimed to produce the fastest lenses arround. Seems the F11 is the new 1.8

But I agree, a new 300 F4 L would be sweet. Anyone who has the fortune to own the 300 F4 and a R7, try once to switch the R7 to silent mode, continous AF and in a quiet environment start shooting the buffer empty. The sound of a first generation USM drive throwing the lenses arround complemented by the stakkato of the IS being constantly triggered and released is an eye (ear) opener to what level engineers have brought the IS and focusing technology in recent years.

Exploreshootshare said:

Well, there go my hopes No, you're right, it'll be around 7.000 €. I'm just tempted with an F2 super tele, but I don't see me buying it ever. Less than 5.000 € as a preowned might be worth a a thought in like 2032 or so.

Click to expand...

A 200mm f1.8 is around $2500, the f2 $3500, and 300mm 2.8 IS is around $2000. Heck, even 400mm 2.8 IS is now just $3000. Can't say I am not tempted.

You do have to have decent strength to lug them around though.

northlarch said:

Like the original commenter, I’ve been reading this forum for years but don’t contribute much here. I see the same 5-10 people in here commenting on the majority of the posts with a few occasional posters. You guys have your little group of Canon warriors and bully, shame, and “ridicule” as another poster commented as justified. You guys continue to enjoy your little circle jerk, that’s fine, but don’t expect the forum to be a diverse mix of opinions if you’re jerks to everyone else. Have fun with that—I’m out. Canon gets the community they deserve, I guess.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, if that's the conclusion you've reached, your contributions won't be missed, and the forum will be better off without them.

mandog said:

I think they could basically take the RF800/11, reduce the FL, and add an aperture ring to get an RF400/5.6. But they would also have to upgrade the body from plastic to metal and weather seal it to make it an RF400/5.6L. Maybe additive composite?

Click to expand...

A 400 5.6 baby brother to the 800 f/11 is a nice idea.

Bob Howland said:

You couldn't miss an opportunity to insult another poster. Dealing with you is like dealing with my sister, and that is a serious insult indeed.

Click to expand...

Where is the insult?

Bob Howland said:

You couldn't miss an opportunity to insult another poster. Dealing with you is like dealing with my sister, and that is a serious insult indeed.

Click to expand...

So in your opinion me stating, “You don’t contribute anything except complaints and you won’t be missed,” constitutes a serious insult?

But @northlarch stating, “You’re a bunch of jerks and bullies with superiority complexes, and you really suck,” that’s not insulting at all?

Sure, Bob. Whatever.

scyrene said:

A 400 5.6 baby brother to the 800 f/11 is a nice idea.

Click to expand...

Canon has had a beautiful 400mm f/5.6 for 30 years. Great lens! I would take it any day over an f/11 joke lens.

Bonich said:

I doubt you have ever seriously used a 800 f11 for birds, ...
Other than WalMart they offer sharpness, great IS and good AF.

But the most relevant thing: They provide a market opener with unbeaten price, weight and size for an 800mm prime lens.

Click to expand...

Disposables don't need AF because everything is in focus!

As far as sharpness...if you're shooting at ISO 3200 in broad daylight just to get an action stopping shutter speed, how concerned could you really be with sharpness? Lol.

mxwphoto said:

Welp, NASA is D00MED!!! View attachment 207239

Click to expand...

Oh boy, this is a pretty embarrassing way to admit you didn't realize that the Hubble's focal length is roughly 60,000mm and uses exposure times in the realm of 15-25 minutes.

Are you doing a lot of 25 minute exposures with your f/11 toy lens? Lmao.

rontele7 said:

Oh boy, this is a pretty embarrassing way to admit you didn't realize that the Hubble's focal length is roughly 60,000mm and uses exposure times in the realm of 15-25 minutes.

Are you doing a lot of 25 minute exposures with your f/11 toy lens? Lmao.

Click to expand...

I think the poster may have been humorously pointing out that lenses with even very narrow apertures can still take good pictures. But I guess humour is in the f/1.8 eye of the beholder.

And, for goodness sake, of course the RF 600 and 800 f/11 lenses aren't toys. Refer to any of the major detailed reviews, in the event you have an interest in the subject beyond trolling.

rontele7 said:

Please no more f/11 lenses. WalMart sells disposable film cameras with faster lenses

Click to expand...

Oh boy, this is a pretty embarrassing way to admit you didn't realize that the typical disposable camera at Walmart has a focal length of about 30mm.

rontele7 said:

...As far as sharpness...if you're shooting at ISO 3200 in broad daylight just to get an action stopping shutter speed, how concerned could you really be with sharpness? Lol.

Click to expand...

Have you shot any of the R bodies (I use the R5 and R3)? They both perform very well, not only at 3200, but at even higher ISOs.

rontele7 said:

Disposables don't need AF because everything is in focus!

Click to expand...

Not really. If you crop down to 600-800 mm equivalent, you will see that everything is out of focus.

rontele7 said:

As far as sharpness...if you're shooting at ISO 3200 in broad daylight just to get an action stopping shutter speed, how concerned could you really be with sharpness? Lol.

Click to expand...

When I used 5D2 to take photos, I was really afraid to shoot at ISO 3200.

None of these f/11 lenses can be mounted on a 5D2, so, not a concern anymore.

Bonich said:

The RF 135 1.8 is double the price of the G-Master here around.
No, I will not buy, rather take a Sony ...

Click to expand...

You could quadruple the price and I still wouldn’t go to that horrible camera system

MoodyCat said:

I've been a reader of this site for about 7 years, but never made an account. I just did, just to reply to your comment. Um.. do you realize that Nikon's 500 5.6 pf has been getting sold like crazy since it's release? I really don't think you understand just how amazing a 3k 500 5.6 is.. "perhaps canon knows something you don't"... While implying a 500 5.6 won't sell? Thats a little bit delusional. The 500 pf, 200-500, and now the 400 4.5 which overlap each other still exist because Nikon gives option to us mere mortals that can't buy a 10k lens. Canon's 100-400 ii is amazing but no it's not at the level of the 500pf (of course it's cheaper), neither is the 100-500 which is f7.1 and not quite as sharp.. anyway.. its very obvious why canon hasnt released a 500 5.6.

Click to expand...

I suggest you join the 13% of Nikon users, cause nikon seems to know better right?

mpmark said:

You could quadruple the price and I still wouldn’t go to the Sony camera system

Click to expand...

Same here.
And there are still many EF 135 F2 available, even new ones.

MoodyCat said:

I've been a reader of this site for about 7 years, but never made an account. I just did, just to reply to your comment. Um.. do you realize that Nikon's 500 5.6 pf has been getting sold like crazy since it's release? I really don't think you understand just how amazing a 3k 500 5.6 is.. "perhaps canon knows something you don't"... While implying a 500 5.6 won't sell? Thats a little bit delusional. The 500 pf, 200-500, and now the 400 4.5 which overlap each other still exist because Nikon gives option to us mere mortals that can't buy a 10k lens. Canon's 100-400 ii is amazing but no it's not at the level of the 500pf (of course it's cheaper), neither is the 100-500 which is f7.1 and not quite as sharp.. anyway.. its very obvious why canon hasnt released a 500 5.6. it would be too affordable and people wont buy the 400 do.

Also you said "..... Personally want something"..SO MANY people have been asking for an update to the now *30* year old 400 5.6, and the 25 year old 300 f4. Canon hasn't even bothered. Cmon. In 30 years they couldve updated it twice. Again, the reason behind it is very clear.

Click to expand...

This post is specifically about a “expensive” premium telephoto that may be coming, and yet you come in here, hijack the thread making us listen to reasons why you hate it and what canon should be doing instead. I could care less if you can’t afford it. I’m looking to own a newer version of the premium lenses so I’m interested in it. I don’t need to here your ego rambling on about your displeasure for what canon is not doing for you.

Why don’t you patienlty wait for the thread that talks about the lens you’re interested in (like I did) or jump ship to another system if you hate it so much. I don’t care to listen to your whining.