True experts can rate based on brand alone.Sorry to say this: You are old-fashioned. The modern experts are capable of rating camera’s and lenses by their rumored spec’s.
Upvote
0
Canon RF 300-600mm f/5.6L IS USM: What to Expect and When It Might Land
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Using a lottery system to place kids in a "magnet" program is "A celebration of mediocrity. Fail."
This f/5.6 lens is some kind of compromise that doesn't appeal to you but Canon is betting on.
Upvote
0
While I'd love to get this lens, at anything over $5,000, no thanks. And $8,000-10,000 becomes laughable territory. If it were f/4, $8-10k makes sense, but for a f/5.6? Nikon's 200-500mm f/5.6 is a bit old now, but it has great optics and is fairly lightweight, and it still sells for only $1,400. Obviously, birders would prefer the extra 100mm at the long end, but $7,000-9,000 more for an extra 100mm? Or an extra $2,000-4,000 to lose a stop of light compared to the aforementioned Sigma? A lot of people already have the RF100-500, so to justify spending $8k+ to gain 100mm and step up from f/7.1 to f/5.6 is tough. Hopefully the price estimate is off, because it doesn't make sense.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
yes- I don't need to see or test a lens if it lacks the 200-300 range and is 5.6 rather than 4 for what I use it for. I currently am using the 200-400 f/4 with the built in converter. I don't use the converter from roughly 11am to 2pm because of the harsh light. I was really hoping for a 200-500 f/4. Yes, that would have been an expensive lens but for professionals it's the price of admission. Producing a lens of lower specs so you can sell to the masses is a celebration of mediocrity. It's a kin to going to see the unveiling of a new car thinking you'll see the new mustang and having Ford pull the cover off the new...Pinto. Now I understand this is still in the rumor stage but also understand my response is to the rumor. We'll see what the reality is.Without having seen or tested this lens???
Upvote
0
The Fred is not the smartest cookie around... Sigma 300-600 F4 is probably one of the heaviest lenses I tried and he should have just bought RF 100-300 2.8 and 2x TC.
I guarantee the focus is faster than on Sigma and the IQ is on par if not better with TC. Plus you get 200-600mm range (and 100-300 at the same time).
So I would not take any advice from Fred
I guarantee the focus is faster than on Sigma and the IQ is on par if not better with TC. Plus you get 200-600mm range (and 100-300 at the same time).
So I would not take any advice from Fred
Upvote
0
From the reviews I have seen the Sigma is no slouch in the IQ department. Big and heavy? yes. AF speed not super fast? yes.
I am sure the 100-300 had the edge in IQ, but also with the 2x TC? I'll need more than your guarantee to believe that, sorry
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Watched some wildlife photographers' reviews to see what they say about the RF 100-300 f/2.8 with the 2x TC. Not really surprising, in my opinion.
Jan Wegener, in his review of the RF100-300 f/2.8 says that his results with the TC were "quite soft wide open." He needed to stop down to f/8 or f/11 and then he got very good results.
Fabian Fopp: Comparing the RF 100-300 with 2x TC to his RF 100-500, he found the RF 100-500 is noticeably sharper at 500mm.
Duade Paton: Found the lens "quite disappointing" with the 2x TC, wide open.
Upvote
0
I actually had a chance to test the Sigma at the pop up store. And as said it is extremely heavy and not the fastest. Although IQ was good.
I own 100-300 and 2x and AF is almost not affected by TC. I mean I literally cannot tell it´s noticably slower.
All other owners of the combo will tell you the same and there are a lot of photos out there to prove it. I have a bunch of them on my social media profile.
First, @Del Paso didn't say it. Second, the point was lost on you. Third, I never said or implied exceptional. Lastly I find it interesting that you used the word paradigm when the first definition is
1.
a typical example or pattern of something; a model.
Typical. not exceptional.
I chose an example that even the simplest of minds could understand.
Upvote
0
Oh I see - you meant the TC 2x does not affect the AF speed, not image quality. My misunderstanding
Upvote
0
Seems likely this will be heavily based on the RF 100-300mm f/2.8 L IS USM , basically same chassis, size weight and price but pretty niche I would have thought as specs are only slightly better than the much cheaper Sony 200-600mm and similar lenses from Nikon, etc.
I would prefer Canon to make a mark ii version of the RF 100-300mm f/2.8 L IS USM with builtin 1.4x and 2x extenders to have the best of both worlds:
I would prefer Canon to make a mark ii version of the RF 100-300mm f/2.8 L IS USM with builtin 1.4x and 2x extenders to have the best of both worlds:
- 100-300mm f/2.8
- 140-420mm f/4
- 200-600mm f/5.6
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Well in that case, It's like expecting to see the unveiling of an 992 and Porsche lifting the cover on a 914. Better?
Upvote
0
Recently heard the 200 - 500 was scrapped because leadership at the top of Canon, who where over seeing design, were also scrapped? Wow, has this been factually confirmed? And that the 300 - 600 is the new leadership's pet project? Really? Wonder if the development division also had cuts at the beginning of the year, that might explain why it's taking soooooooooo long for the MAJOR firmware fixes for R1 and R5II.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Shocking!By the way, your post got misunderstood by "the simplest of minds"...
Upvote
0
That would be be surprising to say the least. I have no idea if it is true or not.
Upvote
0
Now I’m wondering if all release eyes for lower f-stop big whites are on Milan in Italy for the 2026 Olympics in February. The big lens I saw in St Peter’s square yesterday were huge an amazing looking. They all look like they had amazing reach for shots at dusk.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
