Can Canon Compete ?

[mebephoto]

So I recently I went birding with a couple of friends . Both of them just bought the Nikon z8 and Nikons 800mm 6.3 .One of them just dumped all of her canon gear R5 and 100-500. So I. have to admit I am a bit jealous that 800mm Lens is very very nice . the quality is amazing. Do you think Canon will have a lens comparable? In no way do I want to switch systems. But I do want more reach and a faster lens. Just dreaming passing time waiting on the new releases .

 

[neuroanatomist]

So I recently I went birding with a couple of friends . Both of them just bought the Nikon z8 and Nikons 800mm 6.3 .One of them just dumped all of her canon gear R5 and 100-500. So I. have to admit I am a bit jealous that 800mm Lens is very very nice . the quality is amazing. Do you think Canon will have a lens comparable? In no way do I want to switch systems. But I do want more reach and a faster lens. Just dreaming passing time waiting on the new releases .

Canon has the RF 800/5.6L and the RF 800/11. What you really mean is will Canon make lens that fits between those two in terms of aperture and price. No one knows.

Here's a question for you...can Nikon compete with the 800/11? There are those who want reach but cannot afford $6500 for the Nikon 800/6.3, much less $17000 for the Canon 800/5.6. Will Nikon have a comparably affordable lens?

Meanwhile, you can buy the excellent EF 600/4 II used for about the price of the Nikon 800/6.3, and when you add the 1.4xIII you get 840mm f/5.6 with excellent IQ. I've been using that combo for birds for over a decade.

 

[stillviking]

Nikon new fixed telelens are just amazing. Also they have a new 40mm pancake. I'm also constantly debating wanting to go Nikon, but I've had everything Canon and I hope they release as many lenses as possible quickly!

 

[Kit.]

Weird topic title.

My wife goes birding with RF 100-400, as RF 100-500 would be too heavy to her. Can Nikon compete?

 

[frankchn]

Meanwhile, you can buy the excellent EF 600/4 II used for about the price of the Nikon 800/6.3, and when you add the 1.4xIII you get 840mm f/5.6 with excellent IQ. I've been using that combo for birds for over a decade.

I don't think it is quite fair to compare used prices to new, because you can get a used Nikon 800/6.3 for $4000 on eBay too.

The new PF lenses are also significantly lighter (800 PF = 2,385g, EF 600 II + 1.4x 3,945g + 225g = 4170g, RF 800L = 3,140g) than the EF or RF equivalents. I can personally haul around an R3 + 100-300L no problem (similar weight as the Z9 + 800 PF), but hauling around an R3 + a EF 400 or 600L II gets old pretty fast.

Canon is a pioneer in the DO lens game, and I hope they will release more mid-range teles with DO in the future.

 

[neuroanatomist]

...hauling around an R3 + a EF 400 or 600L II gets old pretty fast.

I'm ok with it, but I don't go out to shoot birds every day.

 

[mebephoto]

Weird topic title.

My wife goes birding with RF 100-400, as RF 100-500 would be too heavy to her. Can Nikon compete?

well the weird topic is as such.. the 100-500 is a very slow lens you throw a 1.4 now you are at f10 very slow . So if you buy the 800 f11 you are super slow. I just feel that the 800 6.3 is that middle ground especially when you add in the cost .. canon rf 800 5.6 is a tremendous amount of money .NIkon also produces a 180-600 6.3 so I definitely say that they compete

 

[neuroanatomist]

well the weird topic is as such.. the 100-500 is a very slow lens you throw a 1.4 now you are at f10 very slow . So if you buy the 800 f11 you are super slow. I just feel that the 800 6.3 is that middle ground especially when you add in the cost .. canon rf 800 5.6 is a tremendous amount of money .

The subject content is clear. The title of the topic, "Can Canon Compete ?," is asinine. Canon dominates the camera market. If someone wants to define 'being competitive' as making the lens they personally want, they have no one to blame but themselves when they end up looking foolish.

So, you're right – the 800/6.3 is a nice middle ground that Canon doesn't offer. Just as the 800/11 is a nice budget option that Nikon doesn't offer. As far as user base, the Canon 800/11 is far more competitive than the Nikon 800/6.3

 

[AlanF]

Weird topic title.

My wife goes birding with RF 100-400, as RF 100-500 would be too heavy to her. Can Nikon compete?

So does my wife and so do I when travelling light and inconspicuous. When I want 800mm, I use the RF 200-800mm. It might be narrower and a bit less IQ than the PF 800mm, but it weighs over 500gm less than the PF with its hood, and can zoom with a much shorter mfd and pack into a smaller case. For me, an 800mm prime is not versatile enough but the zoom is. YMMV.

 

[AlanF]

well the weird topic is as such.. the 100-500 is a very slow lens you throw a 1.4 now you are at f10 very slow . So if you buy the 800 f11 you are super slow. I just feel that the 800 6.3 is that middle ground especially when you add in the cost .. canon rf 800 5.6 is a tremendous amount of money .NIkon also produces a 180-600 6.3 so I definitely say that they compete

Now you are into silly comments. The 100-500mm is not a very slow lens - it's only a 1/3rd stop slower than the 800mm f/6.3. If the 100-500mm is very slow, then so is the 800/6.3.

 

[mebephoto]

Canon has the RF 800/5.6L and the RF 800/11. What you really mean is will Canon make lens that fits between those two in terms of aperture and price. No one knows.

Here's a question for you...can Nikon compete with the 800/11? There are those who want reach but cannot afford $6500 for the Nikon 800/6.3, much less $17000 for the Canon 800/5.6. Will Nikon have a comparably affordable lens?

Meanwhile, you can buy the excellent EF 600/4 II used for about the price of the Nikon 800/6.3, and when you add the 1.4xIII you get 840mm f/5.6 with excellent IQ. I've been using that combo for birds for over a decade.

yes this numbers game can be statistically manipulated in whatever favor we would like. I guess for 6 k having the 800 seems like a good deal . when our 800 5

Now you are into silly comments. The 100-500mm is not a very slow lens - it's only a 1/3rd stop slower than the 800mm f/6.3. If the 100-500mm is very slow, then so is the 800/6.3.

ok sir !! I feel f10 at 700 mm is slow .. agree to disagree?

 

[mebephoto]

and honestly this is not about weight thats not what im discussing . I am a paraplegic and have for 30 years so I know a few things about weight and portability

 

[mebephoto]

The subject content is clear. The title of the topic, "Can Canon Compete ?," is asinine. Canon dominates the camera market. If someone wants to define 'being competitive' as making the lens they personally want, they have no one to blame but themselves when they end up looking foolish.

So, you're right – the 800/6.3 is a nice middle ground that Canon doesn't offer. Just as the 800/11 is a nice budget option that Nikon doesn't offer. As far as user base, the Canon 800/11 is far more competitive than the Nikon 800/6.3

so to belittle me and call me asinine is quite frankly a very childish comment . dominating anything is very subjective .

 

[neuroanatomist]

so to belittle me and call me asinine is quite frankly a very childish comment .

The comment is asinine. Canon is more than competitive, by any objective definition. Asking if they can compete (which the OP did, not you) is silly. Make a ridiculous comment, don't be surprised by ridicule.

dominating anything is very subjective .

Leading a market for over two decades and maintaining a nearly 50% market share. Yeah, very subjective.

 

[AlanF]

yes this numbers game can be statistically manipulated in whatever favor we would like. I guess for 6 k having the 800 seems like a good deal . when our 800 5

ok sir !! I feel f10 at 700 mm is slow .. agree to disagree?

You wrote that the 100-500mm is very slow. Do you deny that? If you put a 1.4xTC on the f/6.3 and you have f/9, only 1/3rd stop faster than f/10.

 

[Quack]

So I recently I went birding with a couple of friends . Both of them just bought the Nikon z8 and Nikons 800mm 6.3 .One of them just dumped all of her canon gear R5 and 100-500. So I. have to admit I am a bit jealous that 800mm Lens is very very nice . the quality is amazing. Do you think Canon will have a lens comparable? In no way do I want to switch systems. But I do want more reach and a faster lens. Just dreaming passing time waiting on the new releases .

Like anyone, you should get the equipment that best suits your needs. Nikon certainly has lens offerings that Canon does not, and the reverse is also true. Each company has their priorities and philosophies when it comes to the cameras and lenses they make. Since none of us has a crystal ball, there is always a chance that lenses may be released that we do not expect. My personal opinion is that Canon seems to create lenses, for the most part, that are affordable consumer lenses and expensive pro lenses. They rarely go into that middle ground that you might be looking for. So, no, I do not think Canon will release anything like an 800mm f/6.3. While switching systems is not easy financially, you should not rule it out, if you can afford it. Buying used or refurbished is one way to help a bit.

 

[mebephoto]

You wrote that the 100-500mm is very slow. Do you deny that? If you put a 1.4xTC on the f/6.3 and you have f/9, only 1/3rd stop faster than f/10.

you are missing the point to achieve the said magnification with a 100-500 it requires a 1.4 and even then you are still 100 mm short of 800 mm and yes that is slow .

 

[mebephoto]

The comment is asinine. Canon is more than competitive, by any objective definition. Asking if they can compete (which the OP did, not you) is silly. Make a ridiculous comment, don't be surprised by ridicule.


Leading a market for over two decades and maintaining a nearly 50% market share. Yeah, very subjective.

ok boss cant deny your statistics

 

[AlanF]

you are missing the point to achieve the said magnification with a 100-500 it requires a 1.4 and even then you are still 100 mm short of 800 mm and yes that is slow .

You are missing the point in general. You are comparing apples and pears. The 800mm f/6.3 is a niche prime lens - great for long distances, not ideal for BIF with that narrow field of view, and a minimum focal distance of 5m/16.4', which limits its use. It's fulfilling a different function from the RF 100-500mm, which is a very light by comparison versatile zoom that is great for close up at near macro levels with its mfd of almost down to a metre and great for BIF. And, as I wrote, Canon has a 200-800mm zoom if you want a longer native lens.

 

[mebephoto]

You are missing the point in general. You are comparing apples and pears. The 800mm f/6.3 is a niche prime lens - great for long distances, not ideal for BIF with that narrow field of view, and a minimum focal distance of 5m/16.4', which limits its use. It's fulfilling a different function from the RF 100-500mm, which is a very light by comparison versatile zoom that is great for close up at near macro levels with its mfd of almost down to a metre and great for BIF. And, as I wrote, Canon has a 200-800mm zoom if you want a longer native lens.

Bud you are the one missing the point what the original question is will Canon make a competitive lens to the nikon 800mm 6.3 neither the 1-500 mm or the 2-800mm are NOT competitive..the question had nothing about BIF or static targets it was about aperture and zoom >> go ahead and twist this conversation any way you feel to keep your ego on top homie .. but the fact of the matter is canon does not make a lens in the price point and zoom/aperture that can clearly compete .