Is A Canon RF 300-600mm f/5.6L IS USM The New Big Zoom That’s Coming?

[Mothernature]

MAN, do you even space out your paragraphs. It sucks to read just like your opinions.

1. You just copy the narrative from those RF 200-800 incidents few days ago. Not every RF 200-800 broke right? And Sony make 400-800 "better" by being much more heavy and expensive.

2. The 300GM and 100-300L is a totally different tool. You are comparing apples to oranges. Just because they share the same 300mm focal length doesn't mean they are in the same segments.

3 & 4. EF400Liii & EF600Liii were released in 2018, RF rehash in 2021. Nikon's supertele primes took 8 years from F to Z. You are making the EF/RF ones not usable if you don't have the lightest&latest gear.

5. Again, you are comparing apples to oranges. Z180-600 belongs the same class with 200-600G, RF 200-800.
100-500L is an evolution of 100-400L, and much better than 100-400GM and Z100-400 equivalents. You are just cherry picking to support your arguments, which is opprobrious.

It's unfortunate to hear you have Err60 plagued your gear. I assume your local Canon failed to fix them. And if you can afford to switch systems, just do it. No one on CR is stopping you.

My main point is that rumours about those Canon "new and improved" wildlife lenses have been so wild and going on for so long that many photographers attracted by the advantages of gear released by Nikon and Sony over the last four to five years have moved on. Many are still hanging in there as it is too expensive to switch gear. So hopefully these loyal Canon Wildlife Photograhers will soon be rewarded with something more than a whole bunch of new rumours! I will refrain from commenting on your writing skills. Based on the maturity that you exhibit in this discussion you are probably in grade school and still learning how to write.

 

[DhlcadR6]

If maturity means not understanding how gears are positioned in the market and resorting to personal attacks, then I would rather remain immature.

 

[Mothernature]

If maturity means not understanding how key gears are positioned in the market and resorting to personal attacks, then I would rather remain immature.

Some like to talk about the gear and assume they know everything about it, others prefer buying the gear, using it in the field and fully enjoying it in the pursuit of their photography interests!

 

[scyrene]

This is not trolling, this is real life experience

Sure, jan.

 

[scyrene]

Based on the maturity that you exhibit in this discussion you are probably in grade school and still learning how to write.

That person's reply was more mature than yours in both style and content, they just disagreed with you - unless you think maturity = whatever you believe?

 

[alFR]

My main point is that rumours about those Canon "new and improved" wildlife lenses have been so wild and going on for so long that many photographers attracted by the advantages of gear released by Nikon and Sony over the last four to five years have moved on.

This is literally not the point you made before.

 

[john1970]

I am thinking that if Canon made this a 300-600 mm f4-f5.6 L internal zoom with DO design (to reduced the weight a size) I would be interested. We shall see what happens. In the past Canon has announced big whites during the month of April so maybe there will be a surprise in the next two weeks.

 

[fox40phil]

I wish Canon would do more like Nikon tele lenses... this makes me crazy to see what is possible on the other side...

Everytime I see a new possible lens like this or even the Sigma 300-600 4.0... I think: if Canon would do this... we would pay even mininum the double price

(think about to put money aside for a Z8II with a 800 6,3f for really shy animals)

 

[john1970]

I wish Canon would do more like Nikon tele lenses... this makes me crazy to see what is possible on the other side...

Everytime I see a new possible lens like this or even the Sigma 300-600 4.0... I think: if Canon would do this... we would pay even mininum the double price

(think about to put money aside for a Z8II with a 800 6,3f for really shy animals)

For the focal length / aperture the Nikon 800 mm f6.3 PF lens is a good choice.

 

[neuroanatomist]

My main point is that rumours about those Canon "new and improved" wildlife lenses have been so wild and going on for so long that many photographers attracted by the advantages of gear released by Nikon and Sony over the last four to five years have moved on. Many are still hanging in there as it is too expensive to switch gear. So hopefully these loyal Canon Wildlife Photograhers will soon be rewarded with something more than a whole bunch of new rumours! I will refrain from commenting on your writing skills. Based on the maturity that you exhibit in this discussion you are probably in grade school and still learning how to write.

You are clearly confused about your main point, since it changes with every post. Or is it that each time your ‘main point’ is soundly refuted you move the goalposts? Yeah.

What data do you have to support this new ‘main point’? Let me guess…you know some people who switched to Nikon or Sony. Sorry, those are anecdotes. Also, is it really your argument that rumors of gear are significantly affecting buying behavior? I guess you think everyone is as gullible or foolish as you.

You claim you have an R1 and R5II and have ‘been through’ several 1-series bodies, but now you imply that you can’t afford to switch systems. I trust you realize that a Nikon Z8 with the 600/6.3 PF costs significantly less than the two Canon bodies you claim to have.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Some like to talk about the gear and assume they know everything about it, others prefer buying the gear, using it in the field and fully enjoying it in the pursuit of their photography interests!

Evidently you’re the former. Others here share the results of using their gear in the field. All you’ve done is whine and complain about your gear.

 

[Tom Raymond]

IMHO the introduction of the RF 100 - 300mm F2.8 was the greatest contribution Canon has made to sports photography. My RF 100 - 500mm and my EF 200-400mm were quickly out the door after the 100-300 came on board. I can see advantages to a 300-600mm, but I would rather see Canon introduce a new RF 600mm F 4.0 with a built in 1.4X as a pairing to my 100-300. Nikon has already introduced such a lens.

 

[Del Paso]

Evidently you’re the former. Others here share the results of using their gear in the field. All you’ve done is whine and complain about your gear.

"All new high-end Canon bodies are unreliable, interesting lenses don't exist, comparing a 100-300's weight to a 300mm prime, competition has everything real users want, pros jump ship etc...".
A very clear case of trolling.

 

[neuroanatomist]

For the focal length / aperture the Nikon 800 mm f6.3 PF lens is a good choice.

Agreed. If I couldn’t handhold my current 840mm f/5.6 (EF 600/4 II + 1.4xIII), I’d get that lens and a Z9 to go behind it.

 

[Del Paso]

Nobody said, "Canon 5.6 is too slow, but Nikon 6.3 exactly what I need," yet?

Nikon's or Sony's f/6,3 will always be better than Canon's f/5,6.
Is it really so hard to understand?

 

[AJ]

My thought is that this lens would be like a 100-300/2.8 with a 2x TC. Except, it doesn't zoom out as far (2x zoom instead of 3x)
This would be a nice birding lens. I own a Sigma 150-600C and I am very very happy with it. This rumored lens would be another step up from there.

 

[EricN]

Nikon's or Sony's f/6,3 will always be better than Canon's f/5,6.
Is it really so hard to understand?

I must be dull and slow.

 

[john1970]

I suspect that a RF 300-600 mm f5.6 would be similar in weight to the current RF 100-300 f2.8 because both lenses would have the same size front element. Might be a bit lighter due to the 2x vs. 3x zoom, but I am speculating here.

 

[MOBelue]

300-600 5.6? One can stay at 5.6 to 363 in the 100-500 and be at 580mm in two quick clicks into crop mode with the R5. The bokeh is the same “look” in crop mode, but “moves forward” with compression. Plus with the 100-500 you still have the 100mm range with even better f stops.

 

[AlanF]

300-600 5.6? One can stay at 5.6 to 363 in the 100-500 and be at 580mm in two quick clicks into crop mode with the R5. The bokeh is the same “look” in crop mode, but “moves forward” with compression. Plus with the 100-500 you still have the 100mm range with even better f stops.

When you click into crop mode is doesn’t change the real focal length or f-number (it’s just the same result as cropping the full frame in post). If you want say the field of view of 363mm in crop mode is equivalent to 580mm in FF, then you have to say as well f/5.6 in crop is equivalent to f/9 in FF.