I would only sell my 100-500 for a lens that can offer similar or better MFD and magnification.
I shoot in NHL rinks, I have the 100-500, that lens is a dog indoors.
The Nikon 200-500 weights about 2,3 kg plus body. That's still okay IMO.
100%
I also have a Sigma EF 150-600S. I love some of the images I have captured it. The way it renders an image is great. But fine detail? It's ok/good, I used it for years, but I do not think it is keeping up with modern lenses. Here is a post I did that included it while testing out the RF 200-800. Maybe not the best for the Sigma, but I would rank most of the other lenses above it. I move off of it as my primary bird lens as other lenses did better with fine detail. Of course, you may have a better copy.
Mostly I shoot motorsports. A 200-500 f/4 with a dedicated 1.4x TC, built-in or otherwise, for $5000 to $6000 would be perfection. If Canon introduced one, it would cost $12,000 or more.
Sadly, I would be shocked to see it less than $12k. To be less than that, it is probably a non-L lens, which would also be a surprise. But, yep, a "L" 200-500 for $6k would be a preorder.
I love the 24-105/2.8 and 100-300/2.8. I’ll pass on the 200-500/4 and stick with the 600/4 II, though if an updated one with a built-in 1.4x comes along I’d buy it in a heartbeat.
Canon will never release a 200-500 mm f4 L for $5-6K. The old Canon EF 500 mm f4 L Mk II sold for more.
Would Canon allow Sigma to make lenses for FF RF and would Sigma introduce the 300-600 f/4 in RF mount? I think it's possible but I wouldn't bet money on it. Until then, we just have to look at the alternatives, whatever they may be..
In August 2023, the rumoured price for the RF200-500mm f4 was $15999.
The problem with Canon Fanboy is that they give Canon the impression that they are doing all right! That is why Canon consumers despite years of rumours do not get lenses like the following 1) Sony 400-800 F6.3-8 (that does not split in two pieces when used) with internal zoom better balanced and less likely to collect dust like the RF 200-800 F6.3/9, 2) Sony 300 F2.8 at 3.24 pounds rather than the Canon 100-300 which at 5.7 pounds is as heavy as the old Canon 300 F2.8 mark ii, 3) A Nikon z 600 f4 with a integrated TC rather than the old EF 600 f4 mark III with an RF adapter glued on 4) A nikon z400 f2.8 with an integrated teleconverter rather than an old EF 400 F2.8 with an rf adapter glued on 5) A Nikon Z 180-600 f5.6-6.3 at a fraction of the price of the RF 100-500 F5.6/7.1 and the list goes on. I am not a troll. I have owned Canon gear only my whole lifetime. I have been through several flagships of the one series and top of the line mirrorless cameras. What I can say is that the R1 and R5 mark ii have amazing performance but have provided me headaches like no other Canon gear have provided me before. So what is the point of that performance when you can't count on it? Err 60 is an ongoing problem on both the R5 mark ii and the R1. I know it is not just my problem as it has been reported on other forum. My old R5 (which I have been using for 5 years now) is the only camera performance I can still rely on 100% of the time. The other two have unpredictable temper tantrums. Canon has no clue as to what is the cause of the problem. The error is showing up on 2 different r5 mark ii and on the R1 on an intermittent basis and despite the message stating "lens error will shut down automatically restart the camera" after months of back and forth we all know that it has nothing to do with the lenses being used. Pretty much everything has been examined memory cards, teleconverters, battery grip, zoom lenses, prime lenses, rf lenses ef lenses etc etc etc. It is still impossible to isolate the source of the problem but it becomes more and more apparent after months of guessing, the problem is a programming one and not a hardware one. I have been waiting 5 years for an R1 and an update to the R5, so yes I am tired of waiting but more importantly I can't accept that after five years of waiting Canon can't deliver the top quality and reliability they used to produce. This is not trolling, this is real life experience and frustration after a life time investment in Canon it is not an easy and light decision to switch brand. However It seems that Canon does not care about loosing customers who like to base buying decisions on value, quality, reliabily and performance as long as they continue to rely on a large base of fanboys who make them feel that they are doing ok despite real life experience of customers
About half of all cameras sold every year are made by Canon. Since clueless people sometimes need things spelled out for them in very simplistic terms, that means Canon is more than doing alright.
Yes they are doing alright and that is my point. They do not need to do anything better then get the low hanging fruits and there is no doubt they are the majority!
No. You said it was ‘fanboys’ giving ‘Canon the impression that they are doing all right’. That’s typical trolling, go crawl back under your bridge. It’s the sales data confirming to Canon that they’re continuing to dominate the market.
Sure, because they don’t have any top shelf offerings, right? Nikon’s and Sony’s excellent 24-105/2.8, Sony’s stellar tilt-shift lenses, those are just amazing lenses. Oh, wait…they’re not.
If weight is a concern, which it is for me and appears to be for you, the Sony 400-800 weighs 6lb (with the hood on) compared with 4.7lb for the Canon 200-800mm.
MAN, do you even space out your paragraphs. It sucks to read just like your opinions.
