Canon 600mm and 800mm F11 collapsible Prime lenses

[Steve Hood]

Canon is expected to announce on Thursday new Full-frame Mirrorless telephoto lenses.  Below is the 600mm F11 collapsible lens to give some perspective.  it will weigh 930g.

[Steve Hood]

Canon announced new mirrorless lenses and camera bodies today.  The 600mm f11 lens will cost $949 and the 800mm f11 lens would be $1,249.  The new mirrorless camera bodies are a big step up from what Canon currently has for mirrorless.

https://www.canon.ca/en/Features/EOS-R-System

[lovemypt]

We will have to see what the quality of these lens will produce...but I am very skeptical. I think canon is trying to market to the beginner wildlife shooter who isn't really knowledge on cameras, trying to market based upon price, focal length and weight/ sizes ...not results.

Now I shoot with a cropped sensor not a full-frame camera...but I have a prime DO F4 lens and I don't believe these new ones can even come close to quality with their F11

- I can never get to a F11 or higher setting with my lens unless in 100% bright light and with ISO at highest settling with my F4,  and the shutter speed is so reduced, getting any flying shot or movement fuzzy..not sure how they expect that with a F11, seems like they are trying to use settings on new M5 to off-set limits on new lens rather then make a proper lens then would cost more and be 4x bigger
- I worry about having the new lens needing to be extended to use each time, as with most zooms lens, each time timer you pull the lens out and in, it forces possible air and debris into lens body especially with cheaper made lens.
-For most beginners, these new lens might work but for more experienced shooters, you can 't compare $800-1200 lens with $8000-12000 and expect the same results. Quality costs $ and you get what you pay for.  These big prime lens are not big because they shoot 1000 miles, they are big because of the amount of glass in dia   , which lets in so much more light the standard lens,  giving a higher shutter speed = higher quality pictures. Be interesting to know what the shutter speed and ISO setting are when shooting at F11 on new lens

Just my opinion, but if I was getting serious about buying one of these, I would wait until more sample pictures start coming out from actual people who are using the lens and not just from reviewers.  When I research  my lens , there were about 15-20 reviews but after looking closer only 2 of these reviewers ,actually used the lens, all the others just based comments upon other reviewers remarks with never seeing or using actual lens

Guess it depends upon when you shoot, I tend to be more in early morning and in wooded areas,  doubt these new lens will work for me

[Shortsighted]

There are natural laws that define the physical behavior of just about everything in the inanimate world and there is no new optical technology that confounds those laws. Axioms aside, I do agree that you get what you don’t pay for. In no way is one of these new light-weight Canon lenses for their new R-series camera bodies comparable in performance, ruggedness and reliability to an existing lens worth thousands of dollars. If you believe otherwise then your thoughts are perhaps as delusional as the premise of almost all commercial messages. Even the coatings applied to each element in the group of optical elements that comprise the heart of the lens are very expensive. No one coating services the entire visual spectrum therefore many coating are needed to be comprehensive. The AF mechanism must also be quiet, fast and accurate and that costs money as well. No mention of any new tech on that front. The push pull is not a dust hazard since the lens itself is sealed. The telescoping portion is just to deploy the lens elements to their functional position in front of the focal plane. There might be some minor continuity between the ocular end of the lens and the camera’s throat which might introduce dust into the camera. The versatility of these two new lenses is limited enough to make that term all but inappropriate. I can see them useful as lenses for capturing waterfowl in bright sun or hazy sunlight where slow SS and high ISO may not be mandatory. Many were hoping that these lenses would be less expensive than ultimately proved to be the case and that it might be useful to have such a light-weight tool as part of a travel kit, not for definitive images but for chronically something noteworthy. At close to a grand, and more, I don’t believe waterfowl are in any greater danger of the indignity of shoreline paparazzi. The IS doesn’t need to be great because of IBIS supporting the most stabilization effect but it could slow things down if it is finicky. What is needed is a new sensor with REVOLUTIONARY high ISO performance for these lenses to become versatile in application.