This is a great way to take back the lost ground to m4/3 who have taken a hold on some amateurs like me who don't have the money or wants to carry the heavy glass like you pro's. I shoot F8 and F11 all the time on my GH4 and Panasonic glass.
Yeah I know! So these lenses look they really will be coming out. What are your thoughts? While I know these lenses aren’t for me I’m actually really curious to see how they will perform and sell.
My Sony long primes have never seen f/11 ... probably never will :-) Can't imagine shooting wildlife/action at f/11. I always question when I see people using the Sony 200-600 with TCs, especially the 2X?
Yeah I'm totally with you. This is why it will be fascinating if Canon really does produce these lens. I wouldn't be expecting miracles but it will be interesting to see how good they can make them perform.
@@AdrianChoPhotographyYes … I understand the cost/size/weight benefits, just not a choice I would make. Not sure current Canon mirrorless bodies are wildlife/action-ready quite yet either, but maybe the R5 will be the one.
The most insane thing is that these are long range and you don't need small apertures at long distances because depth of field will be large at wide apertures.
@@thothheartmaat2833 I think they’re clearly going after the mass market with these lenses, prioitizing cost and portability above anything else. This is micro four-thirds territory.
I agree that Canon is trying to market more affordable RF lensesl to complement is current RF mount camera system. The current bodies are not pro level while the current lenses are so there is big miss match.
Additionally, the manufacturing defect rate for PF/DO is high and the number of technicians that can assemble a defect free optic is low which is why the cost is so high
Hey Bob. Yes so it would be interesting if Canon would try to figure out to manufacture these lenses at scale. I am not sure if Nikon have ever been able to meet demand for their PF lenses.
An affordable Sony 200-600mm f5.6-f6-3 is all you need for most wildlife shots , I have Canon and Sony gear and have never gone above f8 ! I think the original rumour was f7.1 which would make more sense.. to me anyway :-)
Hi Chas. I always appreciate the diversity of experiences and perspectives. That's great if you can make that work for you. Everyone has a different style and different requirements.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thanks Adrian, I just can't get my head around F11, I know from years of wildlife photography as I am sure you do it's always a struggle to keep the ISO down except on those sunny clear background days etc. It won't be a lens for me I'm afraid. Thanks for the great video :-)
My standard request is for Canon to make an RF 300-600mm F4-5.6L IS Lens which is internal focus like the Sony 200-600, weather-sealed, ideally with a minimum focus distance of around 2 metres. I cannot imagine trying to shoot with an F11 aperture in the UK, maybe in Florida! I have just sent back my new EOS R + 100-500 F5.6 + 1.4x tele converter, I and am going to try a Sony A7R4 +200-600mm, but might have to wait to try a EOS R5 with a used EF 500mm F4.
Hi Steve. It’s great to hear from you. I cannot imagine shooting with f11 all the time either but it’s so crazy that I’m secretly wishing Canon does it and somehow makes it usable. I think the idea of a used lens with the R5 is really interesting and I’m sure some people will go down that route.
I have the Sony A7R IV with the 200-600mm and it’s a fantastic combo, especially with the APSC mode! Since the lens is damn near 5lbs, your arm will get tired after holding it for a while, but you’ll eventually get used to it. Not too sure how or if it’s possible to remove the tripod collar, but it does come in handy for hand holding (no pun intended). 😃👍🏼
@@generaltso9402 and Michelle Jones, I usually find the lens foot invaluable for handholding and carrying any long (or heavy) lens so I usually leave it on even if it can be removed but I almost always replace it especially since I often want an Arca-Swiss mount and adding a plate will make the foot even taller and heavier. Better to just get something lighter and lower with the mount built in.
They're probably realising that mirrorless is too close to the sensor so it needs a built in magnifier or whatever those things are called and those things make the f stop go way down.
An incredible lens must be aimed at the beginner wildlife photographer. It must work otherwise Canon would not produce such a lens? All for encouraging new Wildlife photographers
Hi Mark. You raise a great point about encouraging new wildlife photographers. If these lenses really do become a reality it will be fascinating to see how Canon makes them work well.
My thoughts as well, I do wonder though will it inspire or discourage beginners, oftentimes beginner or "starter" stuff can make something frustrating and cause someone to quit. I am surprised manufacturer don't produce something like an f/6.3 600 mm prime when they already make that in the zoom which is a really good lens but a lot of us probably shoot it almost always at 600.
@@robwasnj yes it's a good point. I actually see a lot of people get frustrated with trying to use gear which is why I'm always trying to encourage people to have mastery over their gear no matter what it is. Many people get overwhelmed by the complexities and limitations and that's not fun.
I just want to hear someone agree with me that this is bogus af.. I thought r lenses were supposed to be better and wider aperture.. the new r lenses are bad.. I wondered if it had smaller aperture but it straight up only does f11..
ThothHeartMaat well I know these lenses aren’t for me and it sounds like they aren’t for you either but I suspect they’re still going to sell a ton of them and that they, and the 100-500, will be enough to give some people an opportunity to try out the new cameras until they release some serious long R lenses. One thing that we’ve now learned is that the AF coverage is apparently reduced at f11 on the EOS R5. Apparently you only get a smaller area in the center of the frame.
@@AdrianChoPhotography i guess they'll sell a ton because people buy what they're told to buy? Canon is changing the photography game by just making things different I guess? All we need is f11 because that's what they make? I need 2.8 or maybe even wider.
Even though I’m already on Sony I am pretty fascinated to see if Canon ships these lenses and if so, how they perform and who buys them. It will be interesting, that’s for sure.
I like almost everything you say here. My back-of-the-envelope calculations give an effective resolution for a full-frame sensor of somewhere about 5 megapixels for f/11. This seems to be a very inefficient use of a 45 megapixel sensor. I am curious how you came up with f/9 as the point where you would first notice diffraction blur. I admit that I am not an optics designer so perhaps I am being way too pessimistic. Still, there is that pesky Nyquist theorem and I don't see how any deconvolution filter is going to dredge up detail that simply isn't there. Again, I am not a specialist and could easily be wrong.
Hi Stuart. You can find diffraction calculators online that will show both the diffraction-limited aperture (DLA) and the diffraction cutoff frequency (DCF) such as this one: www.photopills.com/calculators/diffraction. The DLA is the point at which you will begin to notice diffraction, bearing in mind that it depends how you are viewing the image such as a 100% crop on a monitor or a print of a certain size viewed at a certain distance. BTW, the selection of the camera in that one is just used to select the sensor size. I have no doubt that if Canon really does release these lenses that they will make the performance reasonable which is part of what will make this interesting.
@@AdrianChoPhotography , sorry, I wrote you a long reply and at the last minute RUclips crashed. Perhaps this is better anyway. Thank you very much for the link! My rough calculation for the blur spot diameter at f/11 was about 14 micrometers and the calculator said 15. The pixel stride for a 45 megapixel full-frame-format sensor is about 5 micrometers. That means, roughly speaking, that a perfectly-focused point of light in the image will be smeared over about 9 pixels. This tells me that either the sensor is wildly too finely-divided into pixels, the lens aperture is way too small, or the photographer, expecting 45 megapixel resolution from his expensive gear is going to find the images way too soft. Actually, it gets worse, because the blur extends way beyond the Airy disk: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airy_disk These ripples look like flare to me. When I did these calculations a few years ago, I decided to get an A9 and use diffraction-limited prime lenses of at least f/4 when I could. I've seen no reason to change.
@@ryandodd8941 Yeah well same results as 9.45 what comes to the light per pixel reaching the sensor and the dof. But since the aperture still physically is 6.3 you won't see the same level of diffraction.
Chas, well that's an interesting perspective. I saw the first images yesterday of the new lenses held in someone's hands and they are definitely really compact. It will be really interesting to see how these perform and sell.
@@radiozelaza I am sure there are people who would like a native F11 Lens. There are also people who enjoy slapping themselfs across their naked backs with branches while chanting. You see, there is always people who are going to enjoy the strangest things. Those people however, better start brushing up on their manual focus skills. As i dont see what type of auto-focus system would allow a native F11 lens to do great auto-focus.
Actually most of the Sony cameras can now autofocus at f11 so it is possible although sometimes there are limitations with continuosly autofocusing during bursts. It will certainly be interesting to see how well it might work if Canon release these lenses.
@@lassepetersen684 A MIRRORLESS system is fully able to focus with f11, because it has focusing pixels on the sensor. Forget about DSLR mindset - Canon has fully embraced the mirrorless revolution.
I nearly lost my plot when I saw f/11 too when the leak first broke a couple of days back. To me, unless there is something Canon hasn't told us yet such as the new R5 sensor's performance will be absolutely exceptional whereby it could make a f/11 lens handle like say a f/6.3 lens, then I think Canon is out of their minds. However, they do have a RF 100-500mm f/5.6-7.1 zoom, that one is a L lens, I think it will be used to compete with the likes of Nikon's 200-500mm f/5.6 or the Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G lens. Right off the bat, this lens doesn't excite me the slightest, at least just looking at the specs at this juncture, it seems to be inferior to that of the other brands. But, going back to the f/11 primes, I hear people speculating about Canon's strategy in widening the appeal to the mass to help kickstart Canon's mirrorless full frame market penetration. Yea sure that all sounds good in theory. But, birding amateurs/hobbyists like myself and others are not exactly clueless. They know and understand specs and quality, they just don't want to spend US$13K on a huge prime that's all, but other than that pretty much anything goes. These people are currently using lenses like the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6, Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3, Sigma and Tamron's 150-600mm f/5-6.3 plus some Canon non-prime shooters using the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 II. Let's just tell it the way it is, these people know f/11 is crap for the lack of a better word. LOL. I mean sure I will keep an open mind and wait for the reviews, but I can't agree with people like Tony Northrup who believes it will make many wildlife photographers "flock" to Canon. Come on, just because we are amateurs, it doesn't mean we would just "flock" to something that is questionably unusable in low light? Say trying to shoot a bird on a branch under thick foliage for example. Again, like I said unless this new R5 sensor will be absolutely ground-breaking, how do you make a f/11 lens work for birding? Who knows, the R5 might have a massively extended ISO range perhaps? Let's think about it for a moment, doesn't the Nikon D6 have an extended ISO range of over 3 million? Just food for thought. I am thinking there has to be something Canon hasn't told us yet, we will find out soon enough in 3 weeks time.
Hey Alex. Yes it’s all pretty intriguing. The whole game they are playing with not revealing all the specs is something I would usually scoff at but I’m actually pretty entertained and intrigued right now. Perhaps I just need a bit of excitement because I‘ve been mostly stuck at home and unable to get out due to the lockdown. :) Normally I wouldn’t really pay a rumor this much attention but if this one is true it will be really interesting to see how it pans out. I keep thinking of Scotty (Montgomery Scott) on the Enterprise telling Kirk “Captain, you canna change the laws of physics!”
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
Yeaaaa. Happy to see a video. Good to see you doing well. Had the same reaction when I saw that aperture.
f11 lenses mean that we will be able to afford them FINALLY. I hope that helped.
The 600 is still gonna be $2000 id bet
Hero Shotz fe 200-600mm is much brigther, cheaper and excellent. highly recommended.
Yeh you'll be able to afford them but unable to use them Hahaha
This is a great way to take back the lost ground to m4/3 who have taken a hold on some amateurs like me who don't have the money or wants to carry the heavy glass like you pro's.
I shoot F8 and F11 all the time on my GH4 and Panasonic glass.
LOLOLOLOL i said the same thing you said at the start of this video
Yeah I know! So these lenses look they really will be coming out. What are your thoughts? While I know these lenses aren’t for me I’m actually really curious to see how they will perform and sell.
@@AdrianChoPhotography i need to see people use them. Depending on how much they are i might rent them. Im looking foward to the 100-500mm tho.
My Sony long primes have never seen f/11 ... probably never will :-) Can't imagine shooting wildlife/action at f/11. I always question when I see people using the Sony 200-600 with TCs, especially the 2X?
Yeah I'm totally with you. This is why it will be fascinating if Canon really does produce these lens. I wouldn't be expecting miracles but it will be interesting to see how good they can make them perform.
@@AdrianChoPhotographyYes … I understand the cost/size/weight benefits, just not a choice I would make. Not sure current Canon mirrorless bodies are wildlife/action-ready quite yet either, but maybe the R5 will be the one.
The most insane thing is that these are long range and you don't need small apertures at long distances because depth of field will be large at wide apertures.
@@thothheartmaat2833 I think they’re clearly going after the mass market with these lenses, prioitizing cost and portability above anything else. This is micro four-thirds territory.
I agree that Canon is trying to market more affordable RF lensesl to complement is current RF mount camera system. The current bodies are not pro level while the current lenses are so there is big miss match.
I thought affordable lenses go down to f4?
ThothHeartMaat not on the long telephoto. The fastest 600 mm is f4 and it’s ~ 13k
Additionally, the manufacturing defect rate for PF/DO is high and the number of technicians that can assemble a defect free optic is low which is why the cost is so high
Hey Bob. Yes so it would be interesting if Canon would try to figure out to manufacture these lenses at scale. I am not sure if Nikon have ever been able to meet demand for their PF lenses.
An affordable Sony 200-600mm f5.6-f6-3 is all you need for most wildlife shots , I have Canon and Sony gear and have never gone above f8 ! I think the original rumour was f7.1 which would make more sense.. to me anyway :-)
Hi Chas. I always appreciate the diversity of experiences and perspectives. That's great if you can make that work for you. Everyone has a different style and different requirements.
@@AdrianChoPhotography Thanks Adrian, I just can't get my head around F11, I know from years of wildlife photography as I am sure you do it's always a struggle to keep the ISO down except on those sunny clear background days etc. It won't be a lens for me I'm afraid. Thanks for the great video :-)
My standard request is for Canon to make an RF 300-600mm F4-5.6L IS Lens which is internal focus like the Sony 200-600, weather-sealed, ideally with a minimum focus distance of
around 2 metres. I cannot imagine trying to shoot with an F11 aperture in the UK, maybe in Florida! I have just sent back my new EOS R + 100-500 F5.6 + 1.4x tele converter,
I and am going to try a Sony A7R4 +200-600mm, but might have to wait to try a EOS R5 with a used EF 500mm F4.
Hi Steve. It’s great to hear from you. I cannot imagine shooting with f11 all the time either but it’s so crazy that I’m secretly wishing Canon does it and somehow makes it usable. I think the idea of a used lens with the R5 is really interesting and I’m sure some people will go down that route.
I have the Sony A7R IV with the 200-600mm and it’s a fantastic combo, especially with the APSC mode! Since the lens is damn near 5lbs, your arm will get tired after holding it for a while, but you’ll eventually get used to it. Not too sure how or if it’s possible to remove the tripod collar, but it does come in handy for hand holding (no pun intended). 😃👍🏼
@@mjsbiggestfan1997 the foot can be removed, but not the entire collar.
@@generaltso9402 and Michelle Jones, I usually find the lens foot invaluable for handholding and carrying any long (or heavy) lens so I usually leave it on even if it can be removed but I almost always replace it especially since I often want an Arca-Swiss mount and adding a plate will make the foot even taller and heavier. Better to just get something lighter and lower with the mount built in.
@@mjsbiggestfan1997 great to hear from you. I'm so happy to hear that you're having a great experience with the A7RIV and the 200-600.
800 f11 sounds a buyer
Hey Gerard. It will definitely have some applications. It's just a question of how much you would be able to use it.
Yes F11. We are going to have to shoot in the middle of the day when the sun is out :) then we will be ok.
They're probably realising that mirrorless is too close to the sensor so it needs a built in magnifier or whatever those things are called and those things make the f stop go way down.
So basically the worst time of day for wildlife photography? Great idea.
An incredible lens must be aimed at the beginner wildlife photographer. It must work otherwise Canon would not produce such a lens? All for encouraging new Wildlife photographers
Hi Mark. You raise a great point about encouraging new wildlife photographers. If these lenses really do become a reality it will be fascinating to see how Canon makes them work well.
@@AdrianChoPhotography On the surface to us it seems a ridiculous lens, but we will have to see what it actually is
My thoughts as well, I do wonder though will it inspire or discourage beginners, oftentimes beginner or "starter" stuff can make something frustrating and cause someone to quit. I am surprised manufacturer don't produce something like an f/6.3 600 mm prime when they already make that in the zoom which is a really good lens but a lot of us probably shoot it almost always at 600.
@@robwasnj yes it's a good point. I actually see a lot of people get frustrated with trying to use gear which is why I'm always trying to encourage people to have mastery over their gear no matter what it is. Many people get overwhelmed by the complexities and limitations and that's not fun.
I just want to hear someone agree with me that this is bogus af.. I thought r lenses were supposed to be better and wider aperture.. the new r lenses are bad.. I wondered if it had smaller aperture but it straight up only does f11..
ThothHeartMaat well I know these lenses aren’t for me and it sounds like they aren’t for you either but I suspect they’re still going to sell a ton of them and that they, and the 100-500, will be enough to give some people an opportunity to try out the new cameras until they release some serious long R lenses. One thing that we’ve now learned is that the AF coverage is apparently reduced at f11 on the EOS R5. Apparently you only get a smaller area in the center of the frame.
@@AdrianChoPhotography i guess they'll sell a ton because people buy what they're told to buy? Canon is changing the photography game by just making things different I guess? All we need is f11 because that's what they make? I need 2.8 or maybe even wider.
What these lenses mean for me is that it’s time to completely jump ship to Sony...
Even though I’m already on Sony I am pretty fascinated to see if Canon ships these lenses and if so, how they perform and who buys them. It will be interesting, that’s for sure.
I like almost everything you say here. My back-of-the-envelope calculations give an effective resolution for a full-frame sensor of somewhere about 5 megapixels for f/11. This seems to be a very inefficient use of a 45 megapixel sensor. I am curious how you came up with f/9 as the point where you would first notice diffraction blur. I admit that I am not an optics designer so perhaps I am being way too pessimistic. Still, there is that pesky Nyquist theorem and I don't see how any deconvolution filter is going to dredge up detail that simply isn't there. Again, I am not a specialist and could easily be wrong.
Hi Stuart. You can find diffraction calculators online that will show both the diffraction-limited aperture (DLA) and the diffraction cutoff frequency (DCF) such as this one: www.photopills.com/calculators/diffraction. The DLA is the point at which you will begin to notice diffraction, bearing in mind that it depends how you are viewing the image such as a 100% crop on a monitor or a print of a certain size viewed at a certain distance. BTW, the selection of the camera in that one is just used to select the sensor size. I have no doubt that if Canon really does release these lenses that they will make the performance reasonable which is part of what will make this interesting.
@@AdrianChoPhotography , sorry, I wrote you a long reply and at the last minute RUclips crashed. Perhaps this is better anyway. Thank you very much for the link! My rough calculation for the blur spot diameter at f/11 was about 14 micrometers and the calculator said 15. The pixel stride for a 45 megapixel full-frame-format sensor is about 5 micrometers. That means, roughly speaking, that a perfectly-focused point of light in the image will be smeared over about 9 pixels. This tells me that either the sensor is wildly too finely-divided into pixels, the lens aperture is way too small, or the photographer, expecting 45 megapixel resolution from his expensive gear is going to find the images way too soft. Actually, it gets worse, because the blur extends way beyond the Airy disk: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airy_disk
These ripples look like flare to me.
When I did these calculations a few years ago, I decided to get an A9 and use diffraction-limited prime lenses of at least f/4 when I could. I've seen no reason to change.
Horrible. I cannot imagine taking wildlife with a 800mm f/11. I would prefer any time a Sony 200-600mm 5.6-6.3 and a Sony A7R4 in crop mode.
at f6.3 in an apsc crop you are getting the same results as using f9.45 on ff. So f11 is not far off that.
@@ryandodd8941 Yeah well same results as 9.45 what comes to the light per pixel reaching the sensor and the dof. But since the aperture still physically is 6.3 you won't see the same level of diffraction.
Why not make it an F14 lens, lighter and shorter, lets face it if F11 satisfies you so will F14 :-)
Chas, well that's an interesting perspective. I saw the first images yesterday of the new lenses held in someone's hands and they are definitely really compact. It will be really interesting to see how these perform and sell.
An F11 wildlife lens. It´s like making a really big flashlight for blind people.
Useless.
useless is your comment. There are people who will be perfectly happy with affordable 600mm f11 lens. They won't be working for NatGeo though
@@radiozelaza I am sure there are people who would like a native F11 Lens. There are also people who enjoy slapping themselfs across their naked backs with branches while chanting. You see, there is always people who are going to enjoy the strangest things.
Those people however, better start brushing up on their manual focus skills. As i dont see what type of auto-focus system would allow a native F11 lens to do great auto-focus.
Actually most of the Sony cameras can now autofocus at f11 so it is possible although sometimes there are limitations with continuosly autofocusing during bursts. It will certainly be interesting to see how well it might work if Canon release these lenses.
@@lassepetersen684 A MIRRORLESS system is fully able to focus with f11, because it has focusing pixels on the sensor. Forget about DSLR mindset - Canon has fully embraced the mirrorless revolution.
I nearly lost my plot when I saw f/11 too when the leak first broke a couple of days back. To me, unless there is something Canon hasn't told us yet such as the new R5 sensor's performance will be absolutely exceptional whereby it could make a f/11 lens handle like say a f/6.3 lens, then I think Canon is out of their minds. However, they do have a RF 100-500mm f/5.6-7.1 zoom, that one is a L lens, I think it will be used to compete with the likes of Nikon's 200-500mm f/5.6 or the Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G lens. Right off the bat, this lens doesn't excite me the slightest, at least just looking at the specs at this juncture, it seems to be inferior to that of the other brands. But, going back to the f/11 primes, I hear people speculating about Canon's strategy in widening the appeal to the mass to help kickstart Canon's mirrorless full frame market penetration. Yea sure that all sounds good in theory. But, birding amateurs/hobbyists like myself and others are not exactly clueless. They know and understand specs and quality, they just don't want to spend US$13K on a huge prime that's all, but other than that pretty much anything goes. These people are currently using lenses like the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6, Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3, Sigma and Tamron's 150-600mm f/5-6.3 plus some Canon non-prime shooters using the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 II. Let's just tell it the way it is, these people know f/11 is crap for the lack of a better word. LOL. I mean sure I will keep an open mind and wait for the reviews, but I can't agree with people like Tony Northrup who believes it will make many wildlife photographers "flock" to Canon. Come on, just because we are amateurs, it doesn't mean we would just "flock" to something that is questionably unusable in low light? Say trying to shoot a bird on a branch under thick foliage for example. Again, like I said unless this new R5 sensor will be absolutely ground-breaking, how do you make a f/11 lens work for birding? Who knows, the R5 might have a massively extended ISO range perhaps? Let's think about it for a moment, doesn't the Nikon D6 have an extended ISO range of over 3 million? Just food for thought. I am thinking there has to be something Canon hasn't told us yet, we will find out soon enough in 3 weeks time.
Hey Alex. Yes it’s all pretty intriguing. The whole game they are playing with not revealing all the specs is something I would usually scoff at but I’m actually pretty entertained and intrigued right now. Perhaps I just need a bit of excitement because I‘ve been mostly stuck at home and unable to get out due to the lockdown. :) Normally I wouldn’t really pay a rumor this much attention but if this one is true it will be really interesting to see how it pans out. I keep thinking of Scotty (Montgomery Scott) on the Enterprise telling Kirk “Captain, you canna change the laws of physics!”