Is Canon Redesigning 600mm Lens?

[BWiley]

Does anyone know if Canon has plans or is already redesigning any of their supertelephoto lenses for digital cameras?

The best example is that Olympus has recently come out with a 300mm f2.8 telephoto that they say is equivalent to a standard 600mm 35mm lens. It weighs 7.2 lbs. instead of a typical 12 lbs. Canon or Nikon and is 11" long instead of 18."

Considering that I am almost ready to purchase the Canon 600mm IS lens, I don't want to spend $7,000 only to find out in six months that a new 600 is being offered that won't be such a monster to carry and shoot.

Will this smaller, lighter design be the trend for most pro lenses in the future, especially the supertelephotos?

Thanks for any insights.
Bill

[CyberDyneSystems]

I doubt that Canon has plans for any "Digital ready" lenses in that price range for a loooooong time. Think 6-10 years!

Besides,. if they made such a lens,. like the Olympus 300mm, it wouldn't actually be a 600mm. If all you want is a lighter "600mm equivelent" then get one of Canons 400mm lenses. They are "640mm equivelent" allready.

If you do get the "real" 600mm it is a whopping "960mm equivelent"

There are 3 Canon 400mms to choose from. If you can afford it,. the 400mm f/2.8 has the same potential that the 600mm as far as focal length Vs. aperture...

...with the 2x converter you will have an 800mm f/5.6

[lightandlife]

My instinct says Canon has a new team of designers that launched new designs.

24-70mm L is one example. I was told by Canon exhibitors that this lens was specifically designed for Canon digitals. 16-35mm also replaces an earlier model. Besides, it has been a long while since these L lenses were launched. So I think Canon is in the process of redesigning all L series lenses.

I would not buy any lenses that costs over $2000 now, especially long telephoto lenses. B&H is not restocking many L lenses. Why?

[CyberDyneSystems]

I can see how redesigns of lenses at the wide end would be advantageous to digital SLRs with "crop factors" but the gain in having a second range of lenses for the super long telephotos escapes me???

Also,. most of these supertelephotos are fairly recent design anyways having had the IS function added to them fairly recently.

[lightandlife]

CDS, you might be right.

Given limited resources, it makes more sense to redesign wide angle lenses for DSLRs. Also, it is more likely for Canon to redesign zoom rather than prime lenses. I noticed Canon released (or is releasing) 55-200mm telephoto zoom.

Supertelephoto lenses such as 600mm may be safe for a decade.

[daveh]

bwiley wrote:
The best example is that Olympus has recently come out with a 300mm f2.8 telephoto that they say is equivalent to a standard 600mm 35mm lens. It weighs 7.2 lbs. instead of a typical 12 lbs. Canon or Nikon and is 11" long instead of 18."


Canon's 300mm f2.8 is 5.6 lbs and 10" long. (And of course, is "equivalent" to a longer lens when used with a smaller-than-35mm sensor.)

You can make a very tiny 600mm "equivalent" for a 1mm square sensor. :)

[BWiley]

Holy cow, you guys are convincing me ever more that I need to make the jump and buy the 600. No doubt this will be the largest single photo equipment item I've ever purchased. As long as I can feel that this lens won't be obsolete in a short time, then I will probably proceed.

BTW, I have checked e-bay and other sources for months and not located a used Canon 600 with IS. That means buying new and, fortunately, B&H's price even beats the "bait and switch" stores. That is a relief, for while I'll still be spending a wad, at least I won't have my blood pressure boil over before heading for the woods.

Thanks for the information everyone. Much appreciated.

Bill

[lightandlife]

What do you use that monster lens for? Shooting stars?

[CyberDyneSystems]

I would sell my children for a 600mm IS :insert drool smiley here:

As stated before, if you are happy with a 600mm equivelent get one of Canons 400mm lenses. IF you want that 960mm equivelent,. than by all means get the 600mmIS.

If you really do decide to try and get a used one on E-bay,. INSIST ON ESCROW! :D

[CoolToolGuy]

The EF-S lens that comes with the 300D is the first lens truly designed for digital. While I think you may see a few more EF-S lenses introduced, my personal opinion is that Canon should move towards a full-size sensor for the masses to eliminate the crop factor. The crop factor works for the long lenses, but works against the wide angles.
One of my favorite FD lenses is my 24mm. It gives some very cool images. I'm sure if I had a wider lens for film, I would be wild about it, too. For digital, you would need a 16mm lens to get the same angle as a 24mm. So, to get the really wide angles, Canon would have to start making some new 10mm (or thereabouts) lenses. I think if they eliminate the crop factor, they don't have to worry about two full sets of lenses.
In fact, since they no longer have to worry about film and who will produce it in what size, I would think they might want to 'fix' the perspective problem of the 35mm format (24 x 36 doesn't work well for 8 x 10 prints) and move towards the relative dimensions of the 6 x 4.5 format, with lenses to match.
Bottom line - I agree with the suggestions to buy the long lens based on the magnification you want.

[BWiley]

A lot of good ideas here. Even though I currently use a D60, I figure it is inevitable that I will eventually purchase a 1Ds (or its successor) with a full-frame CMOS sensor. Like most of us, cost is a big factor, but the $ I make from weddings and sr. pix will allow me to upgrade my camera. At that point, the increased reach that I will have enjoyed with the 600 will be lost and the 600 will be just that. My logic is that if I go the 400 route now, it will work great with the D60, but when I eventually shoot a 1Ds, the 400 won't cut it. At least not without using a 1.4 adapter. I want to have this lens a long, long time.

My goal is to have a digital system that will approximate what I used to use when I lived in Alaska. I won't be shooting bears, sheep and mountain goats now as much as deer, birds and smaller mammals, but the need for a long lens remains about the same. Check Moose Petersen or Art Morris' websites and read how they primarily use 600 lenses with 1.4 adapters for many of their bird shots.

I've been pondering this purchase for a long time and your comments have provided some reassurance that I'm not headed in the wrong direction. Thanks for everyone's thoughts.

Bill

[Jack_Mioff]

I understand that the chip on the Olymp. is much smaller than that of the one found on the 10D...so basicaly, it is equivelent to a 600mm only through the field of view. If you stuck that lens of theirs on a film body, it would look like any old 300mm field of view lens which is nothing like a true 600mm lens.


While you're trying to figure that out, I'll be taking piuctures for my website.

Until then,

Jack Mioff

[Griffin]

Given the "failure" of EF400mm f/4 DO, my wild guess would be there would be an improved DO for 600mm, probably still f/4 but much lighter and shorter.

600mm or above is the "standard" lens for birding and wild life photography and well, you need different techniques and a whole new set of accessories.

No, Mars would still a point of orange light from Earth using a 600. :p If you want some deeper astrophotgraphy, get a real telescope! :p


Griffin.