July 2020 RF Lenses RF 600mm and 800mm f/11 etc.

I am going to buy the R6. I think it will be the perfect camera for me. Very excited about it.

I have also decided to get the 800/11 DO. It would be perfect in Summer in the fields. It only needs to be sharp (and I mean sharp) and to focus well (doesn't have to be blazingly fast, just focus adequately, is all).

Question is how much better will that bare 800mm f/11 DO be in comparison to my 400/5.6L with 2xTC. Which is bad, to be honest. I never use that combo. But the specs are the same, right: 400/5.6+2xTC = 800mm f/11. So how much difference does a 2XTC make compared to a bare f/11?

How I wish they had made these lenses f/8 (at double the price, sure).

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19095042
I am going to buy the R6. I think it will be the perfect camera for me. Very excited about it.

I have also decided to get the 800/11 DO. It would be perfect in Summer in the fields. It only needs to be sharp (and I mean sharp) and to focus well (doesn't have to be blazingly fast, just focus adequately, is all).

Question is how much better will that bare 800mm f/11 DO be in comparison to my 400/5.6L with 2xTC. Which is bad, to be honest. I never use that combo. But the specs are the same, right: 400/5.6+2xTC = 800mm f/11. So how much difference does a 2XTC make compared to a bare f/11?

How I wish they had made these lenses f/8 (at double the price, sure).

I’m willing to wager that the new lens will easily be sharper than your current lens with a 2x TC.

MatthewK wrote in post #19095054
I’m willing to wager that the new lens will easily be sharper than your current lens with a 2x TC.

That's what I'm hoping for, Matt. Thanks!

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19095063
That's what I'm hoping for, Matt. Thanks!

I should have elaborated a bit more Even when using the 2.0x on my 400/500/600 lenses, the image degradation was very apparent, and I avoided using it whenever possible. I’ve never shot w/ the 400 5.6, but I’ll go out on a limb and assume it takes the same IQ hit.

Lastly, Canon hasn’t released an unsharp lens in quite sometime, so it’s probably a safe assumption that these new lenses will be more than adequately sharp and clear. They have a rather direct design goal: one focal length, one aperture. They’ve already sacrificed a ton of features, if these lenses end up having terrible IQ, they’ll be dead in the water.

MatthewK wrote in post #19095072
I should have elaborated a bit more Even when using the 2.0x on my 400/500/600 lenses, the image degradation was very apparent, and I avoided using it whenever possible. I’ve never shot w/ the 400 5.6, but I’ll go out on a limb and assume it takes the same IQ hit.

Lastly, Canon hasn’t released an unsharp lens in quite sometime, so it’s probably a safe assumption that these new lenses will be more than adequately sharp and clear. They have a rather direct design goal: one focal length, one aperture. They’ve already sacrificed a ton of features, if these lenses end up having terrible IQ, they’ll be dead in the water.

Yes, the 400/5.6 with 2xTC takes quite a hit, you assume right.
The 300/4 with 2xTC does substantially better. Probably because of the larger aperture diameter. But even then you don't want to have to crop much in post.

True, Canon has "sacrificed a ton of features" with these lenses but I'm still not very confident. Not at these prices. But I would love nothing better than to be proven wrong. That 800 DO would get limited use but if it's any good, when I can use it, it would be pretty great. So here's hoping...

I have found the 100-400 and 2x to be so good as to maintain fine feather detail, so I hope the new slow fixed aperture lenses are at least that good.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19095243
I have found the 100-400 and 2x to be so good as to maintain fine feather detail, so I hope the new slow fixed aperture lenses are at least that good.

I think that if these RF teleconverters work well then people will really invest in these new R super teles coming out.....especially the 2X R TC's

We all know that the 2X current TC's dont work very well with few exceptions on version 1 L lens

I know the guys with version 3 TC's on version 2 lens like 300/40o/500/600's are reporting and showing decent results like you did with the 100-400

If these new 150-500's , 600/s and 800's play nice with RF TC's....people will jump on them

1600 FOV at F/16 for day use is one hell of a lot of reach...your gonna have to be on tri pods for sure...that like having a telescope on the camera...your gonna wave all over the place trying to track a target

I thought I'd post a link here too to Jared Polin's quick test of the R5/R6 + 800mm f/11 lens, testing animal eye AF in the Zoo.
There are three raw files (in dng) to download as well.

I am so getting that lens...

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=fYuOUmhKbzY

umphotography wrote in post #19095561
1600 FOV at F/16 for day use is one hell of a lot of reach...

Just noticed this. Mike, with a 2xTC the 800mm becomes a 1600mm at f/22.
You're gonna be needing a lot of light for that...

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19096377
.
Just noticed this. Mike, with a 2xTC the 800mm becomes a 1600mm at f/22.
You're gonna be needing a lot of light for that ....
.

.
Yes, that will pretty much only provide excellent (world class I.Q.) results in good light, if the subject is gong to be in motion.

But the good thing about that combo is that adding a tele-extender does not increase the minimum focus distance. . This will help immensely when one wants to fill the frame with small subjects like Warblers and Hummingbirds. . Shooting those things at 20 feet away will be much better at 1600 millimeters than it will be at 800 millimeters, inasmuch as pixels on subject are concerned. . With the 2x added to the 800mm the magnification ratio actually becomes useful for close-up work at MFD.

.

Back in 2012 I did some testing with stacked extenders on my 5Dc and the 400/5.6. One huge problem was the dark viewfinder at f/16 and particularly at f/22. I had to manually focus and simply couldn't see anything. It was like looking through glass, covered with soot. From what I understand this will be very different with an EVF, where the projection will still be bright.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19096450
.
Back in 2012 I did some testing with stacked extenders on my 5Dc and the 400/5.6. One huge problem was the dark viewfinder at f/16 and particularly at f/22. I had to manually focus and simply couldn't see anything. It was like looking through glass, covered with soot. From what I understand this will be very different with an EVF, where the projection will still be bright.
.

.
From what I understand, what you see in the EVF will be based on your exposure settings, so it can be as bright as you want it to be!


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19096452
.
From what I understand, what you see in the EVF will be based on your exposure settings, so it can be as bright as you want it to be!
.

Of course! Didn't think of that.

There's going to be lots to learn once I get the R6!

i feel like they are more like scopes for birders than lenses for photographers... i'm sure they are capable of good photos. I don't see a reason i'd ever buy one...but first i'd have to get an R camera to even think of it

DreDaze wrote in post #19096471
.
i feel like they are more like scopes for birders than lenses for photographers ...
.

.
It may seem like that for folks who have not shot over 500mm before. . But I shoot a lot at 800mm, and I still have to get VERY close to the birds to frame them the way I want to. . Even when I am only 17 to 20 feet from the birds, at 800mm, I often still have to crop a bit to get the photos to look right ..... which makes 800mm not feel like a spotting scope at all. . I feel like the birds are right there, at a very intimate distance, and yet it still isn't close enough for proper photos, even at 800mm.


.