Why does Canon not make a 600mm...

Why does Canon not make a 600mm f5.6?

They make a alternate to the 400 2.8 = 400 5.6
They make a nice 500 f4.
They make (way to big) 600mm f4 and (overpriced) 800mm 5.6

Why not give us a 600mm 5.6 or 6.3?

I would like to have a 600mm that is not gigantic and does not cost near ten grand.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Probably because super telephotos are only purchased by select types of photographers. They don't want to waste the effort designing a 5.6 version of the lens, when it won't sell enough to warrant marketing one.

What about a 500 5.6?

richardchoi wrote in post #7029609
Probably because super telephotos are only purchased by select types of photographers. They don't want to waste the effort designing a 5.6 version of the lens, when it won't sell enough to warrant marketing one.

I would buy one, mainly for surfing etc

mikeassk wrote in post #7029578
Why does Canon not make a 600mm f5.6?

Because the 300mm f/2.8 with a 2x Extender does a great job.

OK, so they now have a 600/5.6. I can see the next question - Why doesn't Canon have a 600/4.5? (Yes, I know they did have one before.)

Well, the OP does have a point in that the 400/5.6 is the longest lens that Canon takes out to the f/5.6 slowest aperture that they make across the range (that is the slowest that will AF will all bodies).

I think a 500/5.6 with IS would make a lot of sense. This lens would weigh about 1.7 kg and could presumably cost as little as $2400. A lot of people would find it convenient, and there is no simple EF XXX + TC option that gets to this range. If the 400/4 wasn't DO, didn't cost $6600 and wasn't controversial as for IQ then this lens also would not be needed.

The 600/5.6 makes less sense, mainly because the 300/2.8 + 2X TC delivers the exact same range and aperture, and probably would weight and cost about the same.

JeffreyG wrote in post #7030426
Well, the OP does have a point in that the 400/5.6 is the longest lens that Canon takes out to the f/5.6 slowest aperture that they make across the range (that is the slowest that will AF will all bodies).

I think a 500/5.6 with IS would make a lot of sense. This lens would weigh about 1.7 kg and could presumably cost as little as $2400. A lot of people would find it convenient, and there is no simple EF XXX + TC option that gets to this range. If the 400/4 wasn't DO, didn't cost $6600 and wasn't controversial as for IQ then this lens also would not be needed.

The 600/5.6 makes less sense, mainly because the 300/2.8 + 2X TC delivers the exact same range and aperture, and probably would weight and cost about the same.

Very good point on the 500 5.6...
However the 300 2.8 + 2X TC delivers nowhere near the image quality of the 600 f4.

It is way softer than my 400 5.6 and is "very slow to auto focus".

I had the 300 combo and did not like it. It was ok... but heavy as.

A 600mm 5.6 should be much lighter and with no IS unit it shouldn't breach 2K$

StewartR wrote in post #7029960
Because the 300mm f/2.8 with a 2x Extender does a great job.

Not great,
I respectfully disagree.

I feel it does well. I agree its slooooooow to focus from min to infinity but it does great for the size, and money spent IMO. I have had good results.

4g63photo wrote in post #7033840
...but it does great for the size, and money spent IMO.

This combo is very large in my opinion.
I think a 600 5.6 could weigh much less.

Because there is a conspiracy to sell you the 800mm f/5.6 instead...I'm pretty sure Moderator Pete is the mastermind behind it too.

I do agree that a 500mm 5.6 would be great. I would jump on one.

I'm just repeating what I heard recently talking to some photog's - I have no proof if it's true or not -

That there are only like 10 people that are qualified to build and assemble the Canon Super-Tele's and it takes on average 1 month to manufacture a 400mm 2.8 from start to finish.

Palladium wrote in post #7034478
I'm just repeating what I heard recently talking to some photog's - I have no proof if it's true or not -

That there are only like 10 people that are qualified to build and assemble the Canon Super-Tele's and it takes on average 1 month to manufacture a 400mm 2.8 from start to finish.

Interesting for sure. I think that may be more to do with demand than ability.

I just feel that their is a large gap missing from 400 5.6 to 500/600 f4.

I just dont need 500mm+ to be quite that fast but also dont want to add TC's to make the IQ plummet.