# Industry News: Nikon releases their Z mount lens roadmap



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 19, 2020)

> Nikon and Canon are both busy building out their full-frame mirrorless lens lineup, we’ve reported on Canon’s roadmap in the past, but none of that is officially from Canon. However, Nikon has released their Z mount lens roadmap which promises 27 lenses for the system by the end of 2022.
> Upcoming Nikon Z mount lenses:
> 
> Nikon Z 28mm
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## H. Jones (Nov 19, 2020)

Man do I wish Canon would do this exact thing. I'm jealous that Nikon at least confirms lofty plans and gives their customers even a silhouette of what's next.

I'm *far* more excited by the rumored Canon line-up, but it would be super nice to see that line-up told to us in official graphics with silhouettes to agonize over


----------



## AJ (Nov 19, 2020)

H. Jones said:


> Man do I wish Canon would do this exact thing. I'm jealous that Nikon at least confirms lofty plans and gives their customers even a silhouette of what's next.


Nah, that would be boring. It is far more interesting to speculate and guess and gossip and keep the rumour mill going.


----------



## Fletchahh (Nov 19, 2020)

With both Sony and now Nikon producing a 200-600mm, I hope that Canon or an RF mount third party follows suit as well.


----------



## tron (Nov 19, 2020)

200-600 hmmm


----------



## xps (Nov 19, 2020)

Dear Canon: Yes, the 200-600mm is definitively missing from my favorite brand. I hope you will produce this always-on zoom lens for birding


----------



## xps (Nov 19, 2020)

Interested, how heavy their mirrorless primes will be. And how much better the optical quality is. And at last how much BIGGER the Nikon-Fans will be drained when they buy these primes


----------



## fox40phil (Nov 19, 2020)

Nikon is doing the right way:
100-400 "L" and 200-600 "non-L".


----------



## amorse (Nov 19, 2020)

I think I'm in the minority here, but I'm much more excited about the Canon 100-500 than the Nikon or Sony 200-600. Starting at 100 just fits my kit better, and that small size makes it so much more attractive for my use, even if the price of that is an extending barrel and 7.1 aperture. Still though, to each their own!


----------



## fox40phil (Nov 19, 2020)

amorse said:


> I think I'm in the minority here, but I'm much more excited about the Canon 100-500 than the Nikon or Sony 200-600. Starting at 100 just fits my kit better, and that small size makes it so much more attractive for my use, even if the price of that is an extending barrel and 7.1 aperture. Still though, to each their own!


But the Canon one has 100mm less, f7.1 aaaand is over 1/3 or 50% more expensive then the Sony!

More expensive (>3.000€ is huge!) -> less photographers use it. Nice for those who can afford it^^ 

For me it would be also enough to have a 300-600 f5.6 ^^... for eveything else you could pick up other lenses  (70-200 / 24-105 or 120-300 2.8)


----------



## xps (Nov 19, 2020)

amorse said:


> I think I'm in the minority here, but I'm much more excited about the Canon 100-500 than the Nikon or Sony 200-600. Starting at 100 just fits my kit better, and that small size makes it so much more attractive for my use, even if the price of that is an extending barrel and 7.1 aperture. Still though, to each their own!


Yes, of course if you do a lot of hiking the 100-500 fits your needs better. For my birding attitudes each mm of focal length is wellcome. Also it is tooooo much pricy
Btw.: Great shots on your site.


----------



## Hyperion (Nov 19, 2020)

Where’s my RF 28mm, Canon?


----------



## Brown (Nov 19, 2020)

Is it strange that they didn't include the apertures of the upcoming lenses?


----------



## tron (Nov 19, 2020)

fox40phil said:


> Nikon is doing the right way:
> 100-400 "L" and 200-600 "non-L".


A 200-600 L could also be an option. Back in 1987 there was choice: EF100-300 5.6, EF100-300 5.6L


----------



## twoheadedboy (Nov 19, 2020)

Hyperion said:


> Where’s my RF 28mm, Canon?



Canon hates this focal length for some reason. I have the Sigma EF ART f/1.4 and it's great but I'd love a 1st party native mount one.


----------



## tron (Nov 19, 2020)

There was the EF28 2.8 the EF28 1.8 and then EF28 2.8 IS.
How Canon hates it exactly?


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Nov 19, 2020)

amorse said:


> I think I'm in the minority here, but I'm much more excited about the Canon 100-500 than the Nikon or Sony 200-600. Starting at 100 just fits my kit better, and that small size makes it so much more attractive for my use, even if the price of that is an extending barrel and 7.1 aperture. Still though, to each their own!



I totally agree! I can see how 200-600mm is tempting for birders and wildlife, but I can hardly see any use and it is very bulky compared to the RF 100-500mm. The Canon lense is much more versatile and when wanna shoot wildlife at long distance I'd pick up a 800mm F11.


----------



## Exploreshootshare (Nov 19, 2020)

Brown said:


> Is it strange that they didn't include the apertures of the upcoming lenses?



I think they didn't announce it for most lenses (50mm F 0.95 was an exception) ever since they released the Z-roadmap at photokina 2018.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 19, 2020)

The 200-600 and 600 are whispering to me. I am looking forward to having them in my hands. I do like that Nikon allows me to plan ahead.
Actually on the Nikon side I am after the 100-400, 600, 105 macro, and the 70-200 with the TC's.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Nov 19, 2020)

Refreshing not to see absurdly slow telephoto zooms and primes. Such shame the 200-600 won't be S line, even more important than for the 100-400 IMO


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Nov 19, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I totally agree! I can see how 200-600mm is tempting for birders and wildlife, but I can hardly see any use and it is very bulky compared to the RF 100-500mm. The Canon lense is much more versatile and when wanna shoot wildlife at long distance I'd pick up a 800mm F11.



What an absurd post. You really need to read what you have said.


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Nov 19, 2020)

Fletchahh said:


> With both Sony and now Nikon producing a 200-600mm, I hope that Canon or an RF mount third party follows suit as well.



Be careful what you wish for, you may get a drinking straw.


----------



## [email protected] (Nov 19, 2020)

twoheadedboy said:


> Canon hates this focal length for some reason. I have the Sigma EF ART f/1.4 and it's great but I'd love a 1st party native mount one.



I love that Sigma 28. I have it and adapt it to RF. Odds of Canon coming out with a better one than that are less than even. The Sigma 40, 28 and 105 are special in their lineup.


----------



## David - Sydney (Nov 19, 2020)

fox40phil said:


> But the Canon one has 100mm less, f7.1 aaaand is over 1/3 or 50% more expensive then the Sony!
> More expensive (>3.000€ is huge!) -> less photographers use it. Nice for those who can afford it^^
> For me it would be also enough to have a 300-600 f5.6 ^^... for eveything else you could pick up other lenses  (70-200 / 24-105 or 120-300 2.8)


So far, Canon has added something extra to their RF lenses that is better than their EF version and/or the competition. There is a price for this engineering but for me it is worth it. I will be keeping them for a long time to come.
We are starting to see discounting happening for lenses and now a rebate from Canon on the R5
The size/weight for the RF70-200mm, RF100-500mm, RF600mm and RF800mm with amazing stabilisation are pretty revolutionary. People have issues with the narrower apertures but best if you can test/rent them to see if that seriously affects your shooting needs with the improved high ISO performance from the R5/R6 sensors.


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 19, 2020)

tron said:


> There was the EF28 2.8 the EF28 1.8 and then EF28 2.8 IS.
> How Canon hates it exactly?



The 28mm focal length never got the love that the 24, 35 and 50mm focal lengths did. There hasn't been a EF 28mm L lens nor something in the league of Nikon's 28mm f/1.4. Perhaps Canon produced the 28mm f/2.8 IS and saw that it didn't sell well enough (especially compared to the 24mm f/2.8 IS and teh 35mm f/2 IS) to justify a f/1.4L above it.


----------



## fred (Nov 20, 2020)

I couldn‘t agree more! The 200-600 will likely be even better than the already excellent Nikon 200-500 F5.6 and will, just like the Sony, have an internal zoom. For whatever reason, Canon just keeps ignoring that type of lens. This is actually the primary reason I am not willing to switch over to Canon!


----------



## fred (Nov 20, 2020)

Canon, please take notes: 200-600. 200-600. I repeat: 200-600. Thank you.


----------



## H. Jones (Nov 20, 2020)

Another observation, looking at this, is that Canon has a lot of room to expand their prime lens line-up without having "too many" primes. If primes weren't selling, look at how many are on the Nikon roadmap here!

Note that Nikon is about to have four entirely different 50mm-ish lenses in their line-up within the next year: 50mm macro, 50mm F/1.8, 50mm F/1.2, 58mm F/0.95. No doubt to me that in the years after, that list of 50mm lenses will only grow.


----------



## fred (Nov 20, 2020)

Canon could offer the ultimate landscape/travel/wildlife lens lineup:

1) 14-35 F4L IS or 15-35 F2.8L IS
2) missing: a nice high quality 50mm F1.8 (like the Nikon Z50 F1.8S or Sony Zeiss 55 F1.8)
3) 70-200 F4L IS or 70-200 F2.8L IS
4) missing: 200-600

So far, they got two things right:
- compact 70-200s (Canon is king in that regard)
- keeping the 16-35ish UWA (instead of 12/14-24)

...and made two mistakes (that can still be fixed though!):
- they released a Toyota 50mm and a Rolls-Royce 50mm, nothing in between (maybe Sigma will jump in with a new 50 F1.4 DN ART?)
- still no 200-600 in sight

Edit: a nice compact 24/28 would be nice too!


----------



## fred (Nov 20, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I think they didn't announce it for most lenses (50mm F 0.95 was an exception) ever since they released the Z-roadmap at photokina 2018.


Nikon shooter here. They used to include the apertures for all lenses up until the Oct 10, 2019 version. Maybe now they need more flexibility.


----------



## deleteme (Nov 20, 2020)

I am happy that Nikon has given its customers a roadmap but the details are very thin. I would be very interested in the aperture as it would inform us of any special characteristics such as speed or compactness. Also, which ones have IS?
At the moment its a bit like the DoD saying "we will have weapons".


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 20, 2020)

WOW! Already 30 posts in a thread about the competition and not even once a:

"Canon is *******!" 

It's getting too sober here - no, it isn't. Thanks to you!


----------



## tmroper (Nov 20, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> The 28mm focal length never got the love that the 24, 35 and 50mm focal lengths did. There hasn't been a EF 28mm L lens nor something in the league of Nikon's 28mm f/1.4. Perhaps Canon produced the 28mm f/2.8 IS and saw that it didn't sell well enough (especially compared to the 24mm f/2.8 IS and teh 35mm f/2 IS) to justify a f/1.4L above it.


From what I've read over the years about the gear photojournalists use, 24mm seems to be the new 28mm. Everyone seems to have that 24L. Maybe just in an effort to be new and different, after the many decades of others using 28mm. As for Canon's 28mm offerings, the EF lenses are a little sad compared to the 24L or the 35L. I have the EF IS 35, and while it's good, it's nothing great like that 35L is, which I've only used a number of times.


----------



## Joules (Nov 20, 2020)

H. Jones said:


> Another observation, looking at this, is that Canon has a lot of room to expand their prime lens line-up without having "too many" primes. If primes weren't selling, look at how many are on the Nikon roadmap here!


Not too compelling an argument, given Nikon's market share and recent financials. Primes having less mass appeal than zooms is not debunked just because a manufacturer has a lot of primes in their portfolio.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Nov 20, 2020)

fred said:


> Canon, please take notes: 200-600. 200-600. I repeat: 200-600. Thank you.


But without the ridiculously narrow apertures that seem to be the thing at the minute...


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 20, 2020)

Canon are trying new some new design and making better versions of popular lenses. Nikon are going for the best versions they have ever made of lenses they know that sell well. I think in the end though, we are going to have two sets of lenses covering everything with a few special lenses in each camp the other doesn't have. Will be very interesting to see a updated MPE-65 for instance.


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 20, 2020)

Fletchahh said:


> With both Sony and now Nikon producing a 200-600mm, I hope that Canon or an RF mount third party follows suit as well.


And I'm still hoping for a 50mm L IS macro !


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Nov 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> I think I'm in the minority here, but I'm much more excited about the Canon 100-500 than the Nikon or Sony 200-600. Starting at 100 just fits my kit better, and that small size makes it so much more attractive for my use, even if the price of that is an extending barrel and 7.1 aperture. Still though, to each their own!



But for wildlife you need the reach and to be fair 500mm is not a lot on a full frame. It's not even a lot on APSC. So you have to crop a lot and Canon does not have high megapixel RF body, apart from the R5.

Plus the 100-500 is very expensive, almost double the price of the excellent Sony 200-600.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Nov 20, 2020)

Jasonmc89 said:


> But without the ridiculously narrow apertures that seem to be the thing at the minute...



If Canon makes one, im 99 percent sure it will be 7.1 again. Cause who needs light.


----------



## Bahrd (Nov 20, 2020)

H. Jones said:


> Man do I wish Canon would do this exact thing. I'm jealous that Nikon at least confirms lofty plans and gives their customers even a silhouette of what's next.


I wonder if Nikonrumors.com agrees...


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 20, 2020)

Bahrd said:


> I wonder if Nikonrumors.com agrees...



Nope over there we bitch that the Z6ii/Z7ii aren't better than the D850 yet.


----------



## amorse (Nov 20, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> But for wildlife you need the reach and to be fair 500mm is not a lot on a full frame. It's not even a lot on APSC. So you have to crop a lot and Canon does not have high megapixel RF body, apart from the R5.
> 
> Plus the 100-500 is very expensive, almost double the price of the excellent Sony 200-600.


I don't disagree, but I don't really see this as a lens designed specifically for wildlife - it seems more like a 100-400 with a bit of extra reach, and the f/7.1 caveat if you're going to use that last little bit of reach. I'd want to use it for landscapes personally, so none of that is limiting for me - I'm much more interested in sharpness, contrast, small size and weight limitations. I don't think there is any question that if wildlife is the target, this is not the most ideal tool in the shed - I'm sure it would work in a pinch, but it wouldn't be the first choice for many.


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 20, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> But for wildlife you need the reach and to be fair 500mm is not a lot on a full frame. It's not even a lot on APSC. So you have to crop a lot and Canon does not have high megapixel RF body, apart from the R5.
> 
> Plus the 100-500 is very expensive, almost double the price of the excellent Sony 200-600.



The 100-500 is more of a competitor to Sony's 100-400, not the 200-600. By your logic, Sony's 100-400 is also overpriced given that it's within 10% in price to Canon's 100-500.


----------



## amorse (Nov 20, 2020)

fox40phil said:


> But the Canon one has 100mm less, f7.1 aaaand is over 1/3 or 50% more expensive then the Sony!
> 
> More expensive (>3.000€ is huge!) -> less photographers use it. Nice for those who can afford it^^
> 
> For me it would be also enough to have a 300-600 f5.6 ^^... for eveything else you could pick up other lenses  (70-200 / 24-105 or 120-300 2.8)


I can understand that perspective, but again I see it as a 100-400 with an extra 100mm: I think that's a much closer comparison than a 200-600. In the 100-400 realm, the price is comparable to both Sony and Canon, as is the size and weight. I really don't think of this as a wildlife first lens because of that 7.1 aperture and the compromises made to keep it small. It makes a lot of sense as a long distance landscape lens, in my opinion anyway.

For me, I'd want to swap this into my kit and swap out my 70-200, adding 300mm more reach, reducing weight, and maintaining the same number of lenses to cover 16mm up to 500. Adding more lenses to my hiking kit is a no go - the bag is too heavy as it is! In this use case I think it makes a lot of sense, but definitely not as much sense if you're planning on shooting wildlife with one lens.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Nov 20, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> The 100-500 is more of a competitor to Sony's 100-400, not the 200-600. By your logic, Sony's 100-400 is also overpriced given that it's within 10% in price to Canon's 100-500.



I know it's not a competitor for the 200-600. But because that's the only zoom lens Canon offers (until a 200-600 type lens arrives), there is nothing else to compare to, RIGHT? If you want a long zoom on Canon land, the only option is the 100-500 or EF 100-400 with 50% less reach or third part EF lenses.


----------



## amorse (Nov 20, 2020)

xps said:


> Yes, of course if you do a lot of hiking the 100-500 fits your needs better. For my birding attitudes each mm of focal length is wellcome. Also it is tooooo much pricy
> Btw.: Great shots on your site.


Thank you very much! I completely agree with you - it wouldn't be my first choice for birding either. I figure for my use it wouldn't really be used for wildlife except for in a real pinch - long distance landscapes would be its bread and butter for me.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Nov 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> I don't disagree, but I don't really see this as a lens designed specifically for wildlife - it seems more like a 100-400 with a bit of extra reach, and the f/7.1 caveat if you're going to use that last little bit of reach. I'd want to use it for landscapes personally, so none of that is limiting for me - I'm much more interested in sharpness, contrast, small size and weight limitations. I don't think there is any question that if wildlife is the target, this is not the most ideal tool in the shed - I'm sure it would work in a pinch, but it wouldn't be the first choice for many.



Yes, its more like an everything lens, focused on image quality and small size. The problem is that Canon never had another lens in the EF era either, only the 100-400. If you wanted longer reach your next option was the 500mm F4 for the price of a car.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 20, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> ...now a rebate from Canon on the R5...



There's a rebate on the R5?


----------



## yankiefrankie (Nov 20, 2020)

Mr Majestyk said:


> What an absurd post. You really need to read what you have said.



What is absurd about it? I agree and have both the 100-500 and the 800 f11 for exactly the same reasons. I can see how this may not suit everyone, but for those who prefer versatility and only occasionally need the super telephoto, this is preferrable than a 200-600.


----------



## tron (Nov 20, 2020)

yankiefrankie said:


> What is absurd about it? I agree and have both the 100-500 and the 800 f11 for exactly the same reasons. I can see how this may not suit everyone, but for those who prefer versatility and only occasionally need the super telephoto, this is preferrable than a 200-600.


How preferable? Like when you see a distant bird you will switch lenses? And then switch back? That much preferable?
P.S I agree about portability and I use 500mm lenses myself but a 600mm is much more powerful resulting a 44% bigger image than a 500mm lens.


----------



## amorse (Nov 20, 2020)

unfocused said:


> There's a rebate on the R5?


This question needs answering - I see no evidence of rebates on the R5, they're not even in stock here yet.


----------



## yankiefrankie (Nov 20, 2020)

tron said:


> How preferable? Like when you see a distant bird you will switch lenses? And then switch back? That much preferable?
> P.S I agree about portability and I use 500mm lenses myself but a 600mm is much more powerful resulting a 44% bigger image than a 500mm lens.



I think Canon needs both satisfy the majority of customers.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Nov 20, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Nope over there we bitch that the Z6ii/Z7ii aren't better than the D850 yet.



In terms of sensors, there won't be a big leap until they get a decent agreement from Sony. Sony Semiconductor is real picky on who gets what sensors and what features are allowed. It's part of the reason that GoPro was using an ancient sensor until recently, and even then, it's not the most modern generation of Sony sensors.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 20, 2020)

amorse said:


> This question needs answering - I see no evidence of rebates on the R5, they're not even in stock here yet.


I checked. Canon Australia is indeed offering a $250 cash back promo on the R.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 20, 2020)

crazyrunner33 said:


> In terms of sensors, there won't be a big leap until they get a decent agreement from Sony. Sony Semiconductor is real picky on who gets what sensors and what features are allowed. It's part of the reason that GoPro was using an ancient sensor until recently, and even then, it's not the most modern generation of Sony sensors.



The sensors on Nikon are fine. And the important ones are still Nikon designed and Sony fabricated, they could go elsewhere with the design.

It looks like they where limited by CPU performance as that second processor had done a lot more than expected. I think they need their “Digic X” more than new sensors, that d850 to Z7ii sensor is still competitive with the best from Sony and Canon.


----------



## tron (Nov 20, 2020)

yankiefrankie said:


> I think Canon needs both satisfy the majority of customers.


I totally agree with that !


----------



## dwarven (Nov 20, 2020)

Exploreshootshare said:


> I totally agree! I can see how 200-600mm is tempting for birders and wildlife, but I can hardly see any use and it is very bulky compared to the RF 100-500mm. *The Canon lense is much more versatile* and when wanna shoot wildlife at long distance I'd pick up a 800mm F11.



Anyone buying one of these supertelephotos doesn't care about "versatility". Chances are they're going to be using it fully extended most of the time to shoot birds or other wildlife, with the shorter end of the range being used mostly for tracking purposes. And 200mm is plenty short enough to zoom out for tracking. The 200-600 is just better for critters all around, especially if it's going to max out at f/6.3.


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 20, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> I know it's not a competitor for the 200-600. But because that's the only zoom lens Canon offers (until a 200-600 type lens arrives), there is nothing else to compare to, RIGHT? If you want a long zoom on Canon land, the only option is the 100-500 or EF 100-400 with 50% less reach or third part EF lenses.



There is also the much more expensive 200-400 f/4L which gets to f/5.6 at 560mm with built-in TC, but it is heavy and pricy (although the used prices have dropped a lot) although it can take TCs. So yes, right now most people are best served by a third party options (i.e. 150-600s). Canon has holes in its lineup, including this one. Canon will fill it if it finds it profitable to do so after the higher priority lenses are released. Canon does what is best for its bottom line. Users should use whatever fits their needs, whether it comes from Canon or a third-party.


----------



## Mahk43 (Nov 21, 2020)

This is good for us to see this roadmap because in the chess game between Sony, Canon and Nikon they each wait the others moves.
This is a big move from Nikon.
Even if Canon don't publish their own roadmap within a few months (I think they will do), at least they will release future lenses taking this into account.
If we don't see some lenses from Canon aligned to nikon in a few years, it will be clear that Canon voluntarily chose do not release it.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 21, 2020)

2021 is going to be a expensive year. R1 + 600mm f/4 or a Z 600mm f/4 quickly followed up by a Z9.


----------



## degos (Nov 21, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> Canon has holes in its lineup, including this one. Canon will fill it if it finds it profitable to do so after the higher priority lenses are released.



That would require Canon to eat humble pie and compete directly with existing third-party options, something they've never been willing to do.

They'd rather ignore the massive dominance of 150-600 lenses and release a 100-500 just so they don't seem to be copying Tamron. It's all about self-image.


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 21, 2020)

tron said:


> There was the EF28 2.8 the EF28 1.8 and then EF28 2.8 IS.
> How Canon hates it exactly?


There's never been a 28 L, sadly !


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 21, 2020)

fred said:


> Nikon shooter here. They used to include the apertures for all lenses up until the Oct 10, 2019 version. Maybe now they need more flexibility


Still in love with my F2 !
That's why, even as a Canon and Leica user, I hope for Nikon to succeed, and to become number 2 again. Their new mirrorless lenses are absolutely convincing, not to mention the 500mm.
They have the means to succeed!


----------



## tron (Nov 21, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> There's never been a 28 L, sadly !



f/2.8 and f/5.6 comparisons of EF28mm 2.8 IS with EF24-70 2.8L II at f/2.8 and f/5.6 show that this is not a problem









Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens Image Quality


View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.




www.the-digital-picture.com












Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens Image Quality


View the image quality delivered by the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens using ISO 12233 Resolution Chart lab test results. Compare the image quality of this lens with other lenses.




www.the-digital-picture.com





Unless you wish for a f/2, f/1.8 or a f/1.4 version which is somethin different


----------



## tron (Nov 21, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> Still in love with my F2 !
> That's why, even as a Canon and Leica user, I hope for Nikon to succeed, and to become number 2 again. Their new mirrorless lenses are absolutely convincing, not to mention the 500mm.
> They have the means to succeed!


If you mean the 500mm PF f/5.6 I totally agree with you although it is a perfect match for D500 and D850 which do not need an adapter. I do have these 3 items and I love them


----------



## SteveC (Nov 21, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> 2021 is going to be a expensive year. R1 + 600mm f/4 or a Z 600mm f/4 quickly followed up by a Z9.



I dropped about seven grand in two days this year on gear. 2021 will be hard pressed to beat that!


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 21, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I dropped about seven grand in two days this year on gear. 2021 will be hard pressed to beat that!



A £12,000 to £15,000 f/4 super tele would if you wanted one. I expect even the R1 and Z7 will be £6500ish given the cost of the D6 and 1DXiii. My issue is it isn't just going to be the big lens, its a body to go with it if I go back to Canon.

My 2020 was quite light on camera stuff: Z6 for £1399, 50 and 85 f/1.8 S lenses when on sale, renting the 500 PF for £200. The 70-200 S was the biggest buy, but I think it is coming next year.


----------



## Random Orbits (Nov 21, 2020)

degos said:


> That would require Canon to eat humble pie and compete directly with existing third-party options, something they've never been willing to do.
> 
> They'd rather ignore the massive dominance of 150-600 lenses and release a 100-500 just so they don't seem to be copying Tamron. It's all about self-image.



Canon will do something similar but with a twist and charge more because they can and people will buy it, if they choose to compete in this space at all. Do you know that the 150-600s sell more than the 100-400/500 variants? Seriously, Canon makes what it makes. CR is giving you insight as to what they Canon may release going into 2022. The list does not have your 150/200-600. Find another solution if you need it.


----------



## SteveC (Nov 21, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> A £12,000 to £15,000 f/4 super tele would if you wanted one. I expect even the R1 and Z7 will be £6500ish given the cost of the D6 and 1DXiii. My issue is it isn't just going to be the big lens, its a body to go with it if I go back to Canon.
> 
> My 2020 was quite light on camera stuff: Z6 for £1399, 50 and 85 f/1.8 S lenses when on sale, renting the 500 PF for £200. The 70-200 S was the biggest buy, but I think it is coming next year.



You're operating at a considerably higher level than I am, that's for sure. R5 was my first fullframe, ever. And I tend to take pictures on vacations and the like, or the occasional special occasion, rarely wanting more than 400mm. (And as I think about it, I should add the 24-105 L to the total, for another $1500 (it came with an RP I've yet to actually use), but then it wouldn't be just two days.)

As it happens, I spent more on camera gear in those two days (plus the 24-105) than I had in my lifetime up to that point. Easily. As a matter of proportions, that's probably never going to happen again. Anyhow, I look forward to seeing the good things you do with that super tele.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 21, 2020)

SteveC said:


> You're operating at a considerably higher level than I am, that's for sure. R5 was my first fullframe, ever. And I tend to take pictures on vacations and the like, or the occasional special occasion, rarely wanting more than 400mm. (And as I think about it, I should add the 24-105 L to the total, for another $1500 (it came with an RP I've yet to actually use), but then it wouldn't be just two days.)
> 
> As it happens, I spent more on camera gear in those two days (plus the 24-105) than I had in my lifetime up to that point. Easily. As a matter of proportions, that's probably never going to happen again. Anyhow, I look forward to seeing the good things you do with that super tele.



I mean after I buy 'a' big lens, thats me set for 30 odd years. It is just the nature of the subjects I want to shoot. I canny ask a fox too sit still while get close and personal with a 85mm.


----------



## SteveC (Nov 22, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I mean after I buy 'a' big lens, thats me set for 30 odd years. It is just the nature of the subjects I want to shoot. I canny ask a fox too sit still while get close and personal with a 85mm.



No, you certainly can't! I understand the utility of long lenses for the sorts of things you do. If I found myself forced to try, I'd be putting extenders on my 100-400 and not get nearly the same results.


----------



## David - Sydney (Nov 22, 2020)

unfocused said:


> There's a rebate on the R5?


In Australia, canon Australia has a AUD250 cash back
https://www.digidirect.com.au/canon-eos-r5-mirrorless-camera-body


----------



## ISv (Nov 22, 2020)

OK! CANON IS *******!!! I have no idea why but if you need someone to say it!


Maximilian said:


> WOW! Already 30 posts in a thread about the competition and not even once a:
> 
> "Canon is *******!"
> 
> It's getting too sober here - no, it isn't. Thanks to you!


----------



## ISv (Nov 22, 2020)

Bahrd said:


> I wonder if Nikonrumors.com agrees...


Hardly (and I'm a Nikon user)!


----------



## Mahk43 (Nov 22, 2020)

SteveC said:


> ...That's probably never going to happen again.


That's what I told to myself several years ago when I first bought my 6Dii, and again last year when I bought the R, then again this year buying RF70-200 + RF15-35...
Now I prefer to say nothing thinking about how I will pay a R1 next year


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 22, 2020)

yankiefrankie said:


> What is absurd about it? I agree and have both the 100-500 and the 800 f11 for exactly the same reasons. I can see how this may not suit everyone, but for those who prefer versatility and only occasionally need the super telephoto, this is preferrable than a 200-600.


Exactly my choice !


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 22, 2020)

A roadmap like this from Canon would help a lot with purchasing decisions. Nikon Z has had a public roadmap from day one so I knew what I was buying into even if there where a few surprises on the way. I have no idea if buying into RF is good just now because I just have rumours about superteles.

On Nikon I new a 200-600 and 100-400 where coming and now I know a 400 and 600 prime is also coming, I've known for over a year a 105mm macro is coming... that's a pretty important lens for wildlife when mammals are playing hide and seek. 

All Canon have to do is say a 400, 500, 600 are coming... preferably that 500 being a f/5.6 and I could start looking at it objectively. As it stands, I just have to put money away and aim for the Z 600 unless the R1 and 600 are announced sooner and just outdo or undercut Nikon before the money is saved. I'll get a 500mm PF till then, it is isn't going to turn useless when the big lenses and pro bodies come out.


----------



## fred (Nov 23, 2020)

Why are Canon cameras so ugly and overpriced?? It would be so easy to switch otherwise - those RF L lenses, Sigma probably coming soon, excellent AF and IBIS...


----------



## tron (Nov 23, 2020)

Canon has a 400DO and Nikon a 500PF. I am thinking that maybe a Canon 600 5.6DO would be a very interesting and tempting lens.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Nov 23, 2020)

tron said:


> Canon has a 400DO and Nikon a 500PF. I am thinking that maybe a Canon 600 5.6DO would be a very interesting and tempting lens.



Sometimes I wonder which is better, a 400 DO f/4 or a 500 PF f/5.6. The 500 is about my good starting point, but if a 400 had a 1.4x and 2x and was just as sharp. But the 400 DO is something close to 2x the cost regardless.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Nov 26, 2020)

Good to see that Nikon tries to give a perspective for the future, despite the crisis in the photography market that hit them even harder than Canon. I am pretty sure that at least some of their planned lenses will force Canon to make a move, too. They did in the past, e.g. with the Nikkor 200-400mm f/4 line of lenses, the original ED version came out in 1983. In 2013 Canon replied with their EF 200-400mm f/4, so Canon sports and wildlife photographers had to wait only for 30 years. So there is sometimes much room for optimism and enough time for long-term saving


----------

