# Patent: Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 7, 2016)

```
A patent for the Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS has finally appeared. A <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-br-at-canon-expo/">prototype of this lens was shown in September of 2015</a> at the Canon EXPO. We <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-is-to-arrive-in-late-2017-cr2/">were also told a few months ago</a> that the retail version of this lens could be coming near the end of 2017, though we haven’t received confirmation.</p>
<p>Patent publication number 2016-200685 (Google Translated)</p>
<ul>
<li>Release date 2016.12.1</li>
<li>Application date 2015.4.9</li>
<li>Focal length 585.00</li>
<li>F number 4.12</li>
<li>Half angle of view (degree) 2.12</li>
<li>Image height 21.64</li>
<li>Lens total length 335.32</li>
<li>BF 66.92</li>
</ul>
<p>We hope to hear confirmation of a release date in the coming months. We’d also like to see a price tag, but that’s far less likely this far out from an announcement.</p>
<p><em>image credit // <a href="http://www.popphoto.com/canon-is-working-on-600mm-do-br-telephoto-lens-with-its-latest-optical-tech">popphoto</a></em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Light Sculptor (Dec 7, 2016)

I am so looking forward to trying this lens out, but might have to sell everything I own to be able to own it though


----------



## Maximilian (Dec 7, 2016)

It will be interesting to see, how much weight they can save compared to the 600/4L II.
Also the optical performance will be interesting, given from what we could see from the 400/4 DO II.


----------



## BeenThere (Dec 7, 2016)

Are we ready for a $15,000 - $16,000 lens?


----------



## j-nord (Dec 7, 2016)

BeenThere said:


> Are we ready for a $15,000 - $16,000 lens?


It'll be a tough call between buying a car or a lens


----------



## kirispupis (Dec 7, 2016)

What I would love to see is a built-in extender like the one on the 200-400/1.4x. I doubt the extra price will make a big difference to those who can afford the lens.


----------



## Jopa (Dec 7, 2016)

BeenThere said:


> Are we ready for a $15,000 - $16,000 lens?


Depends on how good it will be optically. What if it won't match the non-DO IQ? Is it a direct replacement or a separate product? Let's wait and see...


----------



## compupix (Dec 7, 2016)

You should have made the red line green. Canon's DO lenses have a green line.


----------



## tron (Dec 7, 2016)

Yeeeeeeeeeeees! Finally there is hope for such a lens! 
Nooooooooooooooooooo! I will not be able to afford it!


----------



## NancyP (Dec 7, 2016)

Heck, I usually get about 18 years out of a car. The current car is still a baby. Maybe I will look longingly at this. Could I lift it?


----------



## tron (Dec 7, 2016)

NancyP said:


> Heck, I usually get about 18 years out of a car. The current car is still a baby. Maybe I will look longingly at this. Could I lift it?


If I recall correctly you have (or mentioned you were thinking about getting) a 500mm f/4L IS II. It weighs 3.2 Kg and the prototype had about the same weight (and it was 7cm shorter...).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2016)

j-nord said:


> BeenThere said:
> 
> 
> > Are we ready for a $15,000 - $16,000 lens?
> ...



Yeah, when I go out shooting birds the value of the gear in the car (1D X, 600/4L IS II, RRS tripod+monopod) exceeds the value of the car. 

+1 on the built-in extender, I use my 600/4 with a 1.4x much of the time.


----------



## vscd (Dec 7, 2016)

Do I want it? No! Do I need it? No! Do I want to try it out for a day? HELL YEAH!!!!!


----------



## Alex_M (Dec 7, 2016)

I would argue that such a lens priced at $16,000 would hold it's value better than a car priced similarly.
In fact, I would even expect the price for such a lens to go only up due to hidden material, labour and manufacturing cost inflation, taxes and duties. If only the Canon EF mount is still around in 5-10 years time from now. 



j-nord said:


> BeenThere said:
> 
> 
> > Are we ready for a $15,000 - $16,000 lens?
> ...


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 7, 2016)

BeenThere said:


> Are we ready for a $15,000 - $16,000 lens?



We've been there for quite a while........

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=918849&gclid=CKLGs7DB4tACFYQdgQodr-EFmQ&Q=&ap=y&m=Y&c3api=1876%2C92051678642%2C&is=REG&A=details


----------



## fegari (Dec 7, 2016)

Based on the patent's description of the lens length, the lenght is virtually identical to the 400 2.8 II or 200-400 F4. The diameter I guess will also be in between those two, I'd say closer to the 400 2.8's diameter. The weight I guess much closer to the 500 II, the lightest of all those.


----------



## Maiaibing (Dec 7, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> A patent for the Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS has finally appeared.


First DO lens I would have any interest in. Like to see it going on sale, a price tag and some (impressive) test shots to prove itself a worthy acquisition.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2016)

fegari said:


> Based on the patent's description of the lens length, the lenght is virtually identical to the 400 2.8 II or 200-400 F4.



Not quite. Those are 343mm (13.5") and 366mm (14.4"), respectively, whereas the physical length of this patented lens would be ~292mm (11.5"). A 50mm / 2" / 15% length reduction is not insignificant.

Keep in mind that a 'lens patent' is really an optical formula patent, so the 'lens total length' is from the front element to the sensor. To compare with measurements of actual lenses, you need to subtract the 43mm flange focal distance from the patented length.


----------



## jolyonralph (Dec 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yeah, when I go out shooting birds the value of the gear in the car (1D X, 600/4L IS II, RRS tripod+monopod) exceeds the value of the car.



When I go out shooting with my EOS M3 and a couple of EF-M lenses the value of that gear exceeds the value of the car!


----------



## AlanF (Dec 7, 2016)

jolyonralph said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, when I go out shooting birds the value of the gear in the car (1D X, 600/4L IS II, RRS tripod+monopod) exceeds the value of the car.
> ...



When I cycled to the lab this morning, the Black Rapid strap alone exceeded the value of my bike.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Dec 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> j-nord said:
> 
> 
> > BeenThere said:
> ...



Yup, about as much as my first house! Wife wants a new pickup truck. This could get ugly.


----------



## fegari (Dec 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> fegari said:
> 
> 
> > Based on the patent's description of the lens length, the lenght is virtually identical to the 400 2.8 II or 200-400 F4.
> ...



Where do you see 292mm in lenght? in the post it is state "Lens total length 335.32"


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2016)

fegari said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > fegari said:
> ...



Subtraction. 335mm – 43mm = 292mm.


----------



## fegari (Dec 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> fegari said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



tx, did not know that. In such case it is tiny! just 60mm longer than 400 DO II and just 40mm aprox longer than 300 2.8 II. Based on that lenght I guess we're talking about 2.5kg +- lens with a diameter probably close to the 500's front diameter


----------



## LordofTackle (Dec 7, 2016)

fegari said:


> tx, did not know that. In such case it is tiny! just 60mm longer than 400 DO II and just 40mm aprox longer than 300 2.8 II. Based on that lenght I guess we're talking about 2.5kg +- lens with a diameter probably close to the 500's front diameter



I thought the front lens stays the same, also with an DO lens?
DO just shortens the lens, but 600mm f/4 is still 600mm f/4...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2016)

LordofTackle said:


> fegari said:
> 
> 
> > tx, did not know that. In such case it is tiny! just 60mm longer than 400 DO II and just 40mm aprox longer than 300 2.8 II. Based on that lenght I guess we're talking about 2.5kg +- lens with a diameter probably close to the 500's front diameter
> ...



Correct. A 600/4 is still going to need a 150mm front element, whether conventional or DO. As the guy in the red shirt (who somehow managed not to die on the show) said, "Ya cann'a change the laws of physics."


----------



## fegari (Dec 7, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> LordofTackle said:
> 
> 
> > fegari said:
> ...



I may need to disagree, the f/stop relates to the entrance pupil which does not necessarily mean it is the same size than the front element's diameter. 

Nonetheless, I was not referring that, I was talking about overall lens diameter, not front lens diameter (nor pupil for what is worth). I was using the 500 II's diameter as a proxy of what this new lens diameter could be.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 7, 2016)

fegari said:


> I may need to disagree, the f/stop relates to the entrance pupil which does not necessarily mean it is the same size than the front element's diameter.



It is the apparent size of the entrance pupil that is important, not the physical size. In complex lenses that means the front element can't be smaller than the focal length divided by the widest aperture for lenses that focus to infinity. A 600mm f4 lens must have a 150mm front element.


----------



## vscd (Dec 7, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> fegari said:
> 
> 
> > I may need to disagree, the f/stop relates to the entrance pupil which does not necessarily mean it is the same size than the front element's diameter.
> ...



Yes, correct. I would say the "aperture"-diameter has to be 150mm. The Frontelement is at least 150mm or larger, but it's not neccessarily the same size.


----------



## 100 (Dec 7, 2016)

vscd said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > fegari said:
> ...



A 600 f/4 needs 150mm but it’s “only” a 585 f/4.12 so a 142mm front element will do


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2016)

fegari said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > LordofTackle said:
> ...



With long telephoto lens designs, the apparent position of the entrance pupil is effectively at the front element. My statement doesn't necessarily apply to other lens designs, but generally the front element is as large or larger than the physical iris diaphragm diameter (FL / f-number). 




100 said:


> A 600 f/4 needs 150mm but it’s “only” a 585 f/4.12 so a 142mm front element will do



Quite true. In fact, when I lay a ruler across the front of my 600/4L IS II, the front element measures slightly over 142mm in diameter. That's consistent with the typical 'rounding error' for lenses (although in science the practice of rounding is applied such that, on average, there's equal likelihood of rounding up or down, in lens design the rounding almost always favors shorter focal lengths and narrower apertures).


----------



## arbitrage (Dec 8, 2016)

compupix said:


> You should have made the red line green. Canon's DO lenses have a green line.



Who should have made it green? That photo is Canon's prototype of the casing they showed last year. And in some of the photos you can read the actual name plate and Canon named it " EF 600mm 1:4 L DO IS USM " So Canon is pushing this DO into the L range....green ring be gone....this ones gonna be fire engine red 8)

IMO, they should have made the 400 DO II the 400 L DO IS because it leaves the old 400DO in the dust and belongs in the L range of superteles


----------



## Act444 (Dec 8, 2016)

I'd like to know weight. Not so much price though


----------



## IglooEater (Dec 8, 2016)

arbitrage said:


> IMO, they should have made the 400 DO II the 400 L DO IS because it leaves the old 400DO in the dust and belongs in the L range of superteles



Agreed, but I think canon wanted to prove the effectiveness of the DO line before soiling the L line's image unnecessarily. Honestly, the 400mm DO II was the first DO lens that was truly _impressive._


----------



## Maiaibing (Dec 8, 2016)

Having looked a little on Canon's pricing I'm not sure it will be as expensive as some suggest here. 

The 400mm DO II is 6.900$. Current 600mm f/4 is ~12.000$. My guess is the DO will effectively replace the 600 f/4 and Canon will split the productions saving between them selves and their customers. So that I would only expect a 12.000$ price tag.

That would be a very attractive lens by all accounts. Offering a distinct advantage over 300mm +2x in a package you could consider lugging around even for hand held shots.


----------



## scyrene (Dec 8, 2016)

jolyonralph said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, when I go out shooting birds the value of the gear in the car (1D X, 600/4L IS II, RRS tripod+monopod) exceeds the value of the car.
> ...



I don't own a car; my big white lens is worth nearly as much as all my other possessions put together :-[

Oh, and I would be very interested in this lens. I'd have gone for the 600 II but the price is considerably more than the 500 II.


----------



## NancyP (Dec 8, 2016)

Tron's got a good memory. Yes, I'd be interested, if I could handle it. I tried the Sigma Sport 150-600 mm lens at 2.86 kg - could get it on and off tripod and hand hold in shooting position for a few minutes, but my panning is not great at 600mm - need more muscle to make it readily usable. (actual efforts underway since then, but a long way to go, gym-wise). So, the 500 f/4 L IS II is 3.19 kg and the 600 f/4 L IS II is 3.92 kg. I need to rent a 500 or 600 mm 3+ kilo lens once I have built up my usually ignored arms. This takes longer every year....must get very systematic about arm/shoulder exercises, normally I have just done core and legs.


----------



## AlanF (Dec 8, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> Having looked a little on Canon's pricing I'm not sure it will be as expensive as some suggest here.
> 
> The 400mm DO II is 6.900$. Current 600mm f/4 is ~12.000$. My guess is the DO will effectively replace the 600 f/4 and Canon will split the productions saving between them selves and their customers. So that I would only expect a 12.000$ price tag.
> 
> That would be a very attractive lens by all accounts. Offering a distinct advantage over 300mm +2x in a package you could consider lugging around even for hand held shots.



A 600/5.6 DO would weigh less than 2.5 kg (a 300/2.8 II + 2xTC III weighs ~2.7 kg). I can lug one of those around all day on a Blackrapid strap and handhold for long periods even at my advanced age.


----------



## Light Sculptor (Dec 10, 2016)

AlanF said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > Having looked a little on Canon's pricing I'm not sure it will be as expensive as some suggest here.
> ...




I don't think it would weigh as little as 2.5kg, due to the objective lens diameter being considerably wider than the 300mm lens width you are comparing it with. Even a small increase in diameter leads to a considerably greater volume of glass, hence weight.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 10, 2016)

Light Sculptor said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > Maiaibing said:
> ...



Can you explain why a 600/5.6 lens would need a 'considerably wider objective lens diameter' than a 300/2.8 lens? Last I checked, 600 / 5.6 = 300 / 2.8 = 107mm.


----------



## Light Sculptor (Dec 10, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Light Sculptor said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...




Sorry! My bad! Apologies! 

I misread the other persons post, and thought they were referring to the upcoming F4 aperture 600mm DO lens, rather than a new suggestion of F5.6 aperture 600mm DO lens. 

Yes of course an F5.6 600mm DO lens would be considerably lighter, and a very interesting option for light weight nature travel photography.


----------



## applecider (Dec 12, 2016)

The advantage of the DO design is size and weight. Do we really want to add a built in extender? It seems that would negate the advantages for most people. Maybe a second model with the built in extender would be the way to go.

I'd buy the one without and add external extenders as needed.

Or how about a switchable add on extender, that would give fast extending to all the big whites, if optically doable.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Dec 13, 2016)

Now I like that idea, making an extender that can be negated while in use but physically it's probably a nightmare.

Jack


----------



## Mikehit (Dec 13, 2016)

It would definitely entirely feasible. 
Assuming it operates like the 200-400, when the 1.4xtc is switched out out of the light path, its place is taken by an optic that refocuses the lens image without any magnification. With the quality of the 1.4 tc nowadays there would probably be little to no optical degradation but even if there were it is the price to pay for flexibility. 
This of course opens the possibility for different models: no magnification with switchable 1.4x, or with switchable 2x or switchable 1.4x/2x.

Now let me find where I put those patent forms....


----------



## tron (Dec 13, 2016)

NancyP said:


> Tron's got a good memory. Yes, I'd be interested, if I could handle it. I tried the Sigma Sport 150-600 mm lens at 2.86 kg - could get it on and off tripod and hand hold in shooting position for a few minutes, but my panning is not great at 600mm - need more muscle to make it readily usable. (actual efforts underway since then, but a long way to go, gym-wise). So, the 500 f/4 L IS II is 3.19 kg and the 600 f/4 L IS II is 3.92 kg. I need to rent a 500 or 600 mm 3+ kilo lens once I have built up my usually ignored arms. This takes longer every year....must get very systematic about arm/shoulder exercises, normally I have just done core and legs.


I am no fit. I just try to use the 500 on a tripod close to my car or on a car window. When I was hand-holding it almost continuously (on a boat shooting birds) for a couple of days my left hand got so tired that I switched to the 400 DO ii. Even so my hand was feeling tired (when I tried to lift even something light) for about t2 months!


----------

