# Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS To Arrive in Late 2017 [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 3, 2016)

```
<p>We’re told that the Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-br-at-canon-expo/">that was shown in prototype form</a> at Canon EXPO in September of 2015 is currently scheduled to be launched in the second half of 2017.</p>
<p>Along with the new DO supertelephoto, we’re told that Canon is well on its way developing updates for the other “big white” prime lenses. While optics will likely be similar, Canon is working on weight savings techniques and updated coatings and IS systems. We don’t expect to see these lenses announced in 2017, although we’re told it’s possible we may see them being tested at the 2018 Olympics in South Korea.</p>
<p>As with all lens announcements, take them with a grain of salt, as they do have a tendancy to be met with delays.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></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>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 3, 2016)

I rather like my 600/4L IS II, but I would be very interested in getting equivalent optical performance in a smaller, somewhat lighter package...


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> I rather like my 600/4L IS II, but I would be very interested in getting equivalent optical performance in a smaller, somewhat lighter package...



The form factor of that prototype reminded me of a traffic cone. 

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 3, 2016)

As opposed to the current bazooka-like form factor.


----------



## Chaitanya (Oct 3, 2016)

that would certainly be an interesting lens other than the fact that huge front element will make it awkward(to say the least) to carry in bag while travelling.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2016)

Chaitanya said:


> that would certainly be an interesting lens other than the fact that huge front element will make it awkward(to say the least) to carry in bag while travelling.



Sure, but 600/4 = 600/4 regardless -- that front element wouldn't get any smaller with DO, right? 

But if you own a 600 f/4 lens today, this DO version would represent a massive length reduction and get this lens into much more modest carrying bags/cases, one would think.

- A


----------



## YuengLinger (Oct 3, 2016)

They said the ef 50mm f/1.2 L II would be ready when?

Can't believe I beat ahsanford to the question.


----------



## Steve Dmark2 (Oct 3, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told that the Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-br-at-canon-expo/">that was shown in prototype form</a> at Canon EXPO in September of 2015 is currently scheduled to be launched in the second half of 2017.</p>
> <p>Along with the new DO supertelephoto, we’re told that Canon is well on its way developing updates for the other “big white” prime lenses. While optics will likely be similar, Canon is working on weight savings techniques and updated coatings and IS systems. ....



Maybe they also fit in new AF System "NANO USM technology" as well as digital focus display.
However the second part can be to gimmiky for the Big whites


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> They said the ef 50mm f/1.2 L II would be ready when?
> 
> Can't believe I beat ahsanford to the question.



L? f/1.2? What does that mean? Who needs _that?_

- A


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 3, 2016)

What price range would it be in?
13000 - 14000?
The existing one is 4kg
What would being DO shave off the weight?


----------



## Steve Dmark2 (Oct 3, 2016)

Lets do some example calculation:

Canon 300mm 2,8 MK1 IS: 2,55kg
Canon 300mm 4L IS: 1,19kg

-->47% Difference.


Canon 400mm 2,8L 5,4kg 
With 47% Difference -->
A fictive Canon 400mm 4L: 2,6kg.

Compared to 400mm 4DO IS II: 2,1kg.

So DO Savings at 400mm :81%

Put on the 600mm length:

600mm 4L IS II: 3,9kg with 81% -->
600mm 4DO IS: 3,15kg.

Does this make sense?


----------



## xps (Oct 3, 2016)

Hector1970 said:


> What price range would it be in?
> 13000 - 14000?
> The existing one is 4kg
> What would being DO shave off the weight?



Unspecific rumored at Photokina at 13-16.000$ (increase of about 2-3000$ to the older version)-That means about 17.000€! if you calculate it at the new Canon price calculating factor. (1.3 times the $ price) 

I bought the 600 II this year. So I will stay with the old one - although my mucle power is getting weaker.


----------



## dolina (Oct 3, 2016)

0.5x the height and 0.5x the weight but 2.0x the price?

Where do I sign up?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 3, 2016)

Steve Dmark2 said:


> Lets do some example calculation:
> 
> Canon 300mm 2,8 MK1 IS: 2,55kg
> Canon 300mm 4L IS: 1,19kg
> ...



Sure, but *length* is the real killer app with DO, correct? We should be expecting (as an analogy) a 600 prime in the length of a 400 prime of the same max aperture, correct? 

That's the huge driver for DO, correct? To get the length down?

- A


----------



## xps (Oct 3, 2016)

Steve Dmark2 said:


> Lets do some example calculation:
> 
> Canon 300mm 2,8 MK1 IS: 2,55kg
> Canon 300mm 4L IS: 1,19kg
> ...



The people that rumored the price, also said, the weight and lens will be dramatically reduced. I think, the lens is lower than 3kg. -maybe they use other, lighter materials for the tube&coating


----------



## xps (Oct 3, 2016)

Attendum: There were some journalists rumoring, Canon could use two IS systems in the newest lenses. Maybe there is an rotating and tilting compensation too?


----------



## xps (Oct 3, 2016)

dolina said:


> 0.5x the height and 0.5x the weight but 2.0x the price?
> 
> Where do I sign up?


I´m sure, this lens gets sold well. Just think of all the professional photographers that carry a lot of gear with them....


----------



## applecider (Oct 3, 2016)

For weight calculation I compare the 300 2.8 ii with 1.4 ext to the 400 ii DO. The relative weights are

300+1.4-about 100oz, 400 DO 80 oz, either gets you to 400mm f4 more or less. So the DO is 80% roughly of the non-DO.

The 600 f4 ii is 150 oz, times 0.8 gives a potential DO wt of 120 0z or 3.40kg. The bare current 500 is ii is about the same so a DO 600 could weigh about as much as current 500 f4, with weight distributed more toward the camera than the 500.

Using the same guessing method for the 800 f5.6 a 5kg lens could end up as a 4kg 800 DO f5.6.

I just wish canon would innovate....


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 3, 2016)

Maybe DO is something that could finally get the 300f4 and 400f5.6 upgraded.
At greater cost, of course, but the issue is convincing Canon to do anything new with those lenses at all.

Nikon's 300PF is $2,000 if that's any indication of what to expect.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Oct 3, 2016)

9VIII said:


> Maybe DO is something that could finally get the 300f4 and 400f5.6 upgraded.
> At greater cost, of course, but the issue is convincing Canon to do anything new with those lenses at all.
> 
> Nikon's 300PF is $2,000 if that's any indication of what to expect.



I'd go for a 400 f/5.6 DO!


----------



## James Larsen (Oct 3, 2016)

I think my ultimate lens would be a 200-600 f4 DO, (yeah, sounds impossible, but just 30 years ago nobody would've thought the 1DX II was possible!!). That would be a sweet lens.


----------



## asl (Oct 3, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > They said the ef 50mm f/1.2 L II would be ready when?
> ...



Only for weather sealing I would say i do not need 1.2, I have the Tamron 45 it is nice and weather seal is nice feature, but autofocus just is not good enough I think and that makes to hole ting a bit of strange combination, think I will have to (try) to return it.


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 3, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> They said the ef 50mm f/1.2 L II would be ready when?
> 
> Can't believe I beat ahsanford to the question.



Quick Draw McGraw... maybe you are too young to remember? Anyway, you're fast!


----------



## Ozarker (Oct 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> As opposed to the current bazooka-like form factor.



I prefer the bazooka. Compensating. It's pathetic, I know.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 4, 2016)

I don't mind to carry the 600 f/4 II if the quality is top notch, have no problem shooting it handheld. Sometimes only neck hurts by end of the day 
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-400mm-F28L-IS-II-USM-versus-Canon-EF-400mm-F4-DO-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R__401_0_1425_1009 I know, we all love DxO, but I'm still wondering if the DO technology saves the length / weight, but optically is not as flawless as the regular one?


----------



## candc (Oct 4, 2016)

Jopa said:


> I don't mind to carry the 600 f/4 II if the quality is top notch, have no problem shooting it handheld. Sometimes only neck hurts by end of the day
> https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-400mm-F28L-IS-II-USM-versus-Canon-EF-400mm-F4-DO-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R__401_0_1425_1009 I know, we all love DxO, but I'm still wondering if the DO technology saves the length / weight, but optically is not as flawless as the regular one?



That metric on the dxo website is very misleading because the "mpix" sharpness number they use is a conglomerate measurement of all apertures across the field. It's a useless measurement for a lens like this. What people really want to know is how sharp it is wide open. The 400doii is super sharp wide open but it drops off more quickly as you stop down compared to other lenses.


----------



## Nikonism (Oct 4, 2016)

chrysoberyl said:


> I'd go for a 400 f/5.6 DO!



if they are selling a 400 4 DO i don't see them selling a 400 5.6 DO ???

i love this 600 F4 DO, but im afraid it will be hitting 10k or about (even if more, already too much for me)

i'm using nikon and i love my 300 f4 PF (+TC 1.4), just wish it was a 400 or 500 ;D ;D


----------



## pwp (Oct 4, 2016)

Jopa said:


> I don't mind to carry the 600 f/4 II if the quality is top notch, have no problem shooting it handheld. Sometimes only neck hurts by end of the day


Yikes you must be the original Mr Muscles. Very few photographers on the planet could work all day hand holding _any_ 600mm. 
My three times a week at the gym clearly isn't enough. 

-pw


----------



## Nikonism (Oct 4, 2016)

pwp said:


> Yikes you must be the original Mr Muscles. Very few photographers on the planet could work all day hand holding _any_ 600mm.
> My three times a week at the gym clearly isn't enough.
> 
> -pw



once i talked to a guy, bigger build than mine but more lazy
he's more a portraiter and studio shooter than a 'hiker', neither a birder standing on a tower a couple of hours

i told him the 300 F4 ED (not pf) if you are walking 7-8 hours (+ backpack + up and down the hill, water )
in the evening will let you feel tired
he was like that's not heavy (yes from a stationary bird watcher or a studio photographer perspective)

but i didnt tell him, can you lift this up once twice or thrice ? that's heavy like a 'blue tit'

basicly a safarist doesnt do anything in comparison = car + tripod + airplane, 2-3 hours, move it from one place to another and thats it, back in the hotel to eat the nice dinner


static vs active, 2-3 hours vs whole day

i'm of strong build and i lift bags 25-30kg at work, daily
not yet 40yo


----------



## xps (Oct 4, 2016)

I wonder, how good will the optical performance be? I owned the 400 DO Version I and was dissatisfied. The version II seems to be even better, but I know two persons that have bought it, who say, the optical performance is very good, but not excellent for this price.
My grandson says, the fresnel technology is still not as good as the conventional one. It got much better in the last years, but it will take another years to become as good as the current conventional lens technology


----------



## Nikonism (Oct 4, 2016)

it looks like PF and DO needs some more decades of development

it has + and -, pros and cons

you gain in mobility you lose in top quality, it's trade off


CaNikon test us to see if we 'accept' this trade off, considering that a bazooka for a lot of movement is a non sense (unless perhaps your way of shooting is static on tripod and car)


----------



## Plainsman (Oct 4, 2016)

I would have thought Canon would have brought a 300/2 DO out first with matching TCs.

Much more useful than this one I think and a better investment.


----------



## fish_shooter (Oct 4, 2016)

No mention of a BR element? The one shown last year did. see:
http://www.lens-rumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4l-is-do-br-usm-lens-prototype-images/

An f/4 600mm lens needs to have a 150mm aperture so the diameter will be large compared to the f/4 400mm DO that only needs a 100mm aperture. I have the new 400 DO and it is indeed very sharp. Specular bokeh balls have rings due to the Fresnel nature of the lens.


----------



## expatinasia (Oct 4, 2016)

I have not yet tried the 400 f/4 DO IS but the reviews are very, very good and it is considerably cheaper, lighter and smaller than the 400 f/2.8 ii.

If you want to be at 600-1,200 this new lens is going to be a very interesting development.


----------



## krisbell (Oct 4, 2016)

I personally cant wait for this to hit the market. Living on a small island a major priority with my super-teles is the ability to pack it into carry-on luggage bags. This should fit the bill nicely. If the optics are close to the current 600mm f4 and the price doesnt hit $20k then I'm in.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 4, 2016)

Extrapolating from the weight of the 400mm f/4 DO II and a double log plot of the weights of the 500 and 600mm f/4 IIs, I estimate a weight for the 600mm f/4 DO of 3.32 kg, just a tad heavier than the current 500mm.


----------



## tron (Oct 4, 2016)

dolina said:


> 0.5x the height and 0.5x the weight but 2.0x the price?
> 
> Where do I sign up?



3.9->3.2Kg is not 0.5 the weight. It is 0.82X a 18% reduction.

The better part is the length:

44->31cm 0.7X the length a 30% reduction. A very welcome one.

Still the price is extreme...


----------



## arcer (Oct 4, 2016)

Steve Dmark2 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > We’re told that the Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-br-at-canon-expo/">that was shown in prototype form</a> at Canon EXPO in September of 2015 is currently scheduled to be launched in the second half of 2017.</p>
> ...



I think that Nano USM is not faster than the conventional USM technology and such technology are much more suitable in zoom lens than primes.
In terms of the digital display, lets see how the market response to the one on the new 70-300 zoom.


----------



## sanj (Oct 4, 2016)

Friends.
Very curious to know what is the downside of DO lenses? What is the compromise? 
Thx


----------



## FEBS (Oct 4, 2016)

Chaitanya said:


> that would certainly be an interesting lens other than the fact that huge front element will make it awkward(to say the least) to carry in bag while travelling.



But that means that I could use my Gura Gear Bataflae 26L Backpack for travelling instead of the 32L. The last one with 600/f4 II and 1Dx is really critical as handluggage on the airplane, as it is not always permitted from every airline. I now kneed the 32L so that my 600f4 can fit inside, but together with 1Dx and extenders the weight for hand luggage is quickly reached while there is still a lot of place in the bag.

I hope that when the lens will be available that deliveries don't take over the delivery issiues of the 400/f4 DO II.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 4, 2016)

pwp said:


> Jopa said:
> 
> 
> > I don't mind to carry the 600 f/4 II if the quality is top notch, have no problem shooting it handheld. Sometimes only neck hurts by end of the day
> ...



I dunno about that. I'm quite weak and fairly unfit, and I can use the 500L + 2x for hours (although mostly you're carrying it rather than holding it up to aim at things), and that's not much lighter than the 600. I think it's mostly just getting used to the thing and maybe the motivation.


----------



## candc (Oct 4, 2016)

sanj said:


> Friends.
> Very curious to know what is the downside of DO lenses? What is the compromise?
> Thx



Used to be that the "do" lenses were not as sharp and contrasty as the refractive lens counterparts. There was also bad specular highlights and such. Canon has mostly overcome those drawbacks. The oof highlights still may show some rings in some situations but its not common and not much of an issue. 

The do elements are difficult to make. Apparently the 2 halves of the do element need to be matched by hand. Its a lengthy process and makes the lens more expensive. 

It took a long time before the 400doii was even available due to manufacturing difficulties.


----------



## scyrene (Oct 4, 2016)

Plainsman said:


> I would have thought Canon would have brought a 300/2 DO out first with matching TCs.
> 
> Much more useful than this one I think and a better investment.



I suspect that would be an awkward lens to use - short and very wide with a huge, heavy front element - like the 200 1.8 only more so!


----------



## sanj (Oct 4, 2016)

candc said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Friends.
> ...



Thanks Much. So basically the downside is just the cost?


----------



## candc (Oct 4, 2016)

sanj said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



For now it seems. If canon can further refine the "do" technology and improve the manufacturing process then it could be standard for future superteles.


----------



## DJL329 (Oct 4, 2016)

Looking at the photo again, I just noticed it has a red ring, instead of green, as the other DO lenses have. Perhaps Canon has finally decided to add it to the "L" lineup.

After renting the 500 f/4L II this spring (too long and heavy for little ol' me), I purchased the 400mm DO II and really like it. It's a nice upgrade from the 300mm f/4L IS. The 600mm DO would still be too much for me, but a 500mm f/4 DO might be interesting...

All shots with the 5D III and 1.4x TC II.

F/6.3, 1/1000, ISO 200





on Flickr

F/6.3, 1/4000, ISO 2500




on Flickr

F/11, 1/500, ISO 5000 - w/36mm extension tube




on Flickr


----------



## NancyP (Oct 4, 2016)

This goes to the top of my fantasy wish list. 3.1 kg is about the weight of the 500 f/4 L IS II, handholdable for shorter periods of time. I would think that the shorter length of the DO relative to the regular design would make the lens somewhat easier to hold and better balanced. 

However, there's always rentals. And, my well-loved 400 f/5.6L, when I need real portability.

110# woman here. Minor dumbbell lifting at the moment. One thing I can move from fantasy to reality is more muscle.


----------



## sanj (Oct 4, 2016)

DJL329. 
I am not an expert by any standard, but feel that you need to re look at your sharpening techniques, there is something wrong somewhere. 
Friendly comment.


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 4, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> They said the ef 50mm f/1.2 L II would be ready when?
> 
> Can't believe I beat ahsanford to the question.



who's this very special "they"?

canon has shown prototypes of the 600 DO, it's obviously in development. have you seen this fabled 50mm 1.2L II in prototype form?


----------



## rrcphoto (Oct 4, 2016)

Nikonism said:


> it looks like PF and DO needs some more decades of development



PF doesn't have decades of development.. DO does.


----------



## tron (Oct 4, 2016)

sanj said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...


There is also some haze around bright lights that is much less (almost nothing) with 500mm II. I found out by shooting at the same place with my 400 DO as a test so I could compare. This is not tragic (the contrast and sharpness are excellent) but I use to take moonrise photos at that place (an ancient temple) when the time of year is right. The day after full moon the temple is lit with 2 strong floodlights. It is one of these that I am referring to. This is not serious enough but I should also take moon photos to decide. I am afraid this is the reason I will not be able to part with my 500.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Oct 4, 2016)

scyrene said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > Jopa said:
> ...



Totally unfit 57 year old Arthritic Diabetic with arms like matchsticks here. When I had the 600 F4 L IS Mk1 hand holding was a problem - traded to the 800 F5.6 L IS and it's fine. I use it hand held or propped against a handy tree/fence between 20 and 30% of the time. In a number of the hides that I use it is impractical to use a tripod or the apertures are so small that I have to remove the hood and rest the lens on the side of the hide again not an issue.

If the 600 F4 DO materialises the I would be very interested indeed - I won't be able to afford it but I would be very interested! Perhaps it could be a little lighter if they don't include IS? That would suit me just fine but I can't see that happening though.

P.S. What is a Gym?


----------



## tron (Oct 5, 2016)

applecider said:


> For weight calculation I compare the 300 2.8 ii with 1.4 ext to the 400 ii DO. The relative weights are
> 
> 300+1.4-about 100oz, 400 DO 80 oz, either gets you to 400mm f4 more or less. So the DO is 80% roughly of the non-DO.
> 
> ...


Actually the existing 800 5.6L IS weighs 4.5Kg...


----------



## Cali Capture (Oct 5, 2016)

Ive got the 400 f/2.8II, so it's not in the fiscal cards to drop more Mulla for what my 1.4X can give me. Now an 800mm DO might make me save if Canon can use that tech to bring us a lighter/shorter 800mm f/4 or even 5.6. I've more so, also always wanted a 200mm f/2.0. My guess is even though this lens has epic optics, it's next in line for IS, weight and ergonomics/looks upgrade. So That would be may next GAS lens in the off-white family. I love the flexibility fast teles give you paired with a 1.4 or 2x.


----------



## tron (Oct 5, 2016)

Cali Capture said:


> Ive got the 400 f/2.8II, so it's not in the fiscal cards to drop more Mulla for what my 1.4X can give me. Now an 800mm DO might make me save if Canon can use that tech to bring us a lighter/shorter 800mm f/4 or even 5.6. I've more so, also always wanted a 200mm f/2.0. My guess is even though this lens has epic optics, it's next in line for IS, weight and ergonomics/looks upgrade. So That would be may next GAS lens in the off-white family. I love the flexibility fast teles give you paired with a 1.4 or 2x.


A 1000 DO had been mentioned in CR a few months ago...


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 5, 2016)

Cali Capture said:


> Ive got the 400 f/2.8II, so it's not in the fiscal cards to drop more Mulla for what my 1.4X can give me. Now an 800mm DO might make me save if Canon can use that tech to bring us a lighter/shorter 800mm f/4 or even 5.6. I've more so, also always wanted a 200mm f/2.0. My guess is even though this lens has epic optics, it's next in line for IS, weight and ergonomics/looks upgrade. So That would be may next GAS lens in the off-white family. I love the flexibility fast teles give you paired with a 1.4 or 2x.



I have the mkI LIS version....and THAT's a heavy lens. Heavier than the 600mm f4 LIS of the same generation. What I love about the 400/2.8 is that is t is THE most versatile white lens. It takes a 1.4x and 2x tc really well and makes an excellent 560mm f4 or 800mm f5.6 with ease. From an IQ point of view...it's pretty near perfect.


----------



## Cali Capture (Oct 5, 2016)

GMC- Yea, as they say in the auto world, there's no replacement for displacement! Same holds true for aperture, you can always throttle is down, but can never get it if it isn't under the hood :0 That's why I think the 200 f/2 is a great compliment to the 400 f2.8, cause you can fill the 300mm gap at f/2.8 yet you are still stoping action at a lighting f/2.0 which justifys it's exisitance with a 70-200mm f/2.8. I also like the speed when I drop a polarizer in and lose a stop. 
Any 200mm f/2.0 owners out there who use this for sports feel like this is a good lens strategy


----------



## Mistral75 (Oct 5, 2016)

DJL329 said:


> Looking at the photo again, I just noticed it has a red ring, instead of green, as the other DO lenses have. Perhaps Canon has finally decided to add it to the "L" lineup.
> 
> (...)



The prototype shown last year was an L lens: Canon EF 600 mm f/4L DO IS USM.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

Mistral75 said:


> DJL329 said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at the photo again, I just noticed it has a red ring, instead of green, as the other DO lenses have. Perhaps Canon has finally decided to add it to the "L" lineup.
> ...



Interesting that the nameplate doesn't include the BR designation, which was included in the source article for this thread.


----------



## Mistral75 (Oct 5, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Interesting that the nameplate doesn't include the BR designation, which was included in the source article for this thread.



The BR in the name of this lens might be a mistake. At Canon Expo the two technologies, BR and DO, were presented together as "_next generation lens technology_":






There were separated descriptions of each:









and a few examples such as the EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM and the prototype of the 600mm f/4.

Since both technologies were presented together and the 600mm f/4 was between the two descriptive panels, people like popphoto and Photography Bay reported on an EF 600mm f/4L DO BR IS USM without thinking further.


----------



## NancyP (Oct 5, 2016)

It may not need BR. It is a lot easier to design an apochromatic telephoto design than an apo wide angle design.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 5, 2016)

NancyP said:


> It may not need BR. It is a lot easier to design an apochromatic telephoto design than an apo wide angle design.



In fact, both DO and BR are intended to correct CA.


----------



## Jopa (Oct 6, 2016)

Mistral75 said:


> DJL329 said:
> 
> 
> > Looking at the photo again, I just noticed it has a red ring, instead of green, as the other DO lenses have. Perhaps Canon has finally decided to add it to the "L" lineup.
> ...



It looks like "500" to me?


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Oct 6, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > They said the ef 50mm f/1.2 L II would be ready when?
> ...



I support this post.. 
I would love to see a 50mm IS lens...


----------



## Maiaibing (Oct 7, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re told that the Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-br-at-canon-expo/">that was shown in prototype form</a> at Canon EXPO in September of 2015 is currently scheduled to be launched in the second half of 2017.</p>



Great marketing ploy. Have no use for this lens. But 600mm in *that* package - want...


----------



## applecider (Oct 8, 2016)

Tron with regard to the weight of the 800mm 5.6, I got my info off of the digital picture and the lens plus hood or "in use" weight is 4.9kg +- a little, are you using the lens without hood as your weight standard? Personally I always keep my hood on except for the rare time I'm packing and need more space, and then it gets inverted. I find the hood protects the lens. When I car transport the lens I stuff a soft cotton towel into the hood to keep any objects from getting into the hood and rolling around and potentially scratching the front element. 

Sorry a little OT there but the in use weight of the 800mm is 5kg more or less.

From the digital picture:
Manufacturer Specification Weight	157.8 oz	
Actual Weight	162.4 oz	
Lens Hood Weight	11.3 oz	
In-Use Weight	173.7 oz


----------



## tron (Oct 9, 2016)

applecider said:


> Tron with regard to the weight of the 800mm 5.6, I got my info off of the digital picture and the lens plus hood or "in use" weight is 4.9kg +- a little, are you using the lens without hood as your weight standard? Personally I always keep my hood on except for the rare time I'm packing and need more space, and then it gets inverted. I find the hood protects the lens. When I car transport the lens I stuff a soft cotton towel into the hood to keep any objects from getting into the hood and rolling around and potentially scratching the front element.
> 
> Sorry a little OT there but the in use weight of the 800mm is 5kg more or less.
> 
> ...


I got the info from there:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-800mm-f-5.6-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

and there:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/lenses/ef/super-telephoto/ef-800mm-f-5-6l-is-usm

Both say 4.5k


----------



## Eldar (Oct 9, 2016)

I have just spent two weeks in a safari vehicle, with three others, using the 600/4L IS II (with and without extenders) and the 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, on two bodies. Because of the dust situation, there is no option to drop the hoods and since you are not allowed to leave the vehicle in these parks, getting these monster lenses up and down through the open roof, or out through the small windows of the vehicle is anything but fun. 

Swapping the current 600 with a DO version, provided my weight and size expectations are about correct, would be an easy decision. My wife used the 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS II on a 7DII on the same trip and produced stunning shots. A tempting combo for a safari trip would be a 600 DO, with extenders and the 100-400, plus a 24-70.


----------



## applecider (Oct 9, 2016)

Tron interesting that weight could be uncertain. Even within the digital picture review there are inconsistencies. I still think the lighter weights are without hood. How the manufacturer's weight and actual scale weight differ is another matter. In my own case with other great whites I've added custom feet, that change the weight a little. 

Which brings up a small pet peeve of mine, I wish canon would just add acra swiss compatibility to their own feet. Then they'd fit in cases better etc. And the cases should have rollers on them and luggage handles, at least the larger ones.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Oct 10, 2016)

applecider said:


> Tron interesting that weight could be uncertain. Even within the digital picture review there are inconsistencies. I still think the lighter weights are without hood. How the manufacturer's weight and actual scale weight differ is another matter. In my own case with other great whites I've added custom feet, that change the weight a little.
> 
> Which brings up a small pet peeve of mine, I wish canon would just add acra swiss compatibility to their own feet. Then they'd fit in cases better etc. And the cases should have rollers on them and luggage handles, at least the larger ones.



I agree about the lens tripod foot! It's ridiculous given other items are first class.

Jack


----------



## tron (Oct 10, 2016)

applecider said:


> Tron interesting that weight could be uncertain. Even within the digital picture review there are inconsistencies. I still think the lighter weights are without hood. How the manufacturer's weight and actual scale weight differ is another matter. In my own case with other great whites I've added custom feet, that change the weight a little.
> 
> Which brings up a small pet peeve of mine, I wish canon would just add acra swiss compatibility to their own feet. Then they'd fit in cases better etc. And the cases should have rollers on them and luggage handles, at least the larger ones.


I add Arca swiss plates to my white lenses too. And I use hoods too. The advantages over weigh the slight weight increase disadvantage...


----------

