# At Least Two Big White Lenses Coming Ahead of Photokina [CR3]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 15, 2018)

```
<p>We’re told at least two new “big white lenses” are coming ahead of Photokina 2018. We’re not sure at the time of writing this what the new lenses will be.</p>
<p>Will we finally see the <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4-do-br-at-canon-expo/">EF 600mm f/4 DO IS</a>?</p>
<p>We weren’t expecting new big white lenses until 2019, but we may be getting a year long rollout of updated supertelephoto lenses. Optically, I’m not sure how these lenses can get much better, but they could certainly use some weight reduction in light of Nikon and Sony’s lighter offerings with certain supertelephoto lenses.</p>
<p><em>More to come…</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Tom W (Jul 15, 2018)

One of them will undoubtedly be something like a 200-600 f/5.6. 
Why do I say that?
Because I recently broke down and purchased the Sigma 150-600 for a walkaround birding lens.
It's like Murphy's lens law. It's the same law that makes it rain right after you wash the car.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 15, 2018)

A 600 DO is a good possibility because of prior mentions as something Canon was working on.

A 400mm f/5.6 II IS would be a long shot, but definitely wanted Lens.


----------



## Talys (Jul 15, 2018)

Tom W said:


> One of them will undoubtedly be something like a 200-600 f/5.6.
> Why do I say that?
> Because I recently broke down and purchased the Sigma 150-600 for a walkaround birding lens.
> It's like Murphy's lens law. It's the same law that makes it rain right after you wash the car.



 

Sounds perfect, hehe.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> A 600 DO is a good possibility because of prior mentions as something Canon was working on.
> 
> A 400mm f/5.6 II IS would be a long shot, but definitely wanted Lens.



I think you mean 400mm f/5.6L IS USM.

[pushes up glasses] Wouldn't be a 'II' if it's the first version with IS.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

Time out, *between now and the end of September*, we have the following now coming:

A new mirrorless camera (this may not be the FF one(s))
Two superwhites
EF-M 32 f/1.4 STM

CR Guy, can you confirm? Did I miss anything?

- A


----------



## Perio (Jul 15, 2018)

200 f2 and 800mm f5.6? They've been rumored for a long time already


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

Really glad Canon is doing the right thing here.

- A


----------



## Kit. (Jul 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Time out, *between now and the end of September*, we have the following now coming:
> 
> A new mirrorless camera (this may not be the FF one(s))
> Two superwhites
> ...


I'd still want to see the G7X III.

The rest can wait.


----------



## Cryve (Jul 15, 2018)

Tom W said:


> One of them will undoubtedly be something like a 200-600 f/5.6.



does a 200-600 5.6 even qualify as a big white?


----------



## Chaitanya (Jul 15, 2018)

Cryve said:


> Tom W said:
> 
> 
> > One of them will undoubtedly be something like a 200-600 f/5.6.
> ...


100-400mm L does then so will this.


----------



## transpo1 (Jul 15, 2018)

Canon's feeling a little heat from Sony's latest releases...


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Really glad Canon is doing the right thing here.
> 
> - A


A small white, or maybe a fat white if f/1.4. You must know that white paint is expensive


----------



## Tom W (Jul 15, 2018)

Cryve said:


> Tom W said:
> 
> 
> > One of them will undoubtedly be something like a 200-600 f/5.6.
> ...



More seriously, if they could get it right, they could make a great competitor to the Sigma/Tamron 150-600. First off, f/5.6 would be 1/3 stop faster, second, Canon can do the AF tracking better, third, with good second or third-generation DO, they can get a very sharp, light lens without the weird "ring" bokeh of the old 70-300 DO.

But, of course, it wouldn't be cheap. I would venture to say that it would be priced close to the 100-400, even without the "L" designation. And like the 400/4 DO, it would be white. It would have a larger front objective than the Sigma also - 600/5.6 = 107 mm. Close to the 300/2.8 in diameter.


----------



## wtlloyd (Jul 15, 2018)

I bet they are a version III for the 500 and 600 superteles. Same upgrades without optical/weight improvement as the 70-200 f/2.8 just saw. This allows them to discount the ver2 lenses, sales of which are stagnant, and to capture some buzz.
I don't think we'll see DO until it's able to replace current optics design in these premium sizes.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

Tom W said:


> More seriously, if they could get it right, they could make a great competitor to the Sigma/Tamron 150-600. First off, f/5.6 would be 1/3 stop faster, second, Canon can do the AF tracking better, third, with good second or third-generation DO, they can get a very sharp, light lens without the weird "ring" bokeh of the old 70-300 DO.
> 
> But, of course, it wouldn't be cheap. I would venture to say that it would be priced close to the 100-400, even without the "L" designation. And like the 400/4 DO, it would be white. It would have a larger front objective than the Sigma also - 600/5.6 = 107 mm. Close to the 300/2.8 in diameter.



For all the reasons you've outlined, a 600 f/5.6 -- zoom or prime -- will easily cost 2-3x what the Tamron or Sigma 150-600 does. So it wouldn't be a competitor at all.

- A


----------



## unfocused (Jul 15, 2018)

Tom W said:


> Cryve said:
> 
> 
> > Tom W said:
> ...



This has been pretty thoroughly discussed by people who understand lenses far better than I do. A 200-500 f5.6 can be done affordably. Once you get into the 600 mm range, f5.6. sends the lens into the stratosphere.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

unfocused said:


> This has been pretty thoroughly discussed by people who understand lenses far better than I do. A 200-500 f5.6 can be done affordably. Once you get into the 600 mm range, f5.6. sends the lens into the stratosphere.



+1. This is the inflection point where things get crazy pricey.

- A


----------



## Cryve (Jul 15, 2018)

why would canon release a 200-500 5.6 though? it would cannibalize their excelent 100-400 if it were cheaper than that. 

So i guess it would have to be even more expensive than the 100-400 to be viable. perhaps 2.5k oder 3k?


----------



## Cryve (Jul 15, 2018)

Also:

what makes a 600 f5.6 pricey? maybe they could make it cheaper if they make it a 300-600 instead. i personaly dont really care about the short end that much.

i suspect the heavy price comes from the big front element though


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

Cryve said:


> why would canon release a 200-500 5.6 though? it would cannibalize their excelent 100-400 if it were cheaper than that.



Possibly, but it depends on how they do it. A plasticky, non-sealed, non-L 200-500 f/5.6 IS STM for $1500 will not cannibalize the 100-400L II, which would be a much better built instrument.

- A


----------



## AlanF (Jul 15, 2018)

Cryve said:


> Also:
> 
> what makes a 600 f5.6 pricey? maybe they could make it cheaper if they make it a 300-600 instead. i personaly dont really care about the short end that much.
> 
> i suspect the heavy price comes from the big front element though



It's the 600 end that costs money, not 200-300.


----------



## Cryve (Jul 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Possibly, but it depends on how they do it. A plasticky, non-sealed, non-L 200-500 f/5.6 IS STM for $1500 will not cannibalize the 100-400L II, which would be a much better built instrument.
> 
> - A



i personaly would like a 200-500 from canon with the buildquality of the tamron 150-600 g2. its well build but not over the top, weather resistant and not too heavy. 

I dont know if i would buy a 200-500 from canon if it is not really better than the other offerings from sigma, tamron and nikon other than native autofocus.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 15, 2018)

Cryve said:


> Also:
> 
> what makes a 600 f5.6 pricey? maybe they could make it cheaper if they make it a 300-600 instead. i personaly dont really care about the short end that much.
> 
> i suspect the heavy price comes from the big front element though



^^ this ^^

Two things make this expensive for Canon: internal rules (Canon standard?) stating that no EF lens will be slower than f/5.6, and FL divided by max aperture = pricey things. 600 / 5.6 = a 107mm minimum front element size. 

Besides those two drivers, for Canon 107+ typically takes you out of front-filterability, meaning a pricey DI rear drop-in setup would be needed. I think they could make an exception here and go with 105mm and not _quite_ deliver 600mm (many companies kinda sneak around like this), but it still would be quite pricey.

- A


----------



## Chaitanya (Jul 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Cryve said:
> 
> 
> > why would canon release a 200-500 5.6 though? it would cannibalize their excelent 100-400 if it were cheaper than that.
> ...


Nikon's 200-500/80-400 or Sigma/Tamron 150-600 lenses dont have close focusing capability of Canon 100-400mm or weight advantage. All things considered both these lenses can exist side by side and it will be a compromise based on users need.


----------



## TAW (Jul 15, 2018)

I'm hoping for a 400 2.8 with an integrated extender...


----------



## Talys (Jul 15, 2018)

TAW said:


> I'm hoping for a 400 2.8 with an integrated extender...



with an integrated 1.4x and 2.0x that you can independently engage


----------



## unfocused (Jul 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Cryve said:
> 
> 
> > why would canon release a 200-500 5.6 though? it would cannibalize their excelent 100-400 if it were cheaper than that.
> ...



Who says it has to be cheaper? 

An "L" quality 200-500 f5.6 priced at $2,500 to $3,000 would still sell very well. Rather than compete in the overcrowded bargain market, it makes more sense for Canon to produce a stellar 500 f5.6 zoom that makes a nice companion to its other "L" zooms, the 100-400 and the 70-300.


----------



## applecider (Jul 15, 2018)

TAW said:


> I'm hoping for a 400 2.8 with an integrated extender...



Have you handled a 400mm f2.8L? I mean for an actual game or a half mile hike for wildlife setup not in a store.

If they could add an anti- gravity And an anti-inertial unit, then sure add all the extenders made.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 15, 2018)

applecider said:


> If they could add an anti- gravity And an anti-inertial unit, then sure add all the extenders made.



If Canon won't innovate, then they are *******.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 15, 2018)

There are a lot of 400s out there already, not really expecting a new one.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 15, 2018)

stevelee said:


> applecider said:
> 
> 
> > If they could add an anti- gravity And an anti-inertial unit, then sure add all the extenders made.
> ...


Canon needs an anti-inertial unit.


----------



## timmy_650 (Jul 15, 2018)

unfocused said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Cryve said:
> ...



If it is too nice then it will hurt your 200-400 f4. which is also that FL. So I don't see that too likely.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 15, 2018)

stevelee said:


> If Canon won't innovate, then they are *******.


correct.


----------



## applecider (Jul 15, 2018)

Just got to mention remember that Nikon is gearing up for their version of a DO lens in 500mm f 5.6.

Here https://petapixel.com/2018/07/14/nikon-500mm-f-5-6-spotted-its-tiny/ , and in the forum elsewhere.

That would be a great lens especially if it took 1.4 extenders like the canon 400mm DOii does.

And for those of you who think this could happen in canon land for less than 2500-3000$ I give you a big raspberry pfsssssth.

Edit adding the expected price of the Nikon is $4300.00,

So pfsssssth


----------



## unfocused (Jul 15, 2018)

timmy_650 said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



The 200-400 "L" is a very specialized lens. I suspect sales of the lens are a tiny fraction of the "affordable" 100-400 f5.6. I think Canon would happily cut into the sales of the 200-400 f4, with a lens that would likely sell at a rate of 100 to 1.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Really glad Canon is doing the right thing here.
> 
> - A



You didn't want a pickle jar! It won't count as a 'big' white otherwise


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> a pricey DI rear drop-in setup would be needed.



I agree with everything you guys have said, but it makes me wonder - why is the drop-in filter so expensive? Is it just that they know you've spent a few grand on a big white, so it seems like not a lot in comparison? The DI filters use much less glass than a large front-mounted one, and the rest of the housing is pretty basic. Am I missing something, or is it just part of the territory at the high end?


----------



## scyrene (Jul 15, 2018)

This is exciting, even though I can't really afford a big white at the moment. I'd love to see the 600 DO and maybe something like a new 200 - the latter if only to bring down resale prices a bit, I've coveted a 200mm f/2 for ages but they remain stubbornly expensive!

A 400mm f/5.6 IS would be a great addition to the lineup, but who knows?


----------



## lexptr (Jul 15, 2018)

200mm f/2.0L and 800mm f/5.6L for sure! Those are the only two big whites missing the new body color!


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 16, 2018)

Great news! I'll have the $ scraped together for the version after this new version.

Seriously, there is no reason why, in 2018, a great white should cost more than a nifty fifty. And there's no reason why a nifty fifty shouldn't also have a switch that turns it into an EF 800mm f/1.2L. C'mon Canon!

Que the Canapoligists in 3, 2, 1...


----------



## Cryve (Jul 16, 2018)

unfocused said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Cryve said:
> ...



i would love such a lens. if it can be handhold and matches the image quality of the 100-400 II AND could take a n 1.4 extender well i would be all over this lens. wet dream for birdphotographer that likes flexibility and mobility


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 16, 2018)

unfocused said:


> Who says it has to be cheaper?
> 
> An "L" quality 200-500 f5.6 priced at $2,500 to $3,000 would still sell very well. Rather than compete in the overcrowded bargain market, it makes more sense for Canon to produce a stellar 500 f5.6 zoom that makes a nice companion to its other "L" zooms, the 100-400 and the 70-300.



No one says it has to be cheaper, but Nikon already has a 200-500 f/5.6 IS for $1400. Canon might not want to be off on its own pricing-wise in this market segment as a result.

I'm not saying an 'unresponded to' budget 200-500 is a dire threat to Canon, but it is a hell of a value.

- A


----------



## unfocused (Jul 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Who says it has to be cheaper?
> ...



I would argue that Nikon is the outlier here. They've chosen to compete head to head against bargain lenses from Sigma and Tamron and even went under the Sigma Sport. Completely out of character for Nikon, Canon or Sony.

I don't see Canon wanting to devalue its brand in this way and given that they've taken their time to "answer" these bargain zooms, I don't think they see them as a threat. I've got the Sigma contemporary. It's a fine lens but it's no 100-400. 

A similar Canon would not entice me to dump the Sigma. But, if Canon made a 500 f5.6 with IS (either zoom or prime) that's as sharp and responsive as the 100-400 zoom, I'd be all over it and happily save my pennies to buy it even at twice the price of the 100-400. 

I'm guessing there are a lot of other bird and sports photographers who would do the same. 

Still, this is all fantasy. I have no illusion about Canon releasing such a lens this fall. If it ever comes, it will be paired with a 7DIII release.


----------



## Cryve (Jul 16, 2018)

unfocused said:


> If it ever comes, it will be paired with a 7DIII release.



which is a real possability for this photokina with the newest post from cr claiming that a fullflame mirrorless from canon wont take the spotlight this fall.


----------



## RGF (Jul 16, 2018)

I hope that the 600 DO F4 is announced and available soon.

I can dream can't I?


----------



## DJL329 (Jul 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Really glad Canon is doing the right thing here.
> 
> - A



Where's the Red ring?!? ;D :


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 16, 2018)

Responding here to a question asked in another thread, heck yes, I'm waiting to see what the mirrorless mount is before making my first Big White (or tilt-shift) purchase.


----------



## Ladislav (Jul 16, 2018)

unfocused said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Cryve said:
> ...



I would go for that lens immediately and sell my Sigma. It would nicely complement my 70-300L and 70-200L MkII. and it would still be in affordable range.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jul 16, 2018)

A 600 DO would be expensive too.
But a 500 DO f/5.6 IS with a diameter of 90mm front element (with 95mm filter size) and a price tag of <1500€ would be nice. I think most of the current buyer of an 150-600 (Sigma, Tamron, ..) buy it because of the affordable maximum zoom value - and could live with 500mm, if it is very very sharp, because you don't need to calculate it for several different mm, you only have 500mm.
If it is >2500€ or so, it is not for consumer anyway. And then I don't care about 6000€ (400 DO) or 10.000€ (400 f/2.8).


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 16, 2018)

davidcl0nel said:


> A 600 DO would be expensive too.
> But a 500 DO f/5.6 IS with a diameter of 90mm front element (with 95mm filter size) and a price tag of <1500€ would be nice. I think most of the current buyer of an 150-600 (Sigma, Tamron, ..) buy it because of the affordable maximum zoom value - and could live with 500mm, if it is very very sharp, because you don't need to calculate it for several different mm, you only have 500mm.
> If it is >2500€ or so, it is not for consumer anyway. And then I don't care about 6000€ (400 DO) or 10.000€ (400 f/2.8).




If using a zoom, what need to "calculate"? Just zoom to frame as desired. ???


----------



## Trigger (Jul 16, 2018)

Does "_ahead of Photokina_" possibly mean sooner rather than later, or _just_ before Photokina?

I was ready to buy a new 500 II this week, but am definitely waiting now to see what these new releases are.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jul 16, 2018)

YuengLinger said:


> davidcl0nel said:
> 
> 
> > A 600 DO would be expensive too.
> ...


----------



## RGF (Jul 17, 2018)

Ladislav said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



agree. drop the sigma which is okay but not as sharp as the Canon. The Contemporary is rather light, only real benefit


----------



## RGF (Jul 17, 2018)

Trigger said:


> Does "_ahead of Photokina_" possibly mean sooner rather than later, or _just_ before Photokina?
> 
> I was ready to buy a new 500 II this week, but am definitely waiting now to see what these new releases are.



just because it is announced does not mean it will be available. Remember the 200-400, it took a year or more (or so it seemed) between annoucement and first shipment


----------



## RGF (Jul 17, 2018)

unfocused said:


> timmy_650 said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Depends upon the price point and the profit per lens.

At a 100 to 1, sure nearly anything would work, I doubt that a $3000 lens would sell 100 to 1 over the 200-400.

Perhaps 10 to 1 if optical quality was great.

But there are other factors to consider. How differentiate the lens is from their own line up and competition. Will it help Canon claim leadership positioning, provide technical know how for the next generation of lens, ...


----------



## Trigger (Jul 17, 2018)

RGF said:


> Just because it is announced does not mean it will be available. Remember the 200-400? It took a year or more (or so it seemed) between announcement and first shipment



Gah. Still, if there is a "III" version on the horizon, even if it's a year away, I feel that buying a 500 II at this time would be unwise.


----------



## Ladislav (Jul 17, 2018)

RGF said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > timmy_650 said:
> ...



There are other factors to consider like:

[ul]

Many photographers who wanted 200-400 or 100-400 already bought it. 200-500 would not cannibalize those sales which have already been done.
For new sales, those lenses could probably still coexist next to each other, the same way as 70-200L f4, 70-300L and 100-400L can coexist while someone could come and say that some can cannibalize sales of another one.
Because at the end it is better if Canon product cannibalize sales of another Canon product than if third party product cannibalize sales of Canon product.
[/ul]

But when we talk about big white I don't think it means 200-500/5.6. I think it is about real super expensive big whites. If 200-500 ever happens, I would expect its announcement together with 7D3.


----------



## fullstop (Jul 17, 2018)

https://petapixel.com/2018/07/14/nikon-500mm-f-5-6-spotted-its-tiny/

AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/5.6E PF ED VR ... "innovative Nikon" beating "conservative Canon" on this one, hehe. ;D













> Nikon Rumours is hearing that the lens has a length of 24cm (~9.5in) and a price tag of around $4,300.


https://nikonrumors.com/2018/07/06/nikon-af-s-nikkor-500mm-f-5-6e-pf-ed-vr-lens-additional-information-price-and-length.aspx/


----------



## TunaErgan (Jul 20, 2018)

Choose four: EF 600mm f4 DO IS USM, EF 200-600mm f5.6 IS USM, EF 200mm f2 IS II USM, EF 800mm f5.6 IS II USM. Personally, i would be glad to see a 600DO as 400DO was exceptionally good, also 200-600 would be an excellent move, as it will both serve as a competition to Nikon's 200-500 as well as a (maybe cheaper) successor to 200-400 (ofc without 1.4TC). Dont know whether the 200-600 would feature a TC or not though.


----------



## neonlight (Jul 26, 2018)

Also rumored a while back ... 800DO and 1000 DO.
Gen III rather than rev. III?


----------



## RGF (Jul 28, 2018)

neonlight said:


> Also rumored a while back ... 800DO and 1000 DO.
> Gen III rather than rev. III?



I think that the lens will be an update, not a refresh


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 1, 2018)

Chaitanya said:


> 100-400mm L does then so will this.




That all depends on who you ask. Most folks do not consider the EF 100-400mm a "big white". The "Big White" moniker is generally reserved for lenses 300mm or longer with an entrance pupil of 105mm or more. That's f/2.8 for 300mm (sorry 300mm f/4, but you're not a "B.W."), f/3.8 or faster for 400mm (sorry, 400mm f/5.6, but you're not a "B.W." either), and pretty much anything 500mm or longer. The EF 200-400mm f/4 IS 1.4X is a special case that doesn't quite make it to f/3.8 at 400mm, but f/4 with a built in 1.4X is close enough.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 1, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> That all depends on who you ask. Most folks do not consider the EF 100-400mm a "big white". The "Big White" moniker is generally reserved for lenses 300mm or longer with an entrance pupil of 105mm or more. That's f/2.8 for 300mm (sorry 300mm f/4, but you're not a "B.W."), f/3.8 or faster for 400mm (sorry, 400mm f/5.6, but you're not a "B.W." either), and pretty much anything 500mm or longer. The EF 200-400mm f/4 IS 1.4X is a special case that doesn't quite make it to f/3.8 at 400mm, but f/4 with a built in 1.4X is close enough.


I think the moniker refers to the big price tag. Little whites are south of $2.5K, big whites are north of $5K. Easy.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 2, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> I think the moniker refers to the big price tag. Little whites are south of $2.5K, big whites are north of $5K. Easy.




So used EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS (1st gen) lenses selling for between $2,800-3,400 at B&H are not "Big Whites?"


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 2, 2018)

Michael Clark said:


> So used EF 300mm f/2.8 L IS (1st gen) lenses selling for between $2,800-3,400 at B&H are not "Big Whites?"


Disingenuous and intentionally obtuse posts really add value to the forums.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 3, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Disingenuous and intentionally obtuse posts really add value to the forums.



+1 (post count)


----------



## MYB (Aug 16, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Really glad Canon is doing the right thing here.
> 
> - A


----------

