# Review: Canon’s new super telephoto lens cases



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 18, 2019)

> Canon is shipping their latest super telephoto lenses in a new soft shell case instead of the standard hard trunk we’ve been used to for as long as I can remember. We missed this bit of information during the announcements of the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS III and EF 600mm f/4L IS III. We’re actually quite happy to see this.
> Nikon uses soft cases with some of their super telephoto lenses like the 200-400mm f/4 and the 300mm f/2.8. They may be doing it with more big lenses, but I haven’t purchased any since the days of owning Lens Rentals Canada.
> Whenever I’ve received a new super telephoto lens, I would almost immediately stick the trunk in the dungeon and put my new lens into a...



Continue reading...


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 18, 2019)

It would be great if the savings passes to the consumer. The 600mm II's case is $600.00.
When I bought my 500mm I wouldn't have even gotten the hard case if it would have saved a few hundred.


----------



## Otara (Jan 18, 2019)

Yes, it always felt like a lot of money for something that sits in a cupboard.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 18, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> It would be great if the savings passes to the consumer. The 600mm II's case is $600.00.


Clearly it’s not that expensive to produce, probably something like $20, just as many of the lens hoods probably cost <$1 to make but sell for $40-50. I’m glad I wasn’t sipping coffee when I read your statement about passing the savings along to us.

I’m with Craig on this, the hard case for my 600 II went up to the attic on the day I unpacked the lens, and it’s been there ever since. I keep it only because I know it’ll be expected if I ever sell the lens. For home storage, the lens is in a large Storm (Pelican) case with several other lenses, and when taking it out it’s in a Lowepro Lens Trekker 600 II AW.

Looking at Bryan’s review of the cases, they’re softer but no better – it seems there’s not enough room in the case to have a camera mounted to the lens, so if I buy a new supertele with one of those it would end up in the attic alongside the 600’s hard case.


----------



## Tom W (Jan 18, 2019)

Very interesting, but it would have been a LOT more interesting if it had had enough room up top to hold a DSLR. I mean, picture a birder traveling out a couple of hours from home to get some great shots. Keeping the lens and camera together in a single case would be ideal if that's the only gear you intended to use.


----------



## stochasticmotions (Jan 18, 2019)

Interesting case, and it looks similar in size to the thinktank bag I use for my 500....but, I can fit the camera in with that case and it is a backpack. If they had added a second strap you could store it and take it with you in the same Canon case.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 18, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Clearly it’s not that expensive to produce, probably something like $20, just as many of the lens hoods probably cost <$1 to make but sell for $40-50. I’m glad I wasn’t sipping coffee when I read your statement about passing the savings along to us.
> 
> I’m with Craig on this, the hard case for my 600 II went up to the attic on the day I unpacked the lens, and it’s been there ever since. I keep it only because I know it’ll be expected if I ever sell the lens. For home storage, the lens is in a large Storm (Pelican) case with several other lenses, and when taking it out it’s in a Lowepro Lens Trekker 600 II AW.
> 
> Looking at Bryan’s review of the cases, they’re softer but no better – it seems there’s not enough room in the case to have a camera mounted to the lens, so if I buy a new supertele with one of those it would end up in the attic alongside the 600’s hard case.



That's why I like the Lightware bags, there's a pocket in the lid for a camera body, or you can just leave the camera mounted to the lens.


----------



## applecider (Jan 18, 2019)

The two things that I thought canon miffed on were not at least putting wheels and a handle on the hard case.

The other is not making the lens mount handle arca Swiss compatible, thus reducing the need for a third party solution.

The only time I’ve used hard cases was to ship lenses for firmware updates or service


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 18, 2019)

The case from EF 70-200 f2.8 is a perfect fit for my DJI Mavic Pro.
Otherwise I travel and walk with a small and a large backpacks with sections for photo great and don't use cases at all, neither soft not hard.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 18, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> That's why I like the Lightware bags, there's a pocket in the lid for a camera body, or you can just leave the camera mounted to the lens.


No separate pocket on the Lowepro lid, but sufficient room in the bag for the 600 with a 2x TC and 1-series body mounted. I often carry both TC‘s in a lens case attached to the side of the bag, 

I was miffed when Lowepro redid their lens case sizes – the 1W fit almost all the standard size L lenses (24-70, 17/24 TS-E, 16-35, 35/85 primes, etc.) and the 1N was specifically designed to hold both TC’s and even came with a small padded disk to put between them. Unfortunately, with their new sizing they do not have anything like either of those two cases (but fortunately for me, I have two of the 1W and a 1N).


----------



## johnhenry (Jan 18, 2019)

I bought a DJI hard case for MY Canon gear, which I took on a MTB round trip around Newberry Crater in Oregon.

The biggest problem Canos and most other packs is they look like they have camera gear in them, making them a target to steal.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 18, 2019)

My 400 with or without converters stays on the camera most of the time unless I'm not shooting long. When I travel it's in a case long enough to have the X2 mounted with the 1DX2 and I would never want it otherwise, for quick availability. I liked the hard case for shipping only. 

Their useless tripod mount is always replaced since the replacement makes a great handle (except for slightly sharp corners). I tried to persuade a manufacturer to make an Arca Swiss slip on rubber but no bites. That handle with the camera tucked into the crook of one's arm is great for hiking, sometimes cradling the gear or sometimes holding it in mid air if jumping obstacles (400 DO II is light/small enough). Not sure what I would do with 500 or 600.

The new case would see limited/no use for me.

Jack


----------



## eosuser1234 (Jan 19, 2019)

Transporting a heavy lens while mounted on a DSLR is not recommended. You have the possibility to rip the bayonet off of your DSLR. Ask any professional ski or snowboard photography who has to ride down the mountain after shooting something with a 70-200 2.8. You always dis engage the lens first before packing up and riding down.


----------



## Otara (Jan 19, 2019)

Im sure some people ski while carrying a 500mm. I do not.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 19, 2019)

eosuser1234 said:


> Transporting a heavy lens while mounted on a DSLR is not recommended. You have the possibility to rip the bayonet off of your DSLR. Ask any professional ski or snowboard photography who has to ride down the mountain after shooting something with a 70-200 2.8. You always dis engage the lens first before packing up and riding down.



It's very much dependent on the way the lens/camera is supported within the bag and not necessarily unsafe. As far as ripping a lens off a camera, that would assume the camera is being carried with the lens hanging unsupported. With the "big" lenses the lens is carried and the camera resides rather safely on the lens. I can only speak for myself with the 300 2.8 and 400 DO and I'm not involved with ski photography.

Jack


----------



## degos (Jan 19, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Clearly it’s not that expensive to produce, probably something like $20, just as many of the lens hoods probably cost <$1 to make but sell for $40-50.



Yes for the price Canon asks for the Big Whites they could well afford to provide a waterproof & fireproof case instead of that useless plastic hunk. At least then people would have a reason to use them.


----------



## sanj (Jan 19, 2019)

Otara said:


> Im sure some people ski while carrying a 500mm. I do not.



Well said....


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jan 19, 2019)

These things just like the previous hard cases could be a little more discrete without the big Canon logo on them.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 19, 2019)

I never really made use of mine. Maybe they were designed to be sat upon by sports photographers.
I"ve my 600mm in a Vanguard Bag and it has a sort of collar padded divider to go around the back of the 600mm and the camera so it supports it quite well.
I wouldn't be skiing down a mountain with a 600mm but am quite happy to let is connected to the camera in that bag. Its well protected (if a bit long).
The hard cases would have been better with wheels and an extendable handle. As they are they are as good as useless and take up space.
The 300mm II is a lot easier to bring around in normal bags and much lighter too.
Canon designed the soft bags just to be able to transport them carefully to the customer. Its a pity you can't find a camera to them and still fit them in but Canon wouldn't see that as their problem.
The 600mm II is like an aircraft carrier it needs a whole load of supporting items to keep it going. Its a pity the foot isn't Swiss Arca compatible. I've a long Swiss Arca plate on it whose edges are sharpish. A gimbal head is another additional accessory I wouldn't normally have required and of course the bag to hold it.
Still the 600mm II and 300 2.8 II work like a dream and are worth all the extra effort of carting them around.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Its a pity the foot isn't Swiss Arca compatible. I've a long Swiss Arca plate on it whose edges are sharpish.


Have you considered the RRS replacement foot for the 600 II?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 20, 2019)

Cannon is just catching up with Nikon!  

My Nikon 200-400G made years ago now had a soft case (As CR Guy noted).


----------



## Valvebounce (Jan 20, 2019)

Hi Blackcoffee. 
Yep more discrete right up to the point you get twelve or eighteen inches of bright white out of it and then add several more inches when you turn the hood around! 

Cheers, Graham. 



blackcoffee17 said:


> These things just like the previous hard cases could be a little more discrete without the big Canon logo on them.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 20, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> It's very much dependent on the way the lens/camera is supported within the bag and not necessarily unsafe. As far as ripping a lens off a camera, that would assume the camera is being carried with the lens hanging unsupported. With the "big" lenses the lens is carried and the camera resides rather safely on the lens. I can only speak for myself with the 300 2.8 and 400 DO and I'm not involved with ski photography.
> 
> Jack


And I attach both the tripod foot and the camera base to two BlackRapid fasteners so the weight is spread and if one comes loose the other is still there.


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 20, 2019)

I travel all over the world with my Canon f2.8 300mm IS USM II as a carry on personal item. I guess based on size its treated the same as a handbag if I was a woman. Based on the airline it goes under my seat or in the top bin. It is my "go to" lens for "hand held" sports action shooting. The hard case is wonderful and its kept my lens safe in the harshest shooting or traveling conditions. I have larger big whites too, but ship them in black stage containers also inside their hard cases. I've never had to MA a lens if it was shipped or carried in it's hard case. I think Canon should continue the practice of delivering each lens with a hard case, key and lock. When I travel I also carry a chain that goes through each handle on my five big whites in each case. I've never lost or had stolen a lens this way. Perhaps I'm lucky but the chain through the handles I'm sure was a deterrent at leadt once for someone who was thinking g of a quick opportunity to walk off with 10K+ lens. Personally I would love a Canon hard case that fits a 1DXMKII too


----------



## djack41 (Jan 20, 2019)

Pretty sad. So little coming from Canon that Canonrumors is sharing a camera bag review! Come on Canon. No more soft lenses, patents and rumors. Get off your duff and give us Canon shooters cameras with class-leading technology. Sony's brand new gen2 eye-detect has totally leaped the field again and is giving it to its customers as a firmware update!


----------



## larjon (Jan 20, 2019)

Canon has since a long time soft cases available for the super telephoto lenses, called "Soft Lens Case". I got the Soft Lens Case M II for the EF 200-400mm f/4L from ebay back in 2014. Article "S.CASE-M2", 9390B002 for about $200. The case has been available in four sizes, S II, M II, L II and LL II for lenses like the EF 200mm f/2L to the EF 800mm f/5.6L.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Pretty sad. So little coming from Canon that Canonrumors is sharing a camera bag review!


I missed all the exciting Sony and Nikon announcements in the past few weeks, care to share them? Maybe if you did something other than complain constantly, you wouldn’t be so sad.


----------



## kaihp (Jan 20, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> takesome1 said:
> 
> 
> > It would be great if the savings passes to the consumer. The 600mm II's case is $600.00.
> ...



It's definitely not $600, but not as low as $20. My guess would be in the $40-60 range, based on the size of the parts and amount of material involved.
Also, low volume does not help on the cost side either.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 20, 2019)

LOL Not sad Neuroant. Plenty of info is available. Consider starting with Tony Nothrup's recent review of Sony's new eye AF upgrade. Pretty amazing. BTW I own a Canon 600mm F4 lll. Great lens. The soft case is a .......soft case.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2019)

djack41 said:


> LOL Not sad Neuroant. Plenty of info is available. Consider starting with Tony Nothrup's recent review of Sony's new eye AF upgrade. Pretty amazing. BTW I own a Canon 600mm F4 lll. Great lens. The soft case is a .......soft case.


TN? Lol. He’s technically inept, I wouldn’t trust him to review the on/off switch.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 20, 2019)

LOL Have you heard of Canon's DPAF. We all know that no single manufacturer can consistently have it all. Having a 600 doesn't guarantee wisdom in posted comments and in fact is quite irrelevant regarding eye AF or Tony or whatever - the thread is about cases for such lenses.

Post some shots with your 600 III - I'd like to see how it performs.

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Jan 21, 2019)

Jack Douglas said:


> LOL Have you heard of Canon's DPAF. We all know that no single manufacturer can consistently have it all. Having a 600 doesn't guarantee wisdom in posted comments and in fact is quite irrelevant regarding eye AF or Tony or whatever - the thread is about cases for such lenses.
> 
> Post some shots with your 600 III - I'd like to see how it performs.
> 
> Jack


This is how it performs - Canon's latest news item: https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/st...hq_pro-en_a_1_readmore_M1&utm_id=0277-201901n


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 21, 2019)

kaihp said:


> It's definitely not $600, but not as low as $20. My guess would be in the $40-60 range, based on the size of the parts and amount of material involved.
> Also, low volume does not help on the cost side either.



$599.95 at B&H retail for the 600mm. 
It is speculation if it costs $20, $50 or $100 to manufacture. 
Any way you look at it, it is money for something Neuro says he just stores it away in his attic. A waste regardless.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 21, 2019)

AlanF said:


> This is how it performs - Canon's latest news item: https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/st...hq_pro-en_a_1_readmore_M1&utm_id=0277-201901n



But Alan, I wanted that specific lens in the quote so I could evaluate the lens and the shooter. Guess I'll just have to wait.

Jack


----------



## kaihp (Jan 22, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> $599.95 at B&H retail for the 600mm.
> It is speculation if it costs $20, $50 or $100 to manufacture.



I never questioned the retail price, so why are you bringing it up?

As for the cost, it's only speculation if you don't know anything about production methods with the materials and make uneducated guesses. I do know a little.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jan 22, 2019)

kaihp said:


> I never questioned the retail price, so why are you bringing it up?
> 
> As for the cost, it's only speculation if you don't know anything about production methods with the materials and make uneducated guesses. I do know a little.



Exactly. The reason the price could be reasonably low is the peanuts paid to the workers. I have an upholstery machine and have sewn quite a lot and the low prices amaze me - if it were made in the US the price would be higher for sure. Now if it's a 100% mechanized process I can't even guess. We get so much for so little in general relative to import products, although the quality is sometimes quite poor.

Jack


----------



## capital1956 (Jan 23, 2019)

I handled quite a few of these hard cases from various sources.

From what I can tell people do use these hard cases, In some cases (no pun intended) rather extensively.


----------

