# The Canon RF 800mm f/5.6L IS and Canon RF 1200mm f/8L IS will be available starting May 26, 2022



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 17, 2022)

> It looks like Canon will begin shipping the Canon RF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM and Canon RF 1200mm f/8L IS USM on May 26, 2022 in limited quantities, which is likely fine because I imagine these will be purchased in limited quantities.
> Canon RF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM Key Features
> 
> Outstanding Image Quality, 800mm Super-telephoto Fixed Focal Length Lens
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## melgross (May 17, 2022)

What do these things cost again?


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 17, 2022)

As they say, if you have to ask.......

$17K and $20K, IIRC.


----------



## takesome1 (May 17, 2022)

melgross said:


> What do these things cost again?



Possibly more than they are worth?
We shall see.


----------



## AlanF (May 17, 2022)

If you have to ask (the price), you can't afford it.


----------



## Bonich (May 17, 2022)

melgross said:


> What do these things cost again?


In USA the 800 costs 30% more than the 600
In Europe the 800 costs 42% more than the 600

Sorry, Canon Europe. You will not get the deal ...


----------



## Chaitanya (May 18, 2022)

AlanF said:


> If you have to ask (the price), you can't afford it.


Even renting these will be stupidly expensive compared to renting 400 and 600 with TC.


----------



## nemtom (May 18, 2022)

I can agree that these are stupid prices, but let me mention that I managed to put my hands on them a few weeks back for a few minutes, and they are quite handholdable - though I'll most certainly buy a 600/4 when the time comes, and extend with a TC if needed.


----------



## bbasiaga (May 18, 2022)

Will anyone who is not an agency (i.e. anyone spending their own money) buy these? There are a surprising number of hobbyists with the $12k 400 and 600mm lenses. But these are in a-whole-nother class of expensive. 
-Brian


----------



## Ozarker (May 18, 2022)

melgross said:


> What do these things cost again?


They'll take a new Hyundai in trade. Of course, you could buy a new Maverick for $20k.


----------



## Blue Zurich (May 18, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Will anyone who is not an agency (i.e. anyone spending their own money) buy these? There are a surprising number of hobbyists with the $12k 400 and 600mm lenses. But these are in a-whole-nother class of expensive.
> -Brian


Then they share they image on IG, ROI Pure Win


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 18, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Will anyone who is not an agency (i.e. anyone spending their own money) buy these? There are a surprising number of hobbyists with the $12k 400 and 600mm lenses. But these are in a-whole-nother class of expensive.


Perhaps. I suspect if one can afford to spend $13K on a lens (which is what I paid for my 600/4 II back in 2012), there's not much difference between that and $17K or $20K. For me, at least, it's about getting something that offers a capability beyond what one has currently. The 600/4 III and RF 600/4 are not optically better than the 600/4 II; they are lighter, but I can hike and shoot handheld with the MkII version already. For these lenses, I can get to 840/5.6 and 1200/8 with the TCs behind my 600/4, so they don't really offer anything I don't have (except the ability to easily be extended further with TCs, but I can do that now with a modified EF-RF adapter and the EF and RF TCs I have).


----------



## takesome1 (May 18, 2022)

bbasiaga said:


> Will anyone who is not an agency (i.e. anyone spending their own money) buy these? There are a surprising number of hobbyists with the $12k 400 and 600mm lenses. But these are in a-whole-nother class of expensive.
> -Brian



If you're hobby is wildlife photography and you are at a point in your life you can afford it, yes there are many who would buy it. It is a hobby.

I would consider one but looking at the MTF charts it looks like the value isn't going to be there. If the 800mm results are not substantially better than a 600mm with an extender then it wouldn't be appealing to me. We will have to wait and see what they produce.


----------



## TinTin (May 18, 2022)

Ghosting and Flare
Surely, Canon could have left that feature out, making the lenses correspondingly cheaper?

No barrel, pincushion, vignetting, or other distortions! No wonder they're so cheap!


----------



## Berowne (May 18, 2022)

Current price for the 1200mm in Frankfurt am Main - (West) Germany: 23500€. (ca 24700 US$)


----------



## Hector1970 (May 18, 2022)

Incredible focal length of lens. I've the 600 F4 II. It's a great lens but its big and heavy. I have hand held it but its not good for you.
I usually use it on a solid tripod with a wimberly gimbal head which is another few KG's added to the load. 
Getting a bag that fit it was difficult. Even if I could afford 800/1200 I wouldn't consider it due to the logistic effort of moving it around.
I often use a 2 extender with the 600mm. It can be quite tricking actually find something you see with 1200mm. One piece of grass or a tree can look very much like another at 1200mm. I think I'd find an 800 or 1200 a very inflexible lens. 
There's alot to be said for a 100-500mm or a 200-600mm far more flexible and lighter. 
Still there is a market for the ultimate. Maybe it will come with a free donkey to carry it on treks.


----------



## AlanF (May 19, 2022)

Hector1970 said:


> Incredible focal length of lens. I've the 600 F4 II. It's a great lens but its big and heavy. I have hand held it but its not good for you.
> I usually use it on a solid tripod with a wimberly gimbal head which is another few KG's added to the load.
> Getting a bag that fit it was difficult. Even if I could afford 800/1200 I wouldn't consider it due to the logistic effort of moving it around.
> I often use a 2 extender with the 600mm. It can be quite tricking actually find something you see with 1200mm. One piece of grass or a tree can look very much like another at 1200mm. I think I'd find an 800 or 1200 a very inflexible lens.
> ...


I went for a long hike (for me) today with the 100-500 and shot close ups of butterflies and dragonflies and then birds in flight with the same lens. It’s a great compromise for me for me for everyday shooting though a light wider prime would be good for me on more special occasions.


----------



## Bahrd (May 19, 2022)

CanonFanBoy said:


> They'll take a new Hyundai in trade. Of course, you could buy a new Maverick for $20k.


Will they offer Mavericks in EU!?


----------



## InchMetric (May 19, 2022)

I will repeat: these prices are a signal of significant price inflation ahead for other lenses. They are priced for the future, and the 400 and 600 will catch up. You will look back on $12k big whites as "the good old days" if you don't buy now.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (May 19, 2022)

Hector1970 said:


> Incredible focal length of lens. I've the 600 F4 II. It's a great lens but its big and heavy. I have hand held it but its not good for you.
> I usually use it on a solid tripod with a wimberly gimbal head which is another few KG's added to the load.
> Getting a bag that fit it was difficult. Even if I could afford 800/1200 I wouldn't consider it due to the logistic effort of moving it around.
> I often use a 2 extender with the 600mm. It can be quite tricking actually find something you see with 1200mm. One piece of grass or a tree can look very much like another at 1200mm. I think I'd find an 800 or 1200 a very inflexible lens.
> ...



The 600 F4 version 3 is much lighter than your version 2.


----------



## 2 cents (May 19, 2022)

Considering they are mining crystals from Uranus to make the glass, they are quite good value for money.

I have a shoulder bag and backpack, so I'm getting a set for each bag.


----------



## Ozarker (May 19, 2022)

It is amazing what people spend on their hobbies. Good for them! Life is short. You can't take it with you. Enjoy!


----------



## AlanF (May 19, 2022)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It is amazing what people spend on their hobbies. Good for them! Life is short. You can't take it with you. Enjoy!


You can't take the lenses with you either - though the ancients did get buried with their favourite possessions.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (May 19, 2022)

It says "outstanding image quality". I wonder if Canon ever right something less than outstanding, if the image quality is not that great.


----------



## jam05 (May 19, 2022)

Very "check the boxes" niche lenses. Certainly not travel lenses. Won't be much fanfare.


----------



## FramerMCB (May 20, 2022)

Total Paparazzi, Law enforcement, and Military, and perhaps some scientific applications. This is where I see the bulk of sales for these lenses. And of course the few (100's? 1000's? ...maybe) well-heeled serious enthusiasts. And some pros - a few. For example, far safer to photograph Kodiak bears as well as Polar bears from a distance: at 1200mm you can double your distance to subject and still fill the frame... ;-)


----------



## john1970 (May 21, 2022)

InchMetric said:


> I will repeat: these prices are a signal of significant price inflation ahead for other lenses. They are priced for the future, and the 400 and 600 will catch up. You will look back on $12k big whites as "the good old days" if you don't buy know.


Unfortunately you might very well be correct.


----------



## BurningPlatform (May 21, 2022)

Bahrd said:


> Will they offer Mavericks in EU!?


In Finland you could choose between a Ford Ranger (starting from *34 573,30 €*) and buying (Almost) both of them.


----------



## R1Media (May 21, 2022)

Thank god I'm not a wildlife photographer...


----------



## Bahrd (May 21, 2022)

BurningPlatform said:


> In Finland you could choose between a Ford Ranger (starting from *34 573,30 €*) and buying (Almost) both of them.


This is the Maverick I was referring to (a new small hybrid pick-up rather than an old small SUV): FORD MAVERICK NOT HEADING TO EUROPEAN MARKET FOR SOME REASON. The Ranger is cool and all, but... it is also too big for my garage.


----------



## Ozarker (May 25, 2022)

Skyscraperfan said:


> It says "outstanding image quality". I wonder if Canon ever right something less than outstanding, if the image quality is not that great.


We'll never know. Canon is just outstanding by itself.


----------

