[Brightcolours]

• Canon RF 85mm f/2 IS STM Macro £649
  
• Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM £2,899
  
• Canon RF 600mm f/11 IS STM £699
  
• Canon RF 800mm f/11 IS STM £929
  

For reference:
The Canon UK price for the Canon RF 50mm f1.2 L USM is £ 2,329.99, the Canon US price is $2,299.00 and Canon NL price is  2.539.99.

[Spinifex]

Cheaper than I expected, costlier than I hoped. I'm probably in for the 85mm, and I will keep an eye on reviews for the 600 mm.

[Klaus]

Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM £2,899

Are they nuts? Compare this to the price of the Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS ... 1699 GBP ...

[Brightcolours]

Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM £2,899

Are they nuts? Compare this to the price of the Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS ... 1699 GBP ...

£1,800, actually.

[davidmanze]

[quote='Klaus' pid='51587' dateline='1594153347']
Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM £2,899

Are they nuts? Compare this to the price of the Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS ... 1699 GBP ...

£1,800, actually.


Can be found at under €1,700 ......

   F7.1 ???? ..... is this some kind of slow insidious decline in aperture size from Canon that is there to soft sell us with time?? ...... or is there someone at Canon who thinks that wide angle to normal FL lenses ideally need to be F1.2 (and $3,000) in order to keep shutter speeds at around 1/4000 sec for landscape work ?? ......

....... while BIF images are best taken at small apertures in order to be able to blur the action to portray artistic movement ?? ...... which is what you'll get from slower shutter speeds

...... Nikon didn't want to drop below F5.6 ....... with a FL from 200-500mm ..... and kept the price down to $1,400 ....... (now btw way you can buy it for €1,035 )

If you want 600mm the Sony gets the cigar here at F6.3

Sony and Nikon are the clear winners here !!

[Brightcolours]

Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM £2,899

Are they nuts? Compare this to the price of the Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS ... 1699 GBP ...

£1,800, actually.


 Can be found at under €1,700 ......

   F7.1 ????  ..... is this some kind of slow insidious decline in aperture size from Canon that is there to soft sell us with time?? ...... or is there someone at Canon who thinks that wide angle to normal FL lenses ideally need to be F1.2 (and $3,000)  in order to keep shutter speeds at around 1/4000 sec for landscape work ?? ......

....... while BIF images are best taken at small apertures in order to be able to blur the action to portray artistic  movement ?? ...... which is what you'll get from slower shutter speeds

...... Nikon didn't want to drop below F5.6 ....... with a FL from 200-500mm ..... and kept the price down to $1,400 ....... (now btw way you can buy it for €1,035 )

  If you want 600mm the Sony gets the cigar here at F6.3

  Sony and Nikon are the clear winners here !!

The MSRP is 1800, not 1700. 
It is a pricy lens indeed, that Canon 100-500mm.  Its pricing is in line with the EF 100-400mm L IS USM II, not with the Nikkor 200-500mm and Sony 150-600mm.
Canon is, at the moment, making lighter and smaller lenses for mirrorless, believing that smaller is the big plus for mirrorless in the 1st place. So, the extending 70-200mm f2.8 L, the extending DO 600mm f11 and Do 800mm f11, and this 100-500mm f4.5-7.1. 
The Canon RF 100-500mm weighs 1370 grams + 160 grams tripod ring = 1530 grams
The Nikkor 200-500mm weighs 2300 grams
The Sony 200-600mm weighs 2410 grams
The difference is very clear, there. Whether you prefer a bit faster max. aperture or less weight, that is a personal choice. Canon has chosen a lower weight. 
If you would chose a Canon R body and would like to spend less, or have the aperture range the Sony offers, you can of course choose the Tamron 150-600mm G2. That lens weighs 2110 grams in total.
For hiking, that Canon with its low weight is attractive. And the price, yes, that is high. You can offset that with the low price of the R6 of course ;-)
And, of course, a Panasonic MFT body with 100-300 f4-5.6 (200-600mm f8-11 FF equivalent) is even lighter,. Choices.

My personal impossible combo would be the Canon EOS R6, with Nikkor AF-S 200-500mm f5.6 (and Canon 35mm f2, 85mm f2 and 50mm f1.2 and 18-45mm).

[Klaus]

I have no issues whatsoever with the specs. They are very reasonable for a certain usage pattern.

However, it has to be said that 500mm f/7.1 is diffraction-limited on the EOS R5 - or to phrase it differently, it'll not out-resolve the sensor regardless of how good the design is.
Theoretically, things go downhill from f/5.6 on this sensor (red light at f/5.6 on FF: 38mp max).

That's still all fine ... but not at 2899GBP. Well, we'll know in an hour. Maybe it's a typo and it's 1899GBP.

BTW, regarding the 600/800mm f/11. For green/yellow light, they have a max theoretical resolution of 16mp (red light: 10mp) - thus they are really more for the R6.

[wim]

I have no issues whatsoever with the specs. They are very reasonable for a certain usage pattern.

However, it has to be said that 500mm f/7.1 is diffraction-limited on the EOS R5 - or to phrase it differently, it'll not out-resolve the sensor regardless of how good the design is.
Theoretically, things go downhill from f/5.6 on this sensor (red light at f/5.6 on FF: 38mp max).

That's still all fine ... but not at 2899GBP. Well, we'll know in an hour. Maybe it's a typo and it's 1899GBP.

BTW, regarding the 600/800mm f/11. For green/yellow light, they have a max theoretical resolution of 16mp (red light: 10mp) - thus they are really more for the R6.

I'd really like to know how you calculate this, Klaus.

According to my calculations, based on Norman Koren's equations, MTF-09 (Rayleigh) for green light results in a sensor diffraction limit of F/14.1, which is where lens diffraction equals sensor diffraction.

As to max. resulting MP: that also depends on Demosaicing and AA-filter liosses, which for Canon is estimated to be about 30%.


System result for red light therefore is by definition less than 38 MP too, because the maximum system resolution would be around 38.9 MP MTF-09 for green light (512 nm) with a 100% corrected lens at F/1.

Thank you in advance.

Kind regards, Wim

[Brightcolours]

Wim, you keep on "calculating" really off diffraction limits, I have pointed out a few times before that what you calculated is not correct. I gave various sources that showed real diffraction figures, including Nikon documentation.

You mention "sensor diffraction", which is not a thing.

Klaus is correct, for f5.6 max. resolution of a green-yellow wavelength (0.55µ) for FF is about 60mp, and for a red wavelength (0.7µ) bout 38mp. So, for white light, you can see a start of diffraction limiting at f7.1 on the R5, if the lens is sharp enough wide open.
https://luminous-landscape.com/do-sensors-out-resolve-lenses/
Lumious landscape's calculations of green light diffraction are totally in line with the Nikon literature which accompanied their professional industrial ultra micro Nikkor lens line-up (lenses which were used in the 1970/1980's semiconductor production, so I am very sure Nikon knew what they were talking about and what they were writing).

Even Photozone/Opticallimit/Lenstip's tests show that diffraction impacts lenses past f5.6 on high MP FF bodies.

Btw, the 30% losses you attribute to demosaicing and anti aliasing are also off (too high).

However, with Canon's deconvolution in DPP, some diffraction softening losses can be undone, so f7.1 will not be much of an issue using this lens on an R5.

[Klaus]

https://luminous-landscape.com/do-sensors-out-resolve-lenses/