Close Menu

    A bit more information on the upcoming RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS

    By 187 Comments2 Mins Read Canon Lens Rumors
    rf800header 1536x518 - A bit more information on the upcoming RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS

    Canon will officially announced the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS on November 2, 2023. This lens seems to be generating a lot of positive hype. There are still some unknowns about the lens, but we only have to wait a few more days for the launch.

    The Camera Insider is reporting that it's definitely not an “L” lens and won't have “L” lens level of weather sealing, which shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Only the 400mm f/4 DO IS lenses had sealing without the “L” moniker, but I think it's ok to lump those DO lenses into the “L” lens category.

    We have been told that a past patent from over a year ago is pretty much what to expect from a technical standpoint. The patent shows f/8.5, but will be sold as an f/9. This is pretty normal for patents and released products.

    Canon RF 200-800mm F6.3-9 IS

    • Focal length: 199.97mm 399.99mm 784.76mm
    • F number: 6.00 6.80 8.50
    • Half angle of view: 6.17° 3.10° 1.58°
    • Image height: 21.64mm 21.64mm 21.64 mm
    • Lens length: 285.44mm 355.65mm 385.65mm
    • Back focus: 22.57mm 43.72mm 83.86mm

    We have also been told that the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 will be compatible with Canon's RF teleconverters, which will quite welcomed for certain shooting situations.

    As for the focus motor, we see a lot of “STM” in reports, but we have not been able to confirm whether or not this lens will be STM, USM or a new type of focus motor. The RF 10-20mm f/4L IS STM was a surprise with the STM motor, but the focus groups don't really have to move all that much for such a wide lens. Something like a 200-800mm will be different in that regard.

    There are some Canon shooters that were hoping for supertelephoto lenses like the Nikon 600mm f/6.3 VR S for the RF mount. While that isn't happening this coming week, stay tuned for some information on those sorts of lenses in the near future.

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    187 comments

    2. Lens of interest! I doubt if I will ever put a TC on it. 800mm with a 50mpx camera is adequate for my work. Besides, I do not think this lens will give great IQ with a TC.
    3. Not sure about this one. I shoot Nikon as well and whenever I’m using the 800mm 6.3 in not perfect lighting conditions , not even dark , ISO goes through the roof and I struggle to get adequate exposure. Not sure how this F9 lens will behave but that worries me a bit. I’m waiting for the 200-500F4 though.
    4. Not sure about this one. I shoot Nikon as well and whenever I’m using the 800mm 6.3 in not perfect lighting conditions , not even dark , ISO goes through the roof and I struggle to get adequate exposure. Not sure how this F9 lens will behave but that worries me a bit. I’m waiting for the 200-500F4 though.
      If you can’t get adequate exposure under those conditions with an f/6.3 lens, then there is either something wrong with your Nikon camera or your RAW conversion.
    5. I hope for at least some kind of weather resistance. I can't see myself buying a 2500Euro Lens and then going for a hike with a bunch of garbage bags around my lens if it starts to drizzle.

      On a different note... What is going on with the forum on mobile? I have to delete every second word because the input is so laggy, that letters get lost or switched around.
    6. I hope for at least some kind of weather resistance. I can't see myself buying a 2500Euro Lens and then going for a hike with a bunch of garbage bags around my lens if it starts to drizzle.

      On a different note... What is going on with the forum on mobile? I have to delete every second word because the input is so laggy, that letters get lost or switched around.
      Look on the bright side. If it's not weather sealed, it will dry out faster.
    8. f/6-8.5 would not be sold as f/6.3-f/9.
      Things usually go the other way.
      Agreed. For every patent I’ve matched to an actual lens, Canon has rounded in their favor for both focal length and aperture. This patent should correspond to a 200-800 f/5.6-8.

      Also…
      Back focus: 22.57mm 43.72mm 83.86mm
      That leaves just 2.57 mm for the extender protrusion to fit into the back of the lens. Pretty sure that’s not enough, suggesting it would work with TCs like the RF 100-500, i.e., not at the wide end.
    9. Agreed. For every patent I’ve matched to an actual lens, Canon has rounded in their favor for both focal length and aperture. This patent should correspond to a 200-800 f/5.6-8.

      Maybe DO element (or some other part of the design) loses enough light to pull the T-stop down a bit, so they decided to go the other way with the naming.
      Also…

      That leaves just 2.57 mm for the extender protrusion to fit into the back of the lens. Pretty sure that’s not enough, suggesting it would work with TCs like the RF 100-500, i.e., not at the wide end.
      That may be the price for the short body. The patent shows a design shorter than the 800 f/11 (when collapsed) at the short end and only a little longer than the extended 800 f/11 at full reach. That tradeoff won't offend me because I tend to use TCs at or near the long end in any case and the number you point to suggest the lens could be zoomed back to around 300mm with TC in place. It all depends on how fast the rear element moves out as the lens is zoomed out. If the zoom has a friction lock, then I see no issue at all.
    10. The 24-240 uses the nano usm motor and it focuses very quickly. Point being, Canon is not averse to using that motor in a more consumer oriented lens and it is better for video than a standard usm.
    11. That leaves just 2.57 mm for the extender protrusion to fit into the back of the lens. Pretty sure that’s not enough, suggesting it would work with TCs like the RF 100-500, i.e., not at the wide end.
      Just measured my RF TCs, protrusion is about 16 mm.
    12. Just measured my RF TCs, protrusion is about 16 mm.
      So that is 16 mm forward from the flange and the flange to sensor distance is 20mm so that would say you need a back focus distance of 36mm for clearance. the patent says approx 44mm at 400mm so somewhere between 300 and 350 for the stop. that is well within the overlap range for no TC and a 2x TC, so no gap in reach coverage with only a 2x. just some extension in storage if the TC is attached.
    13. Sounds very promissing.
      Esp. that TCs can be used.
      Still dimensions, weight, MFD and final price should be known before all are cheering (I know, some will never cheer ;) )
      Even if there's nothing to complain about, a scenario will happen like the following:
      Almost everyone: This time it's perfect!
      That one person: Why can't Canon make flawed lenses? I'm going to Nikony!
    15. Sounds ok. I actually just switched and bought the z9 and the 600pf. My local brick and mortar had one and I got it. Went shooting today. Seems pretty amazing granted I’m new to Nikon and there is a learning curve. I still love canon and appreciate their products and hope I can still post here. I just couldn’t wait and this lens didn’t seem to be the compromise I was looking for!
    16. The 24-240 uses the nano usm motor and it focuses very quickly. Point being, Canon is not averse to using that motor in a more consumer oriented lens and it is better for video than a standard usm.
      The older EF 70-300 USM also used nano USM.
    17. Sounds ok. I actually just switched and bought the z9 and the 600pf. My local brick and mortar had one and I got it. Went shooting today. Seems pretty amazing granted I’m new to Nikon and there is a learning curve. I still love canon and appreciate their products and hope I can still post here. I just couldn’t wait and this lens didn’t seem to be the compromise I was looking for!
      Hope it lives up to your expectations. The early shots that DPR put up weren't that stunningly sharp.
    18. Agreed. For every patent I’ve matched to an actual lens, Canon has rounded in their favor for both focal length and aperture. This patent should correspond to a 200-800 f/5.6-8.
      Doesn´t the patent RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 actually go to around F6.7 (or F.6.9?), which depending on your setting doesn't doesn't show up. Depending on your camera setting it chooses to show F6.3 or 7.1. The lens is sold as a F7.1 at the long end, so I guess it does exist.
    19. Doesn´t the patent RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 actually go to around F6.7, which doesn't exits in setting. Depending on your camera setting it chooses to show F6.3 or 7.1. The lens is sold as a F7.1 at the long end, so I guess it does exist.
      If you want to see f/6.7, you have to set the camera to 1/2 stop intervals rather than 1/3 stop intervals. The fact that you can't see that aperture doesn't mean the camera won't use it in program mode, but it will only show you the closest value that is displayable based on your interval setting. That follows through to what is shown in EXIF as well.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment