Canon’s New Super-Telephoto Lenses Are Going to Be Super Cheap

Canon’s New Super-Telephoto Lenses Are Going to Be Super Cheap

Since we learned about the surprising new f/11 super-telephoto lenses about to be released from Canon, we assumed that they would be affordable. Little did we know just how cheap they were going to be.

Reports from Canon News and Nokishita suggest that the Canon RF 600mm will cost £699, while the Canon RF 800mm will cost £929 — both inclusive of tax. In U.S. dollars, this is expected to work out at $699 and $899 before tax, respectively. That is insanely affordable.

There’s much discussion on how useful an f/11 lens is at these focal lengths, but there’s certainly nothing else like them on the market in terms of size and weight, and now we know that they will also be special in terms of price. The design looks fascinating — check out some leaked photos here.

In other news, the Canon RF 100-500mm f/4.7-7.1 L USM is thought to be priced pretty much as you’d expect at $2,899. Those on a budget will appreciate that the 85mm f/2 Macro IS STM is expected to cost $699, making it a nice addition to the RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro that was launched in 2018 and currently sells for $499.

CanonWatch reports that the much-anticipated EOS R5 — along with the two telephoto primes — will start shipping by the end of July.

Are you preparing to place a preorder? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

Log in or register to post comments


Joel Manes's picture

Unless reviews are awful, and I don't see that happening with a Canon lens, I think these might be fun and worth a go at.

Deleted Account's picture

They must be super cheap. They look super cheap and are probably build super cheap. Ergonomic nightmare and a 70's design.

Deleted Account's picture

Image quality, AF performance, and weather sealing matter a heck of a lot more than gear suffering from "a 70's design".

Deleted Account's picture

We all know that as soon as it isn't labeled L, Canon is cutting corners in the things you found important. Don't have any illusions about the performance of these 2 tele primes.

Michael Clark's picture

Plenty of non-L Canon primes are excellent optically. The non-L 100 Macro is optically near identical to the 100 L Macro.

Eric Crudup's picture

They're f/11. And there super telephoto. Image quality will be fine good wide open.

Deleted Account's picture

They are crippled with fixed aperture. So you can only shoot them wide open at f11.
They're not even weather sealed.


The f11 lenses will sell a ton.

For most people they will still be the most expensive lens they own.

90% of people buy cameras body up to U$500 and would never pay 2k for a lens. But 700? I see that happening.

Ryan Mense's picture

I anticipate it will be very hard for them to keep in stock at that price. Excellent product ideas.

Deleted Account's picture

They should probably sell them as a kit with a tripod.

Chris van's picture

I would hope at f11 they would be super cheap. An aperture at f11 is at the very end of the autofocus capability.

Stig Nygaard's picture

Apparently Canon's Dual Pixel AF still works even when you attach 1.4x and 2x teleconverters to these.
(Not 100% frame coverage for AF, but still)...

Peter Perry's picture

Hmm, I can get 90% of Fuji’s glass for under $900 in excellent shape used, so I don’t see myself spending $700 on something that isn’t going to be anywhere near as good.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m very grateful to see these lenses coming, because God knows Sony and Nikon don’t care a whole lot about the sub $500 Mirrorless market.

Michael Clark's picture

How many 600mm and 800mm lenses does Fuji make?

Michael Clark's picture

Hmm. Comparing the prices of used APS-C only lenses that have been on the market for several months or years to new FF lenses at introduction?

Kent LaPorte's picture

Couldn’t you buy a contemporary Sigma 150-600 f5-6.3 with IS for about the same money and have more flexibility?

Deleted Account's picture

Sure, but there's the whole "don't mind me, I'm just standing here with MY GIANT LENS" factor (not to mention the "no, I'm not training, I just like carrying 4lb weights in my camera bag" factor).

Ryan Mense's picture

And the Sigma is 2 pounds heavier. These lenses aren’t going for the same type of buyer either in my opinion.

Kent LaPorte's picture

I appreciate the less weight and RF lens mount convenience but we are photographers right? Performance first, then cost, then weight. I want 5.6-6.3 with gives me better chances for the shot which are already challenging with wildlife. If I could afford $12k I would buy a f2.8

Ryan Mense's picture

I don't necessarily agree with the assessment that these are for "photographers" in the way you are insinuating.

Michael Clark's picture

If you don't mind the extra bulk and weight, you could.

Justin Wideman's picture

Yes, do! But this glass is for the new RF mount and made for the new R line, not EF.

Shanmuga sundara Bharathi's picture

The title of the article says “ Super Cheap “...
The lens mount - by the picture - seems plastic...?

Erpillar Bendy's picture

The picture is not of any of the lenses mentioned in the article.

Jon The Baptist's picture

That's because it's a 55-200 kit lens that's been stretched in photoshop. This is what's coming out:

Justin Wideman's picture

It seems plastic, non-weather proof, STM are entry-level glass

Lars Sundin's picture

You get what you're paying for. I don't think Canon will break that formula.

Stewart Chong's picture

I would not buy this because of the F11 stop in low light. Currently using the Sigma 150-600 5.6 and, while manageable, aiming to get a tele 600 with F4. Not sure where and how one could shoot with F11 without grainy images and/or slow shutter speed.

Justin Wideman's picture

I imagine only people with RP or R6 will want to put an $800 lens on their new gear that has probably no IS. Anyone who has used a 600 or 800 telezoom will know it is almost impossible to keep still, then you don't even have the ability to zoom? The slightest movement and you are in a different postcode, like a telescope. This is targeting beginners wanting to try sports and wildlife images wanting more reach, but don't understand the light limitations of f/11, this is not a sports and wildlife lens. f/11 is great for nature photography, but I wish it was more like the similar-sized Sigma or Tamron that have 150-600 etc, so there would be some reach and reframing ability even if all f/11-22. A prime non-L lens, yay, light lens, but no bokeh, will need a tripod or only used on very sunny days, but at least you saved some money, right?

I have had Canon STM prime and tele lens, and there is nothing sadder than breaking the bank on a good body and then getting mediocre images because you bought cheap glass. I use f/11 all the time but won't buy an f/11 only prime.