Will Sony make a 300 2.8 ?

[MrFotoFool]

I have been surprised that no one (yet) makes a mirrorless 300 2.8 lens. CanonRumors has discovered some new patents that show a 300 2.8 with built-in 1.4 extender. Will Sony or Nikon follow? I realize patents don't always result in products that come to market, but considering how popular this lens was for SLR's I am surprised we have not seen one in mirrorless. Adding a built-in teleconverter would make it much more useful I would think.

Patent: Canon RF 300mm f/2.8L IS 1.4x plus other supertelephoto optical designs - Canon Rumors

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. One of the most popular, if not the most popular “big white lens” is the Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS. We're still waiting to learn more about an RF version of the lens. It's our understanding that...

www.canonrumors.com

 

[MrFotoFool]

There are at least four available in A-Mount, all are very highly rated and will give you excellent IQ.

Thanks, I was not aware of that. It still seems odd they do not make one in E mount.

 

[Malsam]

yes i was one of the owners when I'm at Canon EF camp. I too use TCs to achieve wildlife and birding needs. Strange that in mirrorless world, none of the companies seems to be keen to produce this.

 

[AlphaWorld]

There also isn't a 200mm f/2, either. I've owned the Canon EF version, and I'd really like an E mount version. I don't want an adapted lens.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I wish they would make a 300 f4, or 500 5.6 like the Nikon PF lenses, because they are both epic. I can see why they don't make a 300 2.8 E mount though, because the 400 2.8 exists, and there is the A mount version of the 300. There are certainly some holes in the lower end lens range, but again, I think Sony consider them covered with the 70 200's and the 200 600, which are all superb.

 

[AlphaWorld]

I wish they would make a 300 f4, or 500 5.6 like the Nikon PF lenses, because they are both epic. I can see why they don't make a 300 2.8 E mount though, because the 400 2.8 exists, and there is the A mount version of the 300. There are certainly some holes in the lower end lens range, but again, I think Sony consider them covered with the 70 200's and the 200 600, which are all superb.

I understand your thinking, but at 200mm the 200-600 is f/5.6, and the 70-200 II is f/2.8. f/2 makes for some ultra shallow depth of field, and I'm a fan of that.

Of course, you are talking about more practical "shoot all day handheld" lenses. I'm talking about a "use for 30 minutes and have a rest" lens

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I understand your thinking, but at 200mm the 200-600 is f/5.6, and the 70-200 II is f/2.8. f/2 makes for some ultra shallow depth of field, and I'm a fan of that.

Of course, you are talking about more practical "shoot all day handheld" lenses. I'm talking about a "use for 30 minutes and have a rest" lens

Hence me saying the 400 2.8. That's the Sony equivalent in E mount now, they have no need to make a 300 2.8.

 

[Paul stuart]

They will make a 300mm f2.8 for sports photographers ,but when who knows ,400mm is too long for indoor sports ,they will also make a 500mm f4 ,but what i really want is a sigma 500mm f4 e mount ,or pehaps a 120-300mm f2.8 , a 400mm f4.5 would be good prime sharp like the big whites so with t/c so you get 560 f6.3 but lighter than the 200-600mm ,it would sell nice but then so would a 400mm f4 also no need for fresnel design ,sony just needs to fill in some gaps long macro 150mm + ,200mm f2 ,f2.8 ,300mm f2.8,f4 ,400mm f4 primes a long 800mm f6.3/f8 ,me personally would like to see other 1/3 party lenses in the telephoto range tamron ,sigma and samyang ,which for the most part make stellar and competitively priced lenses .

problem with sony their real loyalty in e mount lays with portrait and in this regards are king ,canon loyalty is with sports and nikons is wildlife ,there is some cross over but this is mostly the case.

 

[Malsam]

There also isn't a 200mm f/2, either. I've owned the Canon EF version, and I'd really like an E mount version. I don't want an adapted lens.

Oh ya, I was really into that lens - never owned it but I tested it. Its a mistress