Sorry mate to get 20mp at f11 ..at 800mm... M43 wins big time. less weight less $.
image will look the same.

no but they can buy a em 10 for 400 and a 75-300 also for 400 , the whole being smaller and lighter.

the FF will win with IQ..i had an argument and won on here and proved that the canon bargain-basement plastic nifty fifty at $100 will resolve more detail at equivalent F stops on only a 20ishMP FF sensor ...the m43 lens was the £1200 (then) panny 25mmF1.2 ..you see when the F1.2 m43 lens is wide open the FF 50 is stoped down to be equivalent The m43 lens never catch up as you stop them both down as diffraction limits the m43 lens 2 stops earlier than the FF ..the resan the FF 50 resolves more detail is the image on the m43 sensor is 4 times smaller so it has to be enlarged 4 times more so any optical defects are enlarged 4 times as well ..but the m43 25mmf1.2 optical quality is only about 3.5 times better
Continued

The only advantage m43 has is that you can have small body/lens that is weather sealed ..many m43 bodies are
bigger than APSc and FF most m43 lenses are the same size or bigger if equivalence is taken in account The 25mmF1.2 is bigger than the FF50 F1.8 and not as fast also if you take equivalent lenses m43 are more expensive...just chek out the price of the F1.2 and 1.4 m43 lenses ...and then comper them to equivalent FF lenses ...of course there are not equivalent lenses for every m43 lenses as up till now no one has made slow enough lenses ...i think canon will start to do that

That 100-300 has OIS too, which is useful to keep the view stable at all times (tho some cameras let you turn on IBIS before focusing), and there's a very nifty third party tripod collar for it (Roesch)... You can go even cheaper/smaller with the Oly 75-300 tho, but that one isn't sealed nor does it have OIS, about the same optically tho and would be compatible with Oly Pro Cap (pre-burst)...

I went with the Pany even tho I was using it on an Oly body, for what it is I quite like it... I'll probably keep me M4/3 teles for a long time even tho I'm mulling over a move to FF for wides.

@Martin.au
You can compare the Olympus 300mm f4 with the Nikon 300mm f4 phase fresnel to see that there is room for improvement for MFT with fresnel technology. About 40% of weight could probably be reduced.
I agree that i would rather carry a MFT 300mm f4 than a 600mm f8 for full frame. But then you could get the Nikon 500 f5.6 pf and crop a little or add a teleconverter. This lens is just 10% heavier than the Olympus 300 f4 and camera+lens are just a tad longer.
https://camerasize.com/compact/#181.882,472.506,181.710,851.912,851.911,472.505,181.342,ha,t

If we compare zoom lenses then yes there are no fresnel zoom lenses.

Given that a 2x TC typically introduces some serious kids of contrast, flare, and aberrations, the result with these lenses may be much better.

Once you develop an eye for it, you see a lot of commercial photography with massive noise, LOCA, unflattering lighting and obvious liquify corrections all around the advertising world. A lot of pros hold on to their gear from ten years ago as long as their clients accept the quality because new gear costs money. Doesn't mean these photos couldn't be better, it just means content is king and generating output and money is more important to these pros.

The Canon 400mm/5.6L doesn't have IS, and is about the same price once you add a TC.

The 100-400L IS is the better EF alternative.

@Polacofede - I do something similar, but I use Auto ISO with F/5.6 to F/11 with good results. Detail is all about how much light falls on the sensor(exposure) not ISO. Since these lenses can not stop when AF, I am more curious about AF speed.

@MyReality sure, however high shutter speed and such small aperture is almost a guarantee for little amount of ligth collected, under dusk and dust dimm light. Under a brigth day or slow shutter speeds it wolud be fine.
And yes, it Will be interesting to ser how AF behaves.

Tamron is double the weight of 600mm, about 6cm longer (25%) , more expensive and requires an adapter. It also isn't very sharp at 600mm f6.3, but still an alternative definitely, which has 150-600mm focal length so gives mor.e flexibility

@kreislauf I think you mistook this forum for Huffpost.

Agree. I think that is maybe why Canon designed these lenses, The detail in a photo is about how much light hits the sensor(exposure), not ISO. I can see myself using either of these hand-held with Auto ISO.

they are producing awesome gear for photography.
no one here using photo gear is confused.
only the equivalency- and number-hoggers are!

are they? You should have told the developmental team at Canon that, they are lost without your supervision...

You're right, kreislauf, I really should do that. Oh well, maybe next time Canon decides to do something stupid.

kreislauf - do you really know nothing about exposure, shutter speed, ISO and diffraction of lens? The sun in the light haze needs ISO1600, 1/2000 and F11. The lenses are 600 and 800 mm!!! Play, please, with F11 here http://www.canonoutsideofauto.ca/play/ F11, 1/350 and ISO6400 are good exposure. You could get good exposure with F11, 1/4 and ISO100....:))))))))))))))))

Yeah - odd choices by Canon, no doubt dictated by the marketing dpt to protect sales of EF glass and high-end amazing quality EF bodies. I make do with a 500mm F5.6 diffractive optics, non-retracting, compact and lightweight (ref. 5.6) , weathersealed, IF design plus a TC 1.7 to deliver F9.5 @ 850mm that I most often dial down to F10 or F11. Works on any Nikon body within the last 20 years - as the body needs to support e-diapragm. I had expected Canon to come up with an even lighter, 500mm F5.6 design. My luxury is having the 300mm F4 diffractive optics as well.

Or you can buy a faster Sigma 150-600mm zoom at a lower cost.

I tried f11 on good light today
Got shutter 1/500 iso 100 on my RP
No, it's not horrible, i will share the link to my shot if you like to see

Alam12, which lens at F11? 800 mm?

@tedwill48167 To be fair Canon marketing and Finance won the fight with Canon technical divison and the result is a panicky attempt at both keeping people from buying Sigma/Tamron AND protect Canons EF lenses like the excellent 100-400 (way less than $13.000) and protect their 500 - 800 primes. What Nikon did was provide 4 x the light gathering power with the 500F5.6 "DO" in Canon speak prime @ $3,600 for a Nikon "L-Type", fully pro lens, weathersealed, 4x the light gathering power, ultrasharp wide open. One stop more @500mm F4 you pay $10,300. Diminishing returns for sure. And you are right: Canon offers 2 choices to protect their $13,000 600mm F4. 600mm F11 on R6 looses vs. Sony RX10 III w. F2.4-4 24-600mm. (equivalence trolls, any?) Light does matter. Tiny birds in the canopy, noon, blazing sunlight s.France: ISO 360 1/250 would be ISO 1440 with F11. BIF @ 1/3.000 sec? The R5 @ $3,900 deserves better than a 700$ 600mm F11 lens. Maybe Canon has more DO's to come?

These lenses are very usable. People, please learn how to shoot with Auto ISO.

@MyReality So, what you are saying is that on Canon, auto ISO will be noiseless? Apparently "YourReality" is different from "MyReality", because on my body noise increases with increasing ISO, auto or manual. However, If it works in YourReality, that is all that matters.

@Hasa, cosmicnode - I have both Nikon and Canon. Auto ISO does not work the same on both cameras. One favors aperture the other favors shutter speed if you use Auto ISO and use P program mode.
I use both shutter speed priority or aperture priority with Auto ISO, depending on what I am shooting.
Noise does not increase with rising ISO, as long as the exposure is kept the same. This was shown on DPR twice, by comparing photos.

"ISO 1600 at 1/4000 sec and F11. " I have used that, that is the same exposure as ISO 800 at 1/4000 sec an F8 with the same amount of noise.

@MyReality I have never used P mode but I do use Nikon's auto iso with aperture priority and auto min shutter speed linked to focal length the camera, it adjusts ISO until it maxes out then reduces shutter speed. the problem with F11 is in less than good light where you need the shutter speed to stop action you max out on ISO and end up with slow shutter speeds. this probably never happens with wide angles or short tele lenses such as f1.8 85mm which is where I think a many are drawing there conclusions that you just have to dial in 2 more stops ISO over a F5.6 FF lens or 3 stops over say a m/43 Olympus 300mm f4 and all will be the same.

@ogi i use rf 24-240, I'm not a wildlife photog, just to experiment with people said f11 unusable
Nah that aperture is pretty much usable imo, I will get one if I'm into wildlife, idk are wildlife photog still out there in the wild once it's get dark?.
I live in equator btw, sunny all year long, probably different result if you live in Europe

You may be able to use it in your area, but do not rely on taking test iso / shutter speed tests off your current gear with a short zoom or prime, They will be different much of the time from the same settings on a super telephoto. With a short focal length your meter readings off the full screen will in general include a lot of sky. with a long telephoto you are using a very narrow field of view and the meter reading in a lot of cases will give much slower shutter speeds mainly because you will not have sky in the frame.

I see, maybe you're tight, J will rent it first to see how it performs
where I live i have plenty of light at my disposal

The price and reach poked my interest to wildlife photography

If anyone own a telecovert Can you elaborate, if the 2x teleconvert will also work with adapter and adapted lenses?

@cosmicnode - I agree with what you said regarding AUTO ISO. I use it both with Nikon and Canon(the Auto ISO programs are different). I would use the new Canon F/11 lenses for birds and surfing photography with an occasional landscape. I shoot between 1/500 to 1/1650 shutter speed. I go home long before IS0 25,000, because of possible loss of detail in the picture. With 5 stops of IS in the 600mm F/11, my shutter speed range is easily covered.

I sometimes use P when the light is changing fast or I am moving my camera rapidly between light and shade and I do not have time to adjust. When using P with Auto ISO, everything changes automatically.

@Hasa - Odd, illogical statements. Why would Canon want to protect the sale of anything? They want to sell the most of everything they can, including high end EF lens on R bodies with adapter. The are just doing market segmentation pricing, because they know what sells.

@Adam12 - "I tried f11 on good light today Got shutter 1/500 iso 100 on my RP."
@f11, 1/640 iso 200, 1/800 iso 400, 1/1000 iso 800, etc. all give photos with the same amount of noise. F/11 is very usable.

Was that with a 600mm lens? or a short focal length, the difference is that short focal length lens will have a lot of sky in the shot to boost the shutter speed , a 600 mmm lens will have its narrow field of view focused on the subject which will most likely have every little sky in the shot. With my Olympus E-m1.2 fitted with a 12mm lens i get 1/125 sec at f11 and iso 200 taken off a brick wall of the house around 20m away in the shade, with the 100-400 fitted at 400mm I get 1/30 sec with the focus point on the same spot.
Exposure changes with the focal length due to a different FOV.