see also:

• Canon EOS camera system
• Canon EF lenses
• super telephoto lenses
• see Canon Australia prices

• 70-200mm f/4 L (112-320mm):
  • $A1400 w/o IS; closest focus 1.2m; filter 67mm;
  • IS version is 0.76kg & $A1999;

• 70-200mm f/2.8 L (112-320mm):
  • $A2600 w/o IS and $A3395 ($A2500 online) with IS (introduced in 2001) weighing 1.57kg
  • 77mm filter; closest focus 1.4m;
  • http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_c16/
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/70-200is.shtml
  • IS not so good for astrophotography - presumably due to aberrations from optical IS and the zoom:
    • see http://www.astropix.com:80/HTML/I_ASTROP/EQ_TESTS/C70_200.HTM
  • non-IS version surprisingly competes pretty well with the 200mm prime at f/2.8 for astrophotography:
    • see http://www.pbase.com:80/terrylovejoy/200_comparision

• 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM:
  • min. focus 0.7m; 77mm filter; 1.67kg;
  • 45-480mm on 1.6x; 36-390mm on 1.3x;
  • $A4399

• 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO IS
  • a great lens for hiking as it is small and light due to its diffractive optics and smaller aperture
  • $A2299; ($A1744 online); 720g; closest focus 1.4m; filter 58mm; not compatible with extenders;
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/Canon-70-300mm.shtml
  • as expected, not so good for astro work as significant coma aberration
    • http://www.artistsloft.com:80/sky/M16-17.html

• 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS L (160-640mm effective):
  • $A2979
  • a bit soft at 400mm wide open; push-pull zoom; not so good on a 1Ds;
  • can be hand-held at 400mm at 1/125th sec with IS.
  • seems it is not recommended, but it is sharper at 400mm f/5.6-8 than a 70-200mm f/2.8L with 2x tele.
  • it is not sealed at the rear and thus when zooming it can suck air and potentially dust into the system and onto the camera sensor.
  • variable quality with some saying resolution on their versions only adequate for 8“x10” prints.
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400v400.shtml
  • unfortunately, Canon do not have an equivalent of the faster Nikon 200-400mm f/4 lens.

• introduced in 1991 and helped Canon snatch the pro camera system crown from Nikon
• very similar in build and optical performance to the EF 85mm f/1.8 although the latter only has a plastic filter thread
• 8 elements in 6 groups, no special glass
• 460g, 75mm x 71.5mm
• close focus 0.9m
• 58mm metal filter thread
• photozone lens test on an APS-C dSLR
  • negligible distortion or CA
  • well controlled vignetting
  • sharp wide open although corners in particular are much better at f/4
  • performs a little better than the 85mm f/1.8
  • one of the best non-L Canon EF lenses - great value for money

• see Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L lens

• 200mm f/1.8L:
  • introduced 1989 & discontinued 2004;
  • http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/eos/EF-lenses/EF200mmf18LUSM/index.htm

• Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM
  • 2008; 2.5kg; close focus 1.9m; circular aperture; $US5999 RRP

• 200mm f/2.8 II L USM:
  • 0.77kg; $A1399; 72mm filter; min. focus 1.5m; ($A1059 online)
  • 320mm effective on 1.6x; 260mm on 1.3x
  • http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=37&sort=7&cat=2&page=1
  • http://pindelski.org/Photography/2006/05/30/canon-200mm-f28-l-lens/
  • a very popular lens for astrophotography - see:
    • http://www.pbase.com:80/terrylovejoy/200_comparision - star shapes are better with the prime vs 70-200mm non-IS but the zoom does very well.
    • Canon 200mm vs Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED on a Canon 5D - Canon has less CA wide open.

• produced 2013
• 3 IS modes
• Full-time manual focus override, AF stop buttons, a focus preset and a focus limiter function
• Power Focus mode to provide smooth, electronically controlled focusing that is well suited to video applications.
• $US11,799

• 300mm f/4 IS L (480mm effective):
  • 1.19kg $A2429; 77mm filter ($A1799 online); 221mm long
  • close focus 1.5m with 0.24x max. magnification; 8 blades;

• 300mm f/2.8 USM L:
  • 2.86kg; 48mm drop-in filter;
  • was considered to be sharper than any Nikon 300mm f/2.8 and far better than the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L, although perhaps not as sharp as the Canon 200mm f/1.8 but more contrast.
  • discontinued and replaced by the IS model which unfortunately is not as good optically due to the optical IS.
  • see http://photo.net/photo/canon/donb/300.html and http://www.tanchung.com/canon/ef300mmf28xu.htm

• 300mm f/2.8 IS L:
  • 2.55kg; $A8229 ($A5999 new online)
  • a great lens designed to be used at f/2.8 but v.expensive
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/300mm_f_2_8.shtml
  • not so good for astrophotography - presumably due to aberrations from optical IS
    • see http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/EQ_TESTS/C300MM.HTM

• 400mm f/5.6 L (640mm effective):
  • 1.25kg; $A2319; 77mm filter, white; 257mm long;
  • a great lens you can at least carry around and better quality than the 100-400mm zoom and better than the 300mm f/4 IS with 1.4x extender.
  • close focus 3.5m, max. magnification 0.12x;
  • apparently no AF with teleconverters?
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/forgotten-400.shtml
  • http://www.canon.com.au/products/cameras_lenses_accessories/super_telephoto_lenses/ef400mmF56lUsm.aspx

• 400mm f/4 IS DO L:
  • 1.94kg; $A11179; introduced in 2001; ($A8149 online)
  • tends to have DO artefacts as it was Canon's 1st attempt at designing a DO lens (uses diffraction gratings), but otherwise, almost as good as the 300mm f/2.8, and better than the 300mm f/2.8 with 1.4x teleconv.
  • models after 1998 are supposedly better.
  • a favorite for wildlife photographers, many of whom handhold this lens.
  • some feel it lacks the contrast of the other L lenses.
  • probably not the best for astrophotography as it has both IS and DO elements which are not so good on pinpoint light sources like stars.
  • http://www.wildlifeimagesbyles.net/Technique/technique.html
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/400-do.shtml

• 400mm f/2.8 IS L:
  • 5.37kg; $A13709 ($A10,000 online)
  • not so good for astrophotography - presumably due to aberrations from optical IS
    • see 2.8 L USM IS Tests

• 500mm f/4 IS L:
  • 3.87kg; $A11699 ($A8900 online)
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/500vs600.shtml

• 600mm f/4 IS L:
  • 5.36kg; $A15299 ($A11000 online)
  • this is much more difficult to handle and use than the 500mm f/4 but once mounted it works well.
  • requires a full size Wimberley mount
  • Samir Kharusi feels that this lens competes well with modern APO refractors in 2007 for astrophotography - see here, with better edge to edge performance although not quite as good contrast or image detail in the centre. Has enough aperture and magnification to provide good webcam images of Saturn using a 1.4x converter + a 5x TV Powermate although having some bluish flare decreasing detail and contrast.

• Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM
  • 2008; 4.5kg (lighter than the 600mm f/4 which is 5.4kg); $US11,999 RRRP
  • http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/canon-800mm.shtml