Why The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Delay?

[wickidwombat]

...
The latest we’ve heard, and from a pretty knowledgeable I person is that the lens has needed a redesign in regards to the “bump” that holds the built-in 1.4 TC.
...

The bump is one the same side as all of the knobs as things that you want to change. For the average shooter that has their right hand on the shutter button and left hand on the lens, I can see it getting in the way as you move your hand along the lens.

Even its proximity to the on-off knob for the TC might be such that it is hard to turn the know whilst you've got your eye up to the camera because you can't really approach the knob with your hand against the lens. When you have the camera+lens down, I can see it being easier to get at the knob... but then how easy will it be to turn that knob when wearing big gloves with that bump there in the cold?

I can easily see them moving the bump to either be on top or on the other side of the lens.

the other side wont work since it will get in the way of the Dof preview button and if you have this configured to enable AI servo and there was a bump on the way to use your $10,000 + lens you would surely want to stab someone. On top makes more sense.

[dr croubie]

Also, has anyone else noticed that if this were a 7D or anything else with flash, and there were a CPL in the filter slot, it would be mighty-hard to squeeze your finger in betwixt the flash and filter to actually turn the thing?

[neuroanatomist]

Also, has anyone else noticed that if this were a 7D or anything else with flash, and there were a CPL in the filter slot, it would be mighty-hard to squeeze your finger in betwixt the flash and filter to actually turn the thing?

Maybe the 'bulge' in the rumored issue isn't the bulge of the TC, but the bulge of a popup flash?  The flash on APS-C bodies interferes with TS-E knobs - my 24mm II came with a smaller substitute knob for that reason. Might be the angle, from the pic I'm not sure you could even swap the drop-in filter with the lens mounted on a 7D.

[stewy]

I was thinking that it would be nice to have the 200-400 f4 an an every now and then use lens, but that's not going to happen if its going to cost $10K. I thought it would be closer to the price of the 70-200 II or 24-70 II.

Speaking of that. I see that these lens types of lens are commonly used for sports, but who pays for these pictures to justify the price of these lens? Especially when it comes to wildlife.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I can imagine the AF/MF and AF range limiter switches are a little hard to get to in a hurry, esp on a pro body?

Looking at that image, there is a lock on the TC, but I wonder if it hits a Wimberly head??  That would be a show stopper for sure.

[ddashti]

Is the image shown the actual product image of the lens?

[Simba]

I was thinking that it would be nice to have the 200-400 f4 an an every now and then use lens, but that's not going to happen if its going to cost $10K. I thought it would be closer to the price of the 70-200 II or 24-70 II.

Speaking of that. I see that these lens types of lens are commonly used for sports, but who pays for these pictures to justify the price of these lens? Especially when it comes to wildlife.

There is a better way to spend that money if I really want this zoom range.
Nikon D800 + Nikon 200-400 f4 VR II + Nikon TC 1.4
= $2,999 + $6,749 + $520 (Amazon price)
= $10,268

[M.ST]

Yes. The image shown is an actual product image of the lens.

[mrsfotografie]

I'm starting to think this lens is a bit too much of a swiss pocket knife. Too many features, too little space.

I think it would be beneficial to drop the built-in TC as mentioned earlier. It's nice as a commercial stunt, but a 200-400 without it will be more reliable and most likely sell more units, especially if it's priced to beat the Nikon version.

[sanj]

I'm starting to think this lens is a bit too much of a swiss pocket knife. Too many features, too little space.

I think it would be beneficial to drop the built-in TC as mentioned earlier. It's nice as a commercial stunt, but a 200-400 without it will be more reliable and most likely sell more units, especially if it's priced to beat the Nikon version.

I love my Swiss knife.

[Waterloo]

Also, has anyone else noticed that if this were a 7D or anything else with flash, and there were a CPL in the filter slot, it would be mighty-hard to squeeze your finger in betwixt the flash and filter to actually turn the thing?

There are pictures on Bob Atkins' website of the 200-400 with a 7D attached:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/canon_ef_200-400_f4_extender.html

[neuroanatomist]

Maybe the 'bulge' in the rumored issue isn't the bulge of the TC, but the bulge of a popup flash?  The flash on APS-C bodies interferes with TS-E knobs - my 24mm II came with a smaller substitute knob for that reason. Might be the angle, from the pic I'm not sure you could even swap the drop-in filter with the lens mounted on a 7D.

There are pictures on Bob Atkins' website of the 200-400 with a 7D attached:

That DI filter isn't coming out with the lens mounted...

[mrsfotografie]

What actually happens to these 'demo' lenses, will they all go back to Canon eventually?

[sanj]

Maybe the 'bulge' in the rumored issue isn't the bulge of the TC, but the bulge of a popup flash?  The flash on APS-C bodies interferes with TS-E knobs - my 24mm II came with a smaller substitute knob for that reason. Might be the angle, from the pic I'm not sure you could even swap the drop-in filter with the lens mounted on a 7D.

There are pictures on Bob Atkins' website of the 200-400 with a 7D attached:

That DI filter isn't coming out with the lens mounted...

Oh S___.

[mhcooperphotography]

Just a thought - I wonder if they tried to build a "Drop-In" Tele-Converter?  That way there would be no bump.  Space would clearly need to be bigger than a DI Filter and optical alignment might make it impossible ... but it would be interesting.