2013 - The Year for 400mm Lenses? [CR1]

[neuroanatomist]

Neuro's in rare form today, sarcastic and mistaken.  Somebody mark that on the CR calendar. 

Well, to be fair, my mistake was a month ago, it was caught today.  And as for sarcastic...that's every day.   

[kubelik]

Neuro's in rare form today, sarcastic and mistaken.  Somebody mark that on the CR calendar. 

Well, to be fair, my mistake was a month ago, it was caught today.  And as for sarcastic...that's every day.   

that would make for a great character tagline. "always sarcastic, rarely mistaken." and then they could feature the character in beer commercials.

[K-amps]

I would appreciate a 100-400 2.8 :-)

You must be a back surgeon.

 

Or a back Surgeon Married to a Chiropractor.

[RLPhoto]

I would appreciate a 100-400 2.8 :-)

You must be a back surgeon.

 

Or a back Surgeon Married to a Chiropractor.

Or a back Surgeon Married to a Chiropractor who then buys said 100-400mm F2.8

[expatinasia]

If Canon were to release a new 400 f/5.6L with all the latest features (v. 4 IS, weathersealing, modern build quality and materials, better MFD, etc) what do you think the cost would be?  I think it would have to remain below the price of a 70-200 IS II, but I could definitely see it coming close to $1800 or so given Canon's recent price structure.

Considering the 400L f/5.6 USM is around US$ 1300 and the 500L f/4 IS II USM is US$ 10,400ish and the 400L f/2.8 USM IS II is around US$ 11,000 then I would imagine that any new lens in the 400 f/5,6L range would be somewhere in the middle.

Don't forget that rather silly 100-400 with the built in extender is rumoured to cost a staggering US$ 10,XXX. Which imho is just mad.

But like someone said, if Canon were to do such a lens it is more likely to be f/4 than f/5.6 as most would want to stick a TC on it.