Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS Development Announced

[Flake]

The street price of the Nikon version is £5000 the RRP is higher at £6200.  Generally Canons lenses are a bit cheaper than Nikons for the same focal length, but this one has the 1.4 TC built in, so for it to compete with Nikon I'd suggest a street price somewhere around the same.

The bigger issue is demand, and I wonder how many will be sold, as I've never seen the Nikon version, Nikon users speak of it in hushed tones as if it's some mythical beast, most outlets don't even appear to stock it.

When I want these kinds of focal lengths I have the Sigma 120 - 300mm f/2.8, that's now available with OS and it has a good reputation.  It's a full stop faster than this Canon through half its range, and with a 1.4x tc it reaches 420mm at the same aperture, with a 2x it gives 240 - 600mm f/5.6  All this is (including the TCs )available for £2100 which is about a third of what is being projected for the Canon.

[tzalmagor]

The bigger issue is demand, and I wonder how many will be sold, as I've never seen the Nikon version, Nikon users speak of it in hushed tones as if it's some mythical beast, most outlets don't even appear to stock it.

My impression is that most EF lenses Canon released since the beginning of 2008 are of the 'I wouldn't expect most outlets to stock due to low sales' category. That includes the two TS-E lenses, the 200mm f/2, the 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4, the 600mm f/4, the 800mm f/5.6, and probably the 70-300mm f/4-5.6L as well.

[neuroanatomist]

All this is (including the TCs )available for £2100 which is about a third of what is being projected for the Canon.

Sure...but you're forgetting about the uber-costly coat of white paint!

[DetlevCM]

This does look like a very interesting lens.
Also because it's a highly versatile concept - yes, you can get 400mm with a 2.0 extender and a 70-200 for a reasonable price, but you need to swap lenses.

Having a built in extender sounds good if it can be switched on/off reasonably quickly.
And from what I've heard the 1.4 extenders from Canon have only a very small detrimental effect on image quality.

What I do worry about is the price though - I feel this will be very, very expensive.
-> so sadly, nothing for me for quite some time to come...

(There are 2 other lenses on my list that I can't afford now, but will at some point... 16-35 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 II)

[JLN]

for sure it'll be expensive, thats about as certain as the sun will rise tomorrow.

Pricing should be comparable to the 300 2.8, and the nikkor 200-400 vr.

I'm not suprised about this lens though, the canon camp's been crying for awhile now that nikon have the 200-400 so it was only a matter of time before canon released one.

For those waiting for the 100-400L replacement, THIS IS IT, well sort-of.
When the 70-300L was released many claimed that it was the 100-400 replacement, except it fell short somewhat.
It did however leave a obvious hole for a 200-400L and voila.

[Bob Howland]

Assuming that it's available and sorted out by spring 2012, I'll almost certainly be buying one then. This solves so many problems for shooting field sports and motorsports outdoors.

[Gothmoth]

LOL.....

nobody heard about this lens before... or im am wrong?
are their any rumors about this lens i missed?

[RuneL]

The photo has a metal loop that I think is not a part of the lens, but rather a part of an anti-theft device (the one with a metal wire that has a lock on one side, and a big lump on the other side that wouldn't pass through the loop).

If I'm right, that might mean that the lens isn't just being display (as in, maybe this is just a mockup in a glass box), but a prototype that people can play with in CP+ (Feb 9th-Feb 12th, - in a couple of days), which means production could be significantly closer than Dec 31st.

I'm pretty sure it's for a carrying strap and not a security lock.

[liv_img]

The photo has a metal loop that I think is not a part of the lens, but rather a part of an anti-theft device (the one with a metal wire that has a lock on one side, and a big lump on the other side that wouldn't pass through the loop).

Thats the empty space to put the internal teleconverter when not in use, like the TV lenses.

[neuroanatomist]

The photo has a metal loop that I think is not a part of the lens, but rather a part of an anti-theft device

I'm pretty sure it's for a carrying strap and not a security lock.

Yes, it's the lug for the carrying strap.  Although the specs for the new superteles state that, "Mechanical improvements include...a Kensington-type wire security lock has also been included, keeping the lenses secure during location-based shoots," that metal look is not the Kensington slot.  Lenses back to at least the 300mm f/2.8L non-IS had the lugs for a carrying strap.

[Flake]

Assuming that it's available and sorted out by spring 2012, I'll almost certainly be buying one then. This solves so many problems for shooting field sports and motorsports outdoors.

I'd like to ask what you're using now and why this lens fill a gap that others can't?  In particular the Sigma 120 - 300 f/2.8 which for most of the range is a stop faster.

[kubelik]

Assuming that it's available and sorted out by spring 2012, I'll almost certainly be buying one then. This solves so many problems for shooting field sports and motorsports outdoors.

Bob, you're actually the first person I thought of when I saw this announcement.  This should mean not having to swap so often between the 70-200 and 500 at the racetrack 

[dilbert]

Assuming that it's available and sorted out by spring 2012, I'll almost certainly be buying one then. This solves so many problems for shooting field sports and motorsports outdoors.

And in time for the 2012 Olympics.
In fact, if the 400/5.6L is also refreshed, that'll complete an almost complete rework of Canon's tele-primes between the last Olympic games and the upcoming one.

[Bob Howland]

Assuming that it's available and sorted out by spring 2012, I'll almost certainly be buying one then. This solves so many problems for shooting field sports and motorsports outdoors.

I'd like to ask what you're using now and why this lens fill a gap that others can't?  In particular the Sigma 120 - 300 f/2.8 which for most of the range is a stop faster.

I use a 300 f/2.8 L IS with 1.4X and 2X teleconverters on a 1.6x crop camera. I don't think that the 120-300 sigma would provide good enough image quality with a 2X TC. Certainly my 70-200 Sigma doesn't. The Canon 300 works very well with the 2X TC, as long as the subject isn't moving really fast. One big advantage with the zoom and built-in TC is that I don't have to take the lens off the body to install/remove the TC. That is important for any sort of motorsports run on dirt: motocross, pro rally, oval track, hill climb etc.

As for the stop advantage, most of the time I'm shooting outdoors during the day so light levels aren't a big issue. I may sell the 300 and buy a 200 f/2 for the really low light level stuff.

[tzalmagor]

The photo has a metal loop that I think is not a part of the lens, but rather a part of an anti-theft device (the one with a metal wire that has a lock on one side, and a big lump on the other side that wouldn't pass through the loop).

Thats the empty space to put the internal teleconverter when not in use, like the TV lenses.

Learnt something today, thanks !