World's most expensive lens

[pwp]

Don't sweat it over the cost of the 400 f/2.8isII. This one checks out at over $2 million.
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/27/the-worlds-most-expensive-camera-lens/#more-70978
Of course, it's a Leica...

-PW

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Don't sweat it over the cost of the 400 f/2.8isII. This one checks out at over $2 million.
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/08/27/the-worlds-most-expensive-camera-lens/#more-70978
Of course, it's a Leica...

-PW

 
It doesn't hold a candle in price to the camera lenses used on military spy satellites, or on the Curiosity Martain rover.  I doubt if its  in 100th place.

[Hillsilly]

Hubble would have to be near the top of the list, too.  At $2.5b to construct, then all of the maintenane and the big upgrade a couple of years ago, I think it has cost almost $7b.  But it does get some spectacular shots.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

If you count telescopes and microscopes, its down to about #10,000.

[bdunbar79]

If I had that lens I could stay between the football stadium and soccer field and shoot both games from the same location

[candyman]

If I had that lens I could stay between the football stadium and soccer field and shoot both games from the same location

 

[Hillsilly]

If I had that lens I could stay between the football stadium and soccer field and shoot both games from the same location

The Canon 1200mm and 1.4x extender might be a better choice for sports - It has autofocus.

[nubu]

I am much more impressed by this beauty!  http://www.dpreview.com/news/2006/10/1/zeiss1700f4

[marekjoz]

This was probably not the most expensive but I think that keeping it running may cost some money As Hubble came here into play, I thought I'd share this liquid mirror telescope (mercury)

Liquid mirror telescope	Small | Large

[aj1575]

Hubble would have to be near the top of the list, too.  At $2.5b to construct, then all of the maintenane and the big upgrade a couple of years ago, I think it has cost almost $7b.  But it does get some spectacular shots.

The lens itself is much cheaper; the expensive part of the Hubble was its delivery (no free shipping here), and some repair work under warranty....

[Danielle]

Personally I don't understand how a Leica APO-Telyt-R 1:5.6/1600mm would be worth 2.79 million dollars. Thats really in WTF territory for me. Unless all the glass is sapphire crystal or something ridiculous.

[Wrathwilde]

The customer reviews for the sigma 200-500 seem to make it the better choice.

[Vossie]

Personally I don't understand how a Leica APO-Telyt-R 1:5.6/1600mm would be worth 2.79 million dollars. Thats really in WTF territory for me. Unless all the glass is sapphire crystal or something ridiculous.

The thing that makes it so expensive is that this is a one-off custom built lens (as you could read in the linked article). All the development costs will be included in that price.

[Danielle]

Did I seriously miss that? Ha, wow.

Publicity stunt perhaps.

[M.ST]

The Canon EF 3000 is not much cheaper.