No idea, but I'd expect that if the new 400mm and 600mm lenses have an integrated, switchable 1.4x TC (there were patents published on those about a year ago) then they'll go up in cost a bit over the current versions. Maybe $1K or $2K more? The 1.4x TC is selling for $600...
Not sure that even reducing optics would solve the problem. A friend of mine who worked for Canon for many years once pointed out to me that the reason no one made the equivalent of a Metabones Speed Booster for EF-to EF is that focal reducers do not extend the focal plane like extenders do so they can only be made to fit inside the existing back focus distance of a lens. Hence, we have focal reducers that replace the EF to M and EF to R adapters, but no focal reducers for EF to EF or R to R.
It's technically possible to have a focal reducer that maintains the same lens mount and flange focal distance - there is a 0.7x focal reducer for PL to PL. Of course, technically possible ≠ easy...that optic is 20 cm long, has 13 elements, rotates the image 180° and costs $5500. But it will give you 0.7x the focal length and an extra stop of light with a FF lens and an S35 sensor (or an S35 lens and an S16 sensor).
The 180 rotation makes sense. that would indicate that the adapter created an intermediate focal plane and supports what my friend told me. I guess you could create yet another focal plane and rotate the image back for only $12k
.
Probably not, unfortunately.Given the identical front end size requirement, do you figure getting to 600mm adds more cost than the 2x (instead of 3x) zoom factor reduces it? Honestly, unless some magic happens, I'm not really in the market for this one either
I think we can expect a built-in 1.4 extender, because Nikon's current Z 600mm f/4.0 has one. I guess the old rivalry will drive Canon to come up with such a solution.
Well, Canon's 1200mm f/5.6 was still pocketable compared to the medium format 1700mm f/4.0 tele lens that Zeiss designed especially for a rich Sheikh and his Hasselblad(s). I guess this guy hasn't to carry that lens by himselfomg, how heavy was this lens? According to google AI, it was 16,8 kg. Instead of a tripod one should have probably used a golf cart
.
petapixel.com
If Nikons Z8/9 perform with that lens AF wise like with the Z 600mm f/6.3 PF + 1.4,x extender (latest one from Nikon), I'd really prefer my Canon gear. Shooting side by side with comparable settings, my R5 II + EF 600mm f/4.0 and Canon's 1.4x TC III combo focuses much more reliably than the Nikon gear. I am really disappointed, since I made that 10 k€ gift to my wife as an upgrade of their DSLR F mount gear and hoped it will bring a boost in performance. The opposite is currently the case, and my wife is an experience photographer + she uses exactly the settings recommended by Nikon and Nikon reviewers for birding. Nikon really needs to improve their underwhelming Z AF system.
Canon recognises and locks on to birds faster than Sony or even more so than Nikon. However, they are meant to have stickier tracking. (Faster AF acquisition is more important for me). Recently, I was shooting Peregrines and Kestrels side-by-side with my R5ii +RF 200-800mm and someone with the Sony A1ii and the 300mm f/2.8 + 2xTC against a tricky background. I was much more successful at catching them. It's probably a software thing and they should be able to catch up.
DPAF offers a great deal more focus information than Nikon or Sony have to work with. So long as Canon has that advantage, they are only limited by processing power to stay in the lead with AF. The price, of course, is continually processing twice as many pixels, so the processors are power hungry.
So we’re playing ‘mine is bigger than yours’?Well, Canon's 1200mm f/5.6 was still pocketable compared to the medium format 1700mm f/4.0 tele lens that Zeiss designed especially for a rich Sheikh and his Hasselblad(s). I guess this guy hasn't to carry that lens by himself
Massive 1700mm Carl Zeiss Lens
If you thought Nikon's 6mm Fisheye lens from a week ago was crazy, get a load of this Carl Zeiss telephoto lens announced at Photokina back in 2006. The
View attachment 228817
And they also have DO (PF in Nikon parlance) elements.
The symptoms with the Z8 and the Z 600/6.3 are: the camera focuses fast (with no TC attached) and gets in particular very close to in-focus images with the first frame(s), but then starts to struggle with following frames, and the AF sort of micro-pumps around the precise focus position. First we thought it's a problem with object detection but switching off "birds" or switching it completely off doesn't really help (3D tracking activated). So the problem might be sitting deeper in the system, maybe I have to wipe dust off my old lenscal tool and check the system with it. Nikon's menus of the Z cameras allow for AF calibration, I have briefly seen at least for the Z6 III and 7 on the internet. I always thought that AFMA isn't needed anymore with modern ML cameras, but with Nikon you never know...
Yepp, I know, there is also a youtube video about this crazy catadioptric lens Canon once made - but for 35mm format, if I remember correctly, not for medium format like the Zeiss monster. I guess you really run into trouble with such a huge focal length in many settings because of atmospheric blur. If Canon ever will come up with a modern version I'd highly recommend them to include an adaptive optics system to compensate for the distortion of incoming light wave fronts, like in astronomical telescopes (I edit a German physics magazine so I deal frequently with in-depth reviews of such technologies). That, of course, would only get haze caused by temperature gradients in the air better controlled, not dusty and/or misty or smog conditions.So we’re playing ‘mine is bigger than yours’?
Ok, I’ll see your Zeiss 1700mm f/4 and raise you a Canon 5200mm f/14.
View attachment 228818
It’s a great lens, as long as your subject is further away than the minimum focus distance…
Right, in fact, when I am getting in the age where I can't lift and carry any heavier tele lens anymore, such not-so-fancy lenses will gain a lot of attraction at least for me. Btw I met quite a lot of users, in particular young birders with a small budget, who are quite happy in particular with the 800mm f/11. If there is enough light available, these DO lenses seem to be better than what nerds like us would expect from the underwhelming specs of such lenses. Kudos to Canon that they came up with such tele gear.
