"unable to amortize" is the only one that Nikon might have a problem with.
Nikon is worse.
Sony seems to have no problem making lenses but they leave out some of the corrective elements to Canon and Nikon seem to rely on.
Upvote
0
Canon RF 200-500mm f/4L IS USM confirmed, likely in Q4 [CR3]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Sony seems to have no problem making lenses but they leave out some of the corrective elements to Canon and Nikon seem to rely on.
Canon is marketing the 100-300 as their indoor sports zoom lens.
The EF
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Why would a Canon shooter be waiting for a lens like the Sony 200-600mm when they have the 100-500mm, which is as good, if not better, in so many ways?
Canon knows where the profits are best made. And we have no idea what lenses are in the pipeline. They can only design and produce so many new lenses a year. Why don't people understand that not every lens is for them.
Upvote
0
I think Canon understands that 14, 24 and 35 L primes are not a high priority item since;
A) Many existing photographers will already have these lenses in the EF versions and will use them with an adapter.
B) Many photographers that do not have them, but want them, will buy new or used EF versions of these lenses and will use them with an adapter.
Upvote
0
An interesting lens to be sure and I would consider it more of a replacement for the old 200-400 f/4 (with the built in TC) which weighed a beastly ~8 lbs. It could make a great outdoor sports lens for decent light situations and have some applications for the WL photographer though I'll likely skip it. It will obviously be lighter but not small or light enough to hike with or handhold for long periods. If I have to pull out a mono/tripod, I might as well use the 600 f/4 prime. As much as I dislike the 100-500 b/c of it's f/7.1 aperture and design issues with tc's it's a heck of a lens for BIF/WL. Had Canon produced something like Sony's 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 (unbelievably priced) or Nikon's 800 f6.3, I might have been more excited and likely to purchase.
Upvote
0
RF Future Extender.. A Zoom or 3 step Extender from 0 (bypass) up +2,0 the future is near. But Canon is still behind my expectations.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
I wonder if we'll see variants, e.g. 1.4x+2x, 1x+2x, 1x+1.4x? Certainly a 1x+1.4x+2x would be ideal, but I'm not sure if that's feasible.
Upvote
0
Canon has given us both an 800mm and a 600mm DO lens (I have both). They are the lightest and cheapest lenses around with that kind of reach and they work very well. I get that you may not like f/11, but it works a lot better than you might think, so the question is just where and how wide is the "forgotten middle". Neither the Sony nor Nikon solutions you mention are particularly cheap, so you are talking "upper-middle" which may be a pretty narrow slice. Canon has the numbers, so they know how the market is divvied up. I suspect one of their highest goals is to bring in more entry level customers and then to raise those to, if you will, "lower middle", because that is likely where the most revenue opportunity lies. They have to please the very high end, because even though it may not actually bring in that much revenue, it sets the company image and that is critical for the rest of the market. You will likely see something that fits your fancy, but it may not be at the top of the "to do" list for Canon.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
I'm sure Canon knows that the paid professional market has contracted dramatically and continues to do so, particularly for sports/journalism. Canon's RF lineup seems to split the market into the amateur/consumer level and the enthusiast/pro level, with the latter being mainly driven by wealthy non-professional photographers.
Consider that in this range there's already the RF 100-400 and that's an excellent and inexpensive lens with no counterpart in other manufacturer's lineups. On the other end of the focal range, there's the RF 15-30, also a very good lens with no counterpart. Everyone has cheap and expensive standard and short tele zooms, as well as professional-level standard and short telezooms for enthusiasts and professional wedding/portrait photographers. Canon is innovating with UWA and long telezoom lenses costing $500-600 and that's a big win for the amateur market. The 600/11 and 800/11 fall into a similar category and are also very good lenses costing under $1000, with nothing like them from anyone but Canon. All of those lenses are aimed at the 'middle of amateurs' who want to go beyond a camera and kit lens but can't afford $3000 lenses much less $10000 lenses.
At the higher end for long lenses, Canon seems to be focusing on wealthy amateurs/enthusiasts with incomes sufficient to support an expensive hobby. Time will tell if that's the right choice in the current market, but history suggests that Canon thoroughly understands the camera market and how to succeed in it.
Upvote
0
IMO, one should think about kidney mass production.
It will be interesting, how this lens will perform in size and weight.
And I am sure I don't want to know the price
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
I really don't get how people can post drivel like this and not realize how foolish it makes them appear. A quick look at the market share data, assuming one has the wit to draw conclusions based on a simple dataset, shows that Sony's gains have been matched by Nikon's losses, while Canon's market share has remained generally constant. So no, people have not been generally switching from Canon to Sony and Nikon, they have been mainly switching from Nikon to Sony, and Canon users have been sticking with Canon.
Maybe your friend Bob switched to Nikon for the 500/5.6 PF lens. Bob does not represent the market.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Only Nikon has had a 1.7x TC (among major makers, I don't count Pentax and Hassleblad), and they don't have one for the Z mount. I highly doubt Canon will release a 1.7x in any form, standalone or switchable.
If 1.4x was not too much of a help, why did Canon build one into the EF 200-400?
As a side note, what is a 0x teleconverter...a lens cap? You mean 1.0x.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
