I think my ultimate lens would be a 200-600 f4 DO, (yeah, sounds impossible, but just 30 years ago nobody would've thought the 1DX II was possible!!). That would be a sweet lens.
Upvote
0
Canon EF 600mm f/4 DO IS To Arrive in Late 2017 [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
ahsanford said:
Only for weather sealing I would say i do not need 1.2, I have the Tamron 45 it is nice and weather seal is nice feature, but autofocus just is not good enough I think and that makes to hole ting a bit of strange combination, think I will have to (try) to return it.
Upvote
0
YuengLinger said:
Quick Draw McGraw... maybe you are too young to remember? Anyway, you're fast!
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:As opposed to the current bazooka-like form factor.
I prefer the bazooka. Compensating. It's pathetic, I know.
Upvote
0
I don't mind to carry the 600 f/4 II if the quality is top notch, have no problem shooting it handheld. Sometimes only neck hurts by end of the day
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-400mm-F28L-IS-II-USM-versus-Canon-EF-400mm-F4-DO-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R__401_0_1425_1009 I know, we all love DxO, but I'm still wondering if the DO technology saves the length / weight, but optically is not as flawless as the regular one?
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-400mm-F28L-IS-II-USM-versus-Canon-EF-400mm-F4-DO-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R__401_0_1425_1009 I know, we all love DxO, but I'm still wondering if the DO technology saves the length / weight, but optically is not as flawless as the regular one?
Upvote
0
Jopa said:I don't mind to carry the 600 f/4 II if the quality is top notch, have no problem shooting it handheld. Sometimes only neck hurts by end of the day
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-400mm-F28L-IS-II-USM-versus-Canon-EF-400mm-F4-DO-IS-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R__401_0_1425_1009 I know, we all love DxO, but I'm still wondering if the DO technology saves the length / weight, but optically is not as flawless as the regular one?
That metric on the dxo website is very misleading because the "mpix" sharpness number they use is a conglomerate measurement of all apertures across the field. It's a useless measurement for a lens like this. What people really want to know is how sharp it is wide open. The 400doii is super sharp wide open but it drops off more quickly as you stop down compared to other lenses.
Upvote
0
chrysoberyl said:
if they are selling a 400 4 DO i don't see them selling a 400 5.6 DO ???
i love this 600 F4 DO, but im afraid it will be hitting 10k or about (even if more, already too much for me)
i'm using nikon and i love my 300 f4 PF (+TC 1.4), just wish it was a 400 or 500 ;D ;D
Upvote
0
Yikes you must be the original Mr Muscles. Very few photographers on the planet could work all day hand holding any 600mm.Jopa said:I don't mind to carry the 600 f/4 II if the quality is top notch, have no problem shooting it handheld. Sometimes only neck hurts by end of the day
My three times a week at the gym clearly isn't enough.
-pw
Upvote
0
pwp said:Yikes you must be the original Mr Muscles. Very few photographers on the planet could work all day hand holding any 600mm.
My three times a week at the gym clearly isn't enough.
-pw
once i talked to a guy, bigger build than mine but more lazy
he's more a portraiter and studio shooter than a 'hiker', neither a birder standing on a tower a couple of hours
i told him the 300 F4 ED (not pf) if you are walking 7-8 hours (+ backpack + up and down the hill, water )
in the evening will let you feel tired
he was like that's not heavy (yes from a stationary bird watcher or a studio photographer perspective)
but i didnt tell him, can you lift this up once twice or thrice ? that's heavy like a 'blue tit'
basicly a safarist doesnt do anything in comparison = car + tripod + airplane, 2-3 hours, move it from one place to another and thats it, back in the hotel to eat the nice dinner
static vs active, 2-3 hours vs whole day
i'm of strong build and i lift bags 25-30kg at work, daily
not yet 40yo
Upvote
0
I wonder, how good will the optical performance be? I owned the 400 DO Version I and was dissatisfied. The version II seems to be even better, but I know two persons that have bought it, who say, the optical performance is very good, but not excellent for this price.
My grandson says, the fresnel technology is still not as good as the conventional one. It got much better in the last years, but it will take another years to become as good as the current conventional lens technology
My grandson says, the fresnel technology is still not as good as the conventional one. It got much better in the last years, but it will take another years to become as good as the current conventional lens technology
Upvote
0
it looks like PF and DO needs some more decades of development
it has + and -, pros and cons
you gain in mobility you lose in top quality, it's trade off
CaNikon test us to see if we 'accept' this trade off, considering that a bazooka for a lot of movement is a non sense (unless perhaps your way of shooting is static on tripod and car)
it has + and -, pros and cons
you gain in mobility you lose in top quality, it's trade off
CaNikon test us to see if we 'accept' this trade off, considering that a bazooka for a lot of movement is a non sense (unless perhaps your way of shooting is static on tripod and car)
Upvote
0
No mention of a BR element? The one shown last year did. see:
http://www.lens-rumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4l-is-do-br-usm-lens-prototype-images/
An f/4 600mm lens needs to have a 150mm aperture so the diameter will be large compared to the f/4 400mm DO that only needs a 100mm aperture. I have the new 400 DO and it is indeed very sharp. Specular bokeh balls have rings due to the Fresnel nature of the lens.
http://www.lens-rumors.com/canon-ef-600mm-f4l-is-do-br-usm-lens-prototype-images/
An f/4 600mm lens needs to have a 150mm aperture so the diameter will be large compared to the f/4 400mm DO that only needs a 100mm aperture. I have the new 400 DO and it is indeed very sharp. Specular bokeh balls have rings due to the Fresnel nature of the lens.
Upvote
0
I have not yet tried the 400 f/4 DO IS but the reviews are very, very good and it is considerably cheaper, lighter and smaller than the 400 f/2.8 ii.
If you want to be at 600-1,200 this new lens is going to be a very interesting development.
If you want to be at 600-1,200 this new lens is going to be a very interesting development.
Upvote
0
I personally cant wait for this to hit the market. Living on a small island a major priority with my super-teles is the ability to pack it into carry-on luggage bags. This should fit the bill nicely. If the optics are close to the current 600mm f4 and the price doesnt hit $20k then I'm in.
Upvote
0
Extrapolating from the weight of the 400mm f/4 DO II and a double log plot of the weights of the 500 and 600mm f/4 IIs, I estimate a weight for the 600mm f/4 DO of 3.32 kg, just a tad heavier than the current 500mm.
Upvote
0
Steve Dmark2 said:Canon Rumors said:
Maybe they also fit in new AF System "NANO USM technology" as well as digital focus display.
However the second part can be to gimmiky for the Big whites
I think that Nano USM is not faster than the conventional USM technology and such technology are much more suitable in zoom lens than primes.
In terms of the digital display, lets see how the market response to the one on the new 70-300 zoom.
Upvote
0
Chaitanya said:
But that means that I could use my Gura Gear Bataflae 26L Backpack for travelling instead of the 32L. The last one with 600/f4 II and 1Dx is really critical as handluggage on the airplane, as it is not always permitted from every airline. I now kneed the 32L so that my 600f4 can fit inside, but together with 1Dx and extenders the weight for hand luggage is quickly reached while there is still a lot of place in the bag.
I hope that when the lens will be available that deliveries don't take over the delivery issiues of the 400/f4 DO II.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
- Contains 1 staff post(s)