Review: Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L from B&H Photo
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I found both the lens and the article underwhelming, especially the article because it left out some major considerations. First of all: To get that "magic" 1200-mm-feeling, you can buy a 600 L II and a 2xIII extender. You just lose 1 stop of light. So agreed, that's not 100 % the same experience because of the slightly larger depth of field of the 600-mm-combo, but what you gain is a lot: For roughly 1/10 of the money you get probably almost the same image quality (no test was made, that's why I have to speculate) in a (for some) handholdable lens (at least I can handhold the 600 L II for a short time at least), and you get a very good IS. Since that beast came out, noise performance of cameras and optical knowhow in newer lenses improved a lot so that I think on the whole, if you need 1200 mm, the 600 L II with 2xIII is the way to go.
However, and now I am talking about an issue that was not really mentioned in the article, the optical quality of the lens can hardly be put to use if you use it like the authors of the articles, i. e. to photograph far away subjects. From my vast personal experience with my 600 L II I can say that there is a minimal chance only that you can take photos at 1200 mm without the air between the lens and the subject destroying the image quality. Even at 600 mm, haze is an issue. At 1200 mm, you have to have very special atmospheric conditions to get really sharp images from subjects that are several hundreds meters away. Let alone kilometers. If you are focusing on subjects near infinity (astronomical shots excepted) you will NEVER get a sharp image of an object. Never. Talking about the shots of that bridge in the article, I am pretty sure that images taken with an ordinarly 600 mm lens would be quite as (un)sharp as those taken with this beast, even if the beast were optically better).
However, and now I am talking about an issue that was not really mentioned in the article, the optical quality of the lens can hardly be put to use if you use it like the authors of the articles, i. e. to photograph far away subjects. From my vast personal experience with my 600 L II I can say that there is a minimal chance only that you can take photos at 1200 mm without the air between the lens and the subject destroying the image quality. Even at 600 mm, haze is an issue. At 1200 mm, you have to have very special atmospheric conditions to get really sharp images from subjects that are several hundreds meters away. Let alone kilometers. If you are focusing on subjects near infinity (astronomical shots excepted) you will NEVER get a sharp image of an object. Never. Talking about the shots of that bridge in the article, I am pretty sure that images taken with an ordinarly 600 mm lens would be quite as (un)sharp as those taken with this beast, even if the beast were optically better).
Upvote
0
My big question here, and I'm serious, is will canon service this lens if anything breaks. They seem to have taken some pride in the series converting them from FD lenses to EF. I wonder if they keep track of the current owners and offer them some sort of support plan.
Imagine the price drop that would occur if canon came out with a good 1200mm f 5.6 DO lens that weighed less than 10# or 4 kg. and was hand luggable. Hint hint
And yes in comparison to a 600 L II and a 2xIII extender it would be nice to see some actual quality comparisons. Perhaps that is why the reviews are always short for time and bench testing is never feasible.......
Imagine the price drop that would occur if canon came out with a good 1200mm f 5.6 DO lens that weighed less than 10# or 4 kg. and was hand luggable. Hint hint
And yes in comparison to a 600 L II and a 2xIII extender it would be nice to see some actual quality comparisons. Perhaps that is why the reviews are always short for time and bench testing is never feasible.......
Upvote
0
applecider said:
The focus motors are one of the weak points of "legacy" equipment. This one and the 200mm 1.8 both share the same motor in their "focus by wire" design, meaning if the motor goes even manual focus will not work. When I got my 200mm 1.8, I also got a spare new motor for it from an camera equipment maker.
Someone else made the point about the ultimate resolution of the lens. With a lens this expensive and painstakingly made, there ARE options not available to the opticians such as "retouching". They basically test the complete optic against its own refection in an optical flat that is falt to say 1/20 of a wavelength of light, and adjust it to get the best results.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
