Today, the Canon EF 800 f/5.6L IS costs US$ 13,289 if you buy it from B&H. If a new version did come out, as a CR1 is reporting here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20042.0 how much do you think it would cost?
Steve said:How much for the Nikon 800? Probably that much +10% Canon premium
9VIII said:It's their first lens using fluorite (a big lens at that), where Canon has been making the stuff for decades and is already using it in every big white they make. Economy of scale alone dictates Canon will be able to put out the same product for less. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if overall production for big lenses just goes smoother at Canon, they certainly have been getting a lot of experience doing that sort of thing lately.
9VIII said:Nikon also included a TC (normally a $500 value) and charge an arm and a leg for a carbon fiber hood.
Eldar said:To justify its existens it has to be sufficiently better than the 600 f4L IS II w. 1.4xIII extender. That requires a hell of a lens and it will most certainly be expensive. I can't see why Canon shouldn't try the same pricelevel as Nikon, or maybe even a bit above. If it sell, they have excellent margins. If not, they can reduce the price and still get a healthy return on investment.
expatinasia said:How did the prices change when the 300, 400 and 600 Mark IIs were launched? How much more were they when they came out compared to the Mark Is?
That would line up pretty well with the Nikon, but will Canon throw in a custom extenderneuroanatomist said:expatinasia said:How did the prices change when the 300, 400 and 600 Mark IIs were launched? How much more were they when they came out compared to the Mark Is?
The MkII versions of the 300, 400, 500 and 600mm supertele lenses launched at price increases of 40-50% over their predecessors. An equivalent increase would put the 800/5.6 II at ~$19,000, give or take a few hundred.
neuroanatomist said:Canon should be able to make the product for less...but that doesn't mean they'll sell it for less. MAking it cheaper and selling it for more means higher profit...and that's what Canon is after. They'll sell it for what the market will bear, and given the reputation of Canon's supertele lenses (and the white paint), it's likely they can sell it just fine for a higher price than the Nikon 800/5.6.
neuroanatomist said:The Canon supertele hoods are also carbon fiber, and I could buy a 70-200mm f/4L for the cost of a replacement hood for my 600 II.
Again, it would have to be an amazing lens to justify $19k, with or without an extender.mackguyver said:That would line up pretty well with the Nikon, but will Canon throw in a custom extenderneuroanatomist said:expatinasia said:How did the prices change when the 300, 400 and 600 Mark IIs were launched? How much more were they when they came out compared to the Mark Is?
The MkII versions of the 300, 400, 500 and 600mm supertele lenses launched at price increases of 40-50% over their predecessors. An equivalent increase would put the 800/5.6 II at ~$19,000, give or take a few hundred.![]()
All very true, and Canon may have to use more of that stuff that Nikon said for years wasn't any good (until the 800mm), what was it called, oh yeah, fluorite - AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR:Eldar said:Again, it would have to be an amazing lens to justify $19k, with or without an extender.mackguyver said:That would line up pretty well with the Nikon, but will Canon throw in a custom extenderneuroanatomist said:expatinasia said:How did the prices change when the 300, 400 and 600 Mark IIs were launched? How much more were they when they came out compared to the Mark Is?
The MkII versions of the 300, 400, 500 and 600mm supertele lenses launched at price increases of 40-50% over their predecessors. An equivalent increase would put the 800/5.6 II at ~$19,000, give or take a few hundred.![]()
800mm is pretty long, so the 600 f4L IS II gives you better close(r) range capability and you have excellent performance with th 1.4xIII. I had the same issue with the 400 f2.8L IS II, before buying the 600. With the 1.4x and 2x extenders it gives you very good focal length alternatives. It works well at 640mm, but the IQ at 800 is significantly behind the 840 you get with the 600, with which you can go to 1200. With the 400 you get f2.8, which is a very usable feature, wheras with the 800 you get same f-stops as the 600 with extenders.
At 19k you get a 600 with a 1DX hooked on ... So, to justify that price tag, the 800 would have to be truly exceptional.
Except they forgot to update their website Glossary, LOL:Fluorite (x2), ED glass (x2) and Nano Crystal Coat are employed, realizing high optical performance with minimal chromatic aberration
ED glass - an essential element of NIKKOR telephoto lenses
Nikon developed ED (Extra-low Dispersion) glass to enable the production of lenses that offer superior sharpness and color correction by minimizing chromatic aberration.
Put simply, chromatic aberration is a type of image and color dispersion that occurs when light rays of varying wavelengths pass through optical glass. In the past, correcting this problem for telephoto lenses required special optical elements that offer anomalous dispersion characteristics - specifically calcium fluoride crystals. However, fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index.
So Nikon designers and engineers put their heads together and came up with ED glass, which offers all the benefits, yet none of the drawbacks of calcium fluorite-based glass. With this innovation, Nikon developed several types of ED glass suitable for various lenses.
They deliver stunning sharpness and contrast even at their largest apertures. In this way, NIKKOR’s ED-series lenses exemplify Nikon’s preeminence in lens innovation and performance.
9VIII said:I guess I'm counting on Canon's comfortability as market leader to influence their pricing.
unfocused said:The poll needs to be amended to include an arm and a leg.