Can we start a rumor.... 600 5.6 L it seems there is a strong market for it

[chrysoberyl]

If you want to wish for something, try a 500mm f/5.6. Nikon has already delivered one.

Yes, that one! I want it like absanford wants a 50mm IS!

 

[BeenThere]

The 400 DO2 plus 1.4 is right there and has excellent IQ. However, that white paint is expensive. Equivalent 560mm at f/5.6 on FF for about $7K U.S. The rumored 600mm f/4 DO will likely double this price. So you can see where Canon is going.

I'm not sure I'm following you.

Do you expect a 600mm f/5.6 to cost significantly less than US$7K, and if so, why?

As for the 600mm f/4, it's a faster & larger lens, of course it would be significantly more expensive. IIRC, the 16-35mm f/2.8 is at least 50% more expensive than the 16-35mm f/4.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I would expect a Canon 600mm f/5.6 to be in the $7k price range, but not sure there would be a significant market for it.

 

[Sabaki]

I'd much rather them bring out a 500 f/5.6 IS L with a 77mm or 82mm thread size

Sure, that will go nicely with their new camera powered by a perpetual motion machine.

#physicsbedamned

Apologies, I'm a dreamer, not a scientist

But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think

 

[neuroanatomist]

But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think

I agree.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The 400 DO2 plus 1.4 is right there and has excellent IQ. However, that white paint is expensive. Equivalent 560mm at f/5.6 on FF for about $7K U.S. The rumored 600mm f/4 DO will likely double this price. So you can see where Canon is going.

I'm not sure I'm following you.

Do you expect a 600mm f/5.6 to cost significantly less than US$7K, and if so, why?

As for the 600mm f/4, it's a faster & larger lens, of course it would be significantly more expensive. IIRC, the 16-35mm f/2.8 is at least 50% more expensive than the 16-35mm f/4.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I would expect a Canon 600mm f/5.6 to be in the $7k price range, but not sure there would be a significant market for it.

There are a significant number of excellent 600mm f/4 IS lenses (Ver 1) that sell used for under $5000 and would be the competition to a f/5.6. If a new f/5.6 were priced anywhere near $7500, I know which I'd choose.

 

[slclick]

But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think

I agree.

Plus, isn't that aforementioned Nikon a zoom? And if so, is it really 500 and/or 5.6?

 

[Sabaki]

But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think

I agree.

Lol. I do have massive respect for your knowledge btw

 

[neuroanatomist]

But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think

I agree.

Plus, isn't that aforementioned Nikon a zoom? And if so, is it really 500 and/or 5.6?

It's a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR. But it uses 95mm filters...

In other words, my sarcasm will last as long as the laws of physics hold true. Mwaaa haaa haaaa. ;D

 

[chrysoberyl]

It's a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR. But it uses 95mm filters...

So if Nikon can produce a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR for $1400, can't Canon produce a 500mm f/5.6 for $2000? Really - I'll buy it!

 

[neuroanatomist]

It's a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR. But it uses 95mm filters...

So if Nikon can produce a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR for $1400, can't Canon produce a 500mm f/5.6 for $2000? Really - I'll buy it!

Sure they could. But...will they? ???

 

[chrysoberyl]

It's a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR. But it uses 95mm filters...

So if Nikon can produce a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR for $1400, can't Canon produce a 500mm f/5.6 for $2000? Really - I'll buy it!

Sure they could. But...will they? ???

Sure, it's optimism on my part, but there does seem to be interest other than me. I won't have the 400mm f/5.6. I won't have the 100-400. I expect that some 400mm f/5.6 owners would jump at the chance to upgrade.

 

[9VIII]

It's a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR. But it uses 95mm filters...

So if Nikon can produce a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR for $1400, can't Canon produce a 500mm f/5.6 for $2000? Really - I'll buy it!

Sure they could. But...will they? ???

Sure, it's optimism on my part, but there does seem to be interest other than me. I won't have the 400mm f/5.6. I won't have the 100-400. I expect that some 400mm f/5.6 owners would jump at the chance to upgrade.

It would be really cool if Sigma would revise their 400f5.6 "Telemacro" lens from the 90's, which is said to have actually out resolved Canon's 400f5.6 Prime, and did it for less money.
Back then people wouldn't touch Sigma with a ten foot pole so the lens didn't seem very popular, but trying the same thing again with their modern lens designs would probably result in something both spectacularly sharp and usable (and that theoretically can't be totally botched with a Canon firmware update).
If they could make it 500mm all the better.

 

[Don Haines]

It's a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR. But it uses 95mm filters...

So if Nikon can produce a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR for $1400, can't Canon produce a 500mm f/5.6 for $2000? Really - I'll buy it!

Sure they could. But...will they? ???

I know of a second customer..... ME!

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

It would be really cool if Sigma would revise their 400f5.6 "Telemacro" lens from the 90's, which is said to have actually out resolved Canon's 400f5.6 Prime, and did it for less money.
Back then people wouldn't touch Sigma with a ten foot pole so the lens didn't seem very popular, but trying the same thing again with their modern lens designs would probably result in something both spectacularly sharp and usable (and that theoretically can't be totally botched with a Canon firmware update).
If they could make it 500mm all the better.

Its one of the five EOS compatible lenses I owned when DSLR's arrived, and it not only turned out not to work, but Sigma could not fix it, so I sold it for peanuts to a film user, since I had totally switched to digital. In any event, it was junk compared to modern lenses, flimsy build, and mine never managed to get sharp images, I might have been the reason, but I managed sharp images with other lenses.