neuroanatomist said: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!
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:If you want to wish for something, try a 500mm f/5.6. Nikon has already delivered one.
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.uri.raz said:BeenThere said: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.
neuroanatomist said:Sabaki said: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
Sabaki said:But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think
BeenThere said: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.uri.raz said:BeenThere said: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.
Plus, isn't that aforementioned Nikon a zoom? And if so, is it really 500 and/or 5.6?neuroanatomist said:Sabaki said:But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think
I agree.
neuroanatomist said:Sabaki said:But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think
I agree.
slclick said:Plus, isn't that aforementioned Nikon a zoom? And if so, is it really 500 and/or 5.6?neuroanatomist said:Sabaki said:But I do think we'll see that lens before we see the end of your sarcasm? Maybe? What you think
I agree.
neuroanatomist said:It's a 200-500mm f/5.6 VR. But it uses 95mm filters...
chrysoberyl said:neuroanatomist said: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 said:chrysoberyl said:neuroanatomist said: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 said:neuroanatomist said:chrysoberyl said:neuroanatomist said: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.
I know of a second customer..... ME!neuroanatomist said:chrysoberyl said:neuroanatomist said: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? ???
9VIII said: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.