canon-300mm f1.8, Exotic or what

[mukul]

https://petapixel.com/2017/04/27/canon-300mm-f1-8-yes-monster-lens-exists/

Is it EF or FD?

canon museum does not list it?

http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product_search_result.html?t=lens&q=300

http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product_search_result.html?t=lens&q=1.8&sort=new

 

[Labdoc]

The video says they were all FD initially but were upgraded to EF and future production from that time is EF.

 

[BeenThere]

Why is such a high serial number stamped on the lens when only a few were ever made?

 

[Sharlin]

Technically it's not EF if it doesn't have Electronic Focus and aperture control even if it's mechanically compatible with the EF mount.

 

[Dylan777]

Great balance when mount it to an A9 ;D

 

[Click]

Great balance when mount it to an A9 ;D

;D ;D ;D

 

[LDS]

Technically it's not EF if it doesn't have Electronic Focus and aperture control even if it's mechanically compatible with the EF mount.

That's why it is marked "PE". I wonder what PE stands for.

Also, it says how much money revolve around some horse races. If they are so specific I understand why almost nobody knew them, unlike the 1200/5.6 which was officially listed and could be ordered - if you had the money.

 

[slclick]

PE is the class you must take in order to lug this beast around.

 

[jeffa4444]

We have a PL mounted version of the Canon EF 1200mm f5.6. We used to own two of these lenses but sold one off years ago.
Never heard of the 300mm f1.8

 

[IglooEater]

I've wanted Canon to release a new 50mm 1.0 for a while. Now I know what my new number 1 daydream release is.

 

[StudentOfLight]

Technically it's not EF if it doesn't have Electronic Focus and aperture control even if it's mechanically compatible with the EF mount.

That's why it is marked "PE". I wonder what PE stands for.

Also, it says how much money revolve around some horse races. If they are so specific I understand why almost nobody knew them, unlike the 1200/5.6 which was officially listed and could be ordered - if you had the money.

perhaps PE cos it's Physically Enormous ;D

 

[infared]

....and I thought that I was Hot $hit with my Sigma 135mm F/1.8....
LOL!

 

[runbei]

Made me laugh. What a perfect lens for a clog-wearing South Beach fashion photographer!

 

[cayenne]

Oooooh!!

I gotta put an alert for myself on cannon watch......and try to grab one of these bad boys on a refurb sale!!!




cayenne

 

[NancyP]

I am going to have to think that the design was highly specific for function, and that their off-the-shelf 300 f/2.8 of any era out-resolved it.

 

[Fleetie]

Naah, it's crap; it's not even an L.


GIMME GIMME GIMME GIMME GIMME!!!


Seriously, I am amazed that such a lens exists!


Thanks for posting this link! Fascinating!

 

[Tom W]

300 f/1.8 - the original Fat-Boy!

 

[rwvaughn]

Why is such a high serial number stamped on the lens when only a few were ever made?

We only read of one race tracks use of this super specialty lens in the article. However, I would imagine that there were more than just a few made, and more than just a few are still being used for photo finish work. Take the number of race tracks in existence, and barring a competing lens being used manufactured by Nikon, it's plausible that dozens of this lens were made and exist.

Just because the serial number stamped on the lens is a high number could have very little meaning. It could represent some sort of code much like the Canon Date Code. The serial number could identify the lens to Canon as a certain series, lens type and production specimen as a whole. There's really no way to know.

One has to wonder how many other super specialty lenses exist for specific applications that are not listed in the general Canon/Nikon lens catalogs due to trade secret reasons or due to contractual non-disclosure obligations?

Canon, Nikon and even Tamron have whole industrial optics divisions that produce lenses that are not listed in there general consumer lens line ups. I don't find it impossible that there are other monsters out there with wide apertures to be discovered.

 

[Pippan]

I'm wondering what use 6" of DOF would be in a photofinish.

 

[IglooEater]

Why is such a high serial number stamped on the lens when only a few were ever made?

We only read of one race tracks use of this super specialty lens in the article. However, I would imagine that there were more than just a few made, and more than just a few are still being used for photo finish work. Take the number of race tracks in existence, and barring a competing lens being used manufactured by Nikon, it's plausible that dozens of this lens were made and exist.

Just because the serial number stamped on the lens is a high number could have very little meaning. It could represent some sort of code much like the Canon Date Code. The serial number could identify the lens to Canon as a certain series, lens type and production specimen as a whole. There's really no way to know.

One has to wonder how many other super specialty lenses exist for specific applications that are not listed in the general Canon/Nikon lens catalogs due to trade secret reasons or due to contractual non-disclosure obligations?

Canon, Nikon and even Tamron have whole industrial optics divisions that produce lenses that are not listed in there general consumer lens line ups. I don't find it impossible that there are other monsters out there with wide apertures to be discovered.

Oooooh, so their might be a 400mm f/1.8?
Or maybe a 10-1000 f/1.0. ;D