Canon Developing a New Slower Supertelephoto Lens [CR2]

[StudentOfLight]

Is it possible to have a affordable decent performing 500/5.6 IS?

Here is a thought experiment. A lens like the Tamron 150-600 exists. This lens sells at a profit in the US in the $1100 price range. At the long end it is i think around 580mm f/6.3.

Increase front group and iris size by 8%. Raises material costs by 20%.
Use higher quality "glass" in some of the optics. Raises material costs by 120%.
Replace mechanical zoom barrel with higher strength solid tube. Increases material cost by 10%
Replace zoom optics with simpler prime optics. Reduces material costs 30%
Use alternative focus group optics to accommodate the new front end optics. No change to overall costs
Use alternative IS group. No change to overall costs
Use alternative rear group to correct aberrations to target specification. No change to overall costs

($1100)x(1.2)x(2.2)x(1.1)x(0.7)x(1x1x1) = $2336

Maybe my guesswork is way out, but I think it's doable for under $3000

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I certainly think there's a market for a 500 f5.6 LIS and a 600 f5.6 LIS
Especially if it's sharp wide open. Given that the new DO II optics look very good...these new lenses could be VERY small and light.

I wonder if the 300 f4 LIS is needed these days. A 70-200 f2.8 II LIS with a 1.4x is just as sharp and more versatile.
The same with the 400mm f5.6L, it's real skill was it's great sharpness wide open combined with a really fast and accurate AF system. The new 100-400 II LIS pretty much covers those skills and adds versatility.

I dare say that the 800mm f5.6 LIS will come in for a replacement soon, along with the 200mm f2 LIS.

 

[Maximilian]

Is it possible to have a affordable decent performing 500/5.6 IS?

Here is a thought experiment. A lens like the Tamron 150-600 exists. This lens sells at a profit in the US in the $1100 price range. At the long end it is i think around 580mm f/6.3.

Increase front group and iris size by 8%. Raises material costs by 20%.
Use higher quality "glass" in some of the optics. Raises material costs by 120%.
Replace mechanical zoom barrel with higher strength solid tube. Increases material cost by 10%
Replace zoom optics with simpler prime optics. Reduces material costs 30%
Use alternative focus group optics to accommodate the new front end optics. No change to overall costs
Use alternative IS group. No change to overall costs
Use alternative rear group to correct aberrations to target specification. No change to overall costs

($1100)x(1.2)x(2.2)x(1.1)x(0.7)x(1x1x1) = $2336

Maybe my guesswork is way out, but I think it's doable for under $3000

Quite interesting thought. Thank you, StudentOfLight.

Although the numbers and percentage values might be wrong I'd be willing to call this thought experiment good.
Except for one point:
A $1.100 lens is supposed to be sold in higher numbers than a $3.000 lens.
So costs for R&D, prototyping, marketing, etc. will be divided up to a much lower number of units.
You could argue now that this is already included in your percentage numbers or the margin between 2.336 and 3.000 but I am not 100% sure on this. I've seen price calcualtions before (not for lenses) and R&D of a product is quite a huge part.

But I am willing to agree that somewhere between 3.000 and 3.500 it could be possible to built such a lens - for SigRon.
Add up some 15% to 20% for a Canon lens and we'll be probalby again north of 4k bucks.
And for this price the costs for R&D, etc. will be spread over a even lower number of lenses.

Even if 3.000 might be right, it's still a lot of money.

One thing really positive:
This price is far enough north to separate from a 100-400L II.
But I don't believe that it is close enough to the prices of the big whites in Canons eyes.

 

[NancyP]

There might be a market out there for an under $5,000.00, under 6 pounds, weather-resistant, outstanding optics 500 or 600 f/5.6L IS. How large a market, I am not sure. A lot of individuals looking for a 4K to 5K lens are buying old 500 f/4L IS Is, heavy but not impossible.

I just have to rent a 500 f/4 and see if I can handle it hand-held for flight shots.

 

[Loswr]

I certainly think there's a market for a 500 f5.6 LIS and a 600 f5.6 LIS

I wonder...what if the rumored lens is not an L-series lens?

 

[Don Haines]

a 300mm F4.0 goes for $1350... 77mm filter
a 400mm F5.6 goes for $1250... 77mm filter

an updated 400 F5.6 with IS would go for at least $1350.... more likely $1500

A 500mm F5.6 with IS would probably have a 95mm filter....

A Sigma 150-500 F6.3 goes for $800
A Tamron 150-600 F6.3 goes for $1,080
A Sigma 500 F4.5 goes for $5,000
A Canon 500 F4.0 goes for $9,000
A Nikon 500 F4.0 goes for $8,300
A Sony 500 F4.0 goes for $13,000

I can see a 500 F5.6 going for around $2100 to 2200

 

[Maximilian]

I certainly think there's a market for a 500 f5.6 LIS and a 600 f5.6 LIS

I wonder...what if the rumored lens is not an L-series lens?

If they (Canon) make an "affordable" super-tele I am SURE that it won't be a L lens.

 

[hendrik-sg]

It's just funny, 8 pages of discussion about what a 500 5.6 might cost in relation to other partly completely different lenses.

BUT: The selling price is definded by the marketing compartment. If they think, it should be sold for 3000.- the question is at what Price it can be produced. If it can produced at less cost, it will come to marked after it passed some other considerations. if not, it will not be produced. if they can produce it for 10$ in China instead of 50$ in Japan, they will produce it in China and sell it for 3000$.

Pricing policy is independent from cost, it depends on what ccustomers think it would cost..... this may be diffferent only in case of strong competition, but not in case of camera Systems, where everybody who buys a super telephoto is locked in his system

 

[scyrene]

It's just funny, 8 pages of discussion about what a 500 5.6 might cost in relation to other partly completely different lenses.

BUT: The selling price is definded by the marketing compartment. If they think, it should be sold for 3000.- the question is at what Price it can be produced. If it can produced at less cost, it will come to marked after it passed some other considerations. if not, it will not be produced. if they can produce it for 10$ in China instead of 50$ in Japan, they will produce it in China and sell it for 3000$.

Pricing policy is independent from cost, it depends on what ccustomers think it would cost..... this may be diffferent only in case of strong competition, but not in case of camera Systems, where everybody who buys a super telephoto is locked in his system

I'm not sure that's totally true. Unless a cartel is operating, if company A charges far more than its costs on a product, then company B can come along and offer the same (or an equivalent) product at a lower cost, and undercut them. Of course in the case of lenses, brand loyalty is relevant, but still - I don't think cost to produce and cost charged to customers are entirely divorced.

 

[privatebydesign]

It's just funny, 8 pages of discussion about what a 500 5.6 might cost in relation to other partly completely different lenses.

BUT: The selling price is definded by the marketing compartment. If they think, it should be sold for 3000.- the question is at what Price it can be produced. If it can produced at less cost, it will come to marked after it passed some other considerations. if not, it will not be produced. if they can produce it for 10$ in China instead of 50$ in Japan, they will produce it in China and sell it for 3000$.

Pricing policy is independent from cost, it depends on what ccustomers think it would cost..... this may be diffferent only in case of strong competition, but not in case of camera Systems, where everybody who buys a super telephoto is locked in his system

Nonsense, if the manufacturing department can't make something for the cost the marketing dept wants then it won't get made, only loss leading statement lenses in very small numbers are made to make a point (50mm f1.0, 200mm f1.8 etc), a 500mm f5.6 will have to make money and stand alone as there is more than enough competition from third parties to force the issue. People might feel they are 'locked in' to Canon, but they have a wide range of 500mm options already.

 

[Don Haines]

People might feel they are 'locked in' to Canon, but they have a wide range of 500mm options already.

EXACTLY!
if we look at lenses 500mm or longer, we get some really cheap t-mount lenses.....
A Vivitar 500 F8.0 goes for $90
A Samyang 500 F8.0 mirror lens goes for $100
A Rokinon 500 F6.3 mirror lens goes for $120
A Vivitar 800 F8.0 mirror lens goes for $150
A Bower 650-1300 F16 goes for $250

Then we have a flurry of medium quality zooms....
A Sigma 150-500 F6.3 goes for $730
A Tamron 150-600 F6.3 goes for $1,070
A Sigma 150-600 F6.3 goes for $1,090
A Sigma 50-500 F6.3 goes for $1,510
A Sigma 150-600 F6.3 (sports) goes for $2,000

and finally, a bunch of high quality (and price) primes....
A Sigma 500 F4.5 goes for $5,000
A Sigma 800 F5.6 goes for $6,600
A Sigma 300-800 F5.6 goes for $8,000
A Canon 500 F4.0 goes for $9,000
A Canon 600 F4.0 goes for $11,500
A Canon 800 F5.6 goes for $13,000
A Sigma 200-500 F2.8 goes for $26,000

A medium quality prime should be able to be built for less than a medium quality zoom. It will be lighter and the IQ should be better as it will have an easier design to optimize than a zoom. If a 600 F6.3 zoom can be built for around $1000, then a 500mm F5.6 prime can most definitely be built for under $1000 and a 600 F5.6 prime can be built for around $1000 to $1200. These would definitely an "affordable supertelephoto"

If you went to a high quality "L" prime, then double the cost.... this would still get you a $2200 500 F5.6, still affordable as super telephotos go....

 

[privatebydesign]

People might feel they are 'locked in' to Canon, but they have a wide range of 500mm options already.

EXACTLY!
if we look at lenses 500mm or longer, we get some really cheap t-mount lenses.....
A Vivitar 500 F8.0 goes for $90
A Samyang 500 F8.0 mirror lens goes for $100
A Rokinon 500 F6.3 mirror lens goes for $120
A Vivitar 800 F8.0 mirror lens goes for $150
A Bower 650-1300 F16 goes for $250

Then we have a flurry of medium quality zooms....
A Sigma 150-500 F6.3 goes for $730
A Tamron 150-600 F6.3 goes for $1,070
A Sigma 150-600 F6.3 goes for $1,090
A Sigma 50-500 F6.3 goes for $1,510
A Sigma 150-600 F6.3 (sports) goes for $2,000

and finally, a bunch of high quality (and price) primes....
A Sigma 500 F4.5 goes for $5,000
A Sigma 800 F5.6 goes for $6,600
A Sigma 300-800 F5.6 goes for $8,000
A Canon 500 F4.0 goes for $9,000
A Canon 600 F4.0 goes for $11,500
A Canon 800 F5.6 goes for $13,000
A Sigma 200-500 F2.8 goes for $26,000

A medium quality prime should be able to be built for less than a medium quality zoom. It will be lighter and the IQ should be better as it will have an easier design to optimize than a zoom. If a 600 F6.3 zoom can be built for around $1000, then a 500mm F5.6 prime can most definitely be built for under $1000 and a 600 F5.6 prime can be built for around $1000 to $1200. These would definitely an "affordable supertelephoto"

If you went to a high quality "L" prime, then double the cost.... this would still get you a $2200 500 F5.6, still affordable as super telephotos go....

Don't forget all those options are available on the secondhand market too.

There are Canon 500mm f4 IS primes going for close to $4,000, the older non IS's are much less.

 

[slclick]

A common frame of reference I keep running into is that some folks without disposable or higher incomes have a tough time spending more on glass than the body cost. I don't see it that way because bodies are transient but good lenses are for keeps.

However this seems to be a commonly held belief I've gleaned from a few hundred Community College photography majors I've spoken to over the past few years. I know students you say. But no, all walks of life and income strata take classes at community colleges.

 

[100]

A Sigma 200-500 F2.8 goes for $26,000

It’s on sale where I live (the Netherlands) for 7k€ (about 7,700 USD)
http://www.foka.nl/sigma-200-500mm-f-2-8-ex-apo-canon
It’s a bit heavy (15.7 kilos) and it doesn’t have image stabilization so you need some money for a tripod as well but it’s the most “affordable” 500 f/2.8 option as far as I know.
With an 2x extender you get a 1,000 f/5.6 and that’s a steal compared to a second hand 1200mm f/5.6L http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/801201815-USE/canon_2527a001_super_telephoto_1200mm_f_5_6l.html

 

[NancyP]

That has to be a typo, or the lens must be used and in poor condition.

 

[Maximilian]

I certainly think there's a market for a 500 f5.6 LIS and a 600 f5.6 LIS

I wonder...what if the rumored lens is not an L-series lens?

Then absolutely nobody here will be interested in it because it won't be "cool" enough for them to own.

You mean like all those people here talking about the 50, 40 and 24 STMs or the Tamrons and Sigma teles that are also not L and therefore not "cool"?
There is (almost) no greater danger than in generalizations.

 

[meywd]

I certainly think there's a market for a 500 f5.6 LIS and a 600 f5.6 LIS

I wonder...what if the rumored lens is not an L-series lens?

Then absolutely nobody here will be interested in it because it won't be "cool" enough for them to own.

You mean like all those people here talking about the 50, 40 and 24 STMs or the Tamrons and Sigma teles that are also not L and therefore not "cool"?
There is (almost) no greater danger than in generalizations.

+1 if its sharp it will be cool, as much as the ef-s 17-55 is cool, anyway I think if its a prime its will definitely be an L, if a zoom and affordable then mostly not L.

 

[100]

That has to be a typo, or the lens must be used and in poor condition.

There are actually two retailers with a Sigma 200-500 f/2.8 on sale for the same price (€6,999) so I don't think it's a typo. Here is the other one:
http://www.bol.com/nl/p/sigma-apo-200-500mm-f2-8-400-1000mm-ex-dg-canon/9200000018461285/?Referrer=ADVNLTWE0020149200000018461285PLZ
I've seen it being offered for less than 10k€ before but this is the lowest I've seen. I think it's a difficult lens to sell hence the "low" price.

 

[danski0224]

I would think that just about anything that Canon comes out with that is at 40% to 50% of MSRP of the current supertelephoto lenses would be classified as "affordable". Affordable is a relative term in this case.

I don't know what Canon would make the consumer give up from the top of the line lenses to the "affordable" lenses. One stop of light? Two stops? Two mode IS instead of 3?

Would people buy a 600mm f/5.6 at say $4500 USD if it offered 80% of the IQ of the 600 f/4 II?

I can't realistically see Canon offering something that gives 80% of a 500/600 f/4 VII at 1/3 of the cost of one or less.

 

[Loswr]

I can't realistically see Canon offering something that gives 80% of a 500/600 f/4 VII at 1/3 of the cost of one or less.

They already do for shorter lenses – 85mm, 200mm, 300mm, 400mm. The point for those lenses, as for the rumored lens here, is that the cheaper lenses are slower by 1-2 stops.