First pictures of the massive Samsung S 300mm f/2.8 lens!

[raptor3x]

Sony's superteles are white, too. I think when you make your lenses white it means "we're really super serious about photos, guys. Super. Serious." I'm gonna guess $8k intro price.

The whiteish colour is not just for good looks. It prevents the lens from thermic expansion (e.g. from prolonged sunlight exposure), which would lead to misaligments in the barrel (even a few microns can make or break it). At least, that's what the Canon has been proclaiming for years...

Reduces thermal expansion, it can't prevent it.

 

[Khalai]

Sony's superteles are white, too. I think when you make your lenses white it means "we're really super serious about photos, guys. Super. Serious." I'm gonna guess $8k intro price.

The whiteish colour is not just for good looks. It prevents the lens from thermic expansion (e.g. from prolonged sunlight exposure), which would lead to misaligments in the barrel (even a few microns can make or break it). At least, that's what the Canon has been proclaiming for years...

Reduces thermal expansion, it can't prevent it.

That's what I meant, just didn't say it properly, thanks

 

[dolina]

Samsung is a big enough gorilla to take on Canon, Nikon and Sony. More power to them as it will only drive Canon to give better products at better price points

 

[Steve]

The whiteish colour is not just for good looks. It prevents the lens from thermic expansion (e.g. from prolonged sunlight exposure), which would lead to misaligments in the barrel (even a few microns can make or break it). At least, that's what the Canon has been proclaiming for years...

That's the reason Canon has given but I have a sneaking suspicion that they paint 'em white so they show up better on TV cameras at major sporting events. I think branding was a much bigger concern for Canon early on than thermal expansion.

 

[RLPhoto]

Haha right and sonys 300mm is really threatening canon/nikons sport market. : : :

Sony is a lot closer than Samsung at best.

 

[Aglet]

Having seen the massive lenses produced for mirrorless cameras, I am beginning to question the whole point of trying to keep cameras small. This is particularly true when it comes to mirrorless cameras with crop sensors.

Olympus 40-150 f/2.8, Sony 70-200 f/4 OSS (for FE mount), Fujifilm 50-140 f/2.8, Samsung 50-150 f/2.8, Samsung 300 f/2.8 come to mind.

because if you want small lenses, they are available, and they're small.
Can't beat physics tho, bigger lenses do what only bigger lenses can do, with commensurate IQ results.

 

[Khalai]

The whiteish colour is not just for good looks. It prevents the lens from thermic expansion (e.g. from prolonged sunlight exposure), which would lead to misaligments in the barrel (even a few microns can make or break it). At least, that's what the Canon has been proclaiming for years...

That's the reason Canon has given but I have a sneaking suspicion that they paint 'em white so they show up better on TV cameras at major sporting events. I think branding was a much bigger concern for Canon early on than thermal expansion.

Sony has also white lenses, now Samsung. AFAIK even Nikon had some white versions of superteles. So I don't think that it's just a "brand" thing to increase awareness.

 

[Steve]

Sony has also white lenses, now Samsung. AFAIK even Nikon had some white versions of superteles. So I don't think that it's just a "brand" thing to increase awareness.

Well, for some reason "heat expansion" isn't a problem for Nikon or Sigma superteles so I'm gonna go with the white lens being a brand thing. Canon was able to equate "white lens" with "quality product" so that's why you see companies like Samsung going with white. Sony's white lenses are holdovers from Minolta, who were also trying to do the same thing in the mid/late 80's.