Upvote
0
Nikon Releases Z 800mm at 1/3 Cost of Canon’s
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
D
Deleted member 387325
Guest
I guess none of us will ever know until there’s data to prove that point. One can say they read it at some point on just about anything. And markets change. Trends change. Industries change. I’d like to see something, genuinely. You may be right—it’s certainly been the talking point for decades—but I’m guessing the birding/wildlife segment is much larger than many give it credit for, or lack thereof.
Either way, when speaking to the supertelephoto niche that includes sports and PJs along with wildlife, nobody is going to convince me that it’s not a big enough market to sway any of the Big Three. Their top of the line products are all geared for them so the money must be nice.
Upvote
0
That's quite interesting. I hadn't realised the 100-500 had that restriction until I watched Dustin Abbots review. I didn't think of keeping it close to the rear element of the lens and it makes sense it would be a good idea to restrict to 300mm min. It's certainly a tempting combination with the R5.
While this Nikon lens is not exactly cheap it certainly ups the stakes for Canon. A Z9 / 800mm combination is certainly better value than an R3 / 800mm even if its not a direct comparison. I think Canon have exploited shortages and limited opposition. This is where a strong Nikon helps Canon users. Canon have to be careful not to overplay their hand. A Nikon Z9 / 800mm or a Sony A1 / 200-600mm are attractive system shifts.
Upvote
0
I am a member of several niches. I shoot birds with the 600/4 and 100-500. I shoot architecture with the TS-E 17 and 24, and sometimes the 11-24. I shoot macro with the 100/2.8 and mostly the MP-E 65 1-5x. I shoot portraits with the 70-200/2.8 and now also the 28-70/2.
The Nikon 800/6.3 looks like quite a nice lens. Nikon doesn’t have anything to match the TS-E 17, the MP-E 65 or the 28-70/2. Nor does Sony. For me, Canon offers the broadest range of niche lenses that match my use cases.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
It's funny how some folks think a conversation on a forum - or even a debate - is some sort of legal procedure as if we are in a court of law. People have experiences, people have recollections. Sure it's nice to have actual articles or quotes, but no one has to prove anything on an internet forum. if you think someone's recollections are not good enough, feel free to have your doubts, but don't ask or demand - or even expect people to take time and effort just to prove something to you. Who are you?? You are not the judge or the jury. You're just another a-hole on the internet based on your comments in this thread. Nobody in their right mind would waste more than the few minutes it has taken me to comment to your egotistical reply to try to prove a point to you just because you don't agree with what they say or remember reading.
Upvote
0
In terms of sales volume wildlife/bird photography does not sell as many super teles as PJ and sports.
Wildlife/bird photography is an important market is like Apple saying poor countries like the Philippines is an important market for the iPhone. But it does not have the iPhone sales volume of rich markets of say Japan, US or Europe.
This is why wildlife/bird-specific features only got released fairly recently as it is an indicator that Canon/Sony are trying to expand that market. This was not the case in the past.
So do not get offended that within users of super teles wildlife/bird photography is a niche relative to the press. There just arent enough over 60yo rich men buying these gear for their hobby relative to the mass media buyers.
A comparable analogy is that of dishwashing detergent. It is a food grade approach to stripping of grease from plates, glassware, metal ware and flatware.
It was repurposed when oil spills occurs and impacted the birds within that habitat. It is used to clean up the wildlife from the crude oil that impacts it. As oil spills does not occur that frequently there is little to no R&D spending for a oil spill-specific solution for rescuing animals.
Are oil spills as large a market as dish washing? No, but it is an important market
Last edited:
Upvote
0
While searching the market research for wildlife/bird photographers I found the CIPA report that covers animals. See how your point of view aligns with CIPA's research.
Upvote
0
If you think about it they should be thankful that people like me or @neuroanatomist participate on threads like these.
We bring with us decades of experience.
I started digital still photography in 1996 with the Kodak DC20. My first Canon digital camera was a 2000 PowerShot A40. The first DSLR I started using was a 2003 EOS 10D.
So the volume of written material on camera gear we've read is very substantial.
Canon puts out a press release about milestones in the number of EF bodies and lenses they've shipped. A bit of math would yield that for every 1 EOS body made there is a corresponding 2 lenses produced.
This can be interpreted that most film SLR and DSLR made have their kit lens never being removed and hobbyists who have dozens of lenses are niche as even majority of working photographers would struggle to have half a dozen lenses.
These reports and stats disrupts the internal narrative to some users who have an overblown sense of importance of what they are doing.
Gents, it isn't your right nut we're talking about but gear. ;-)
On that note I found the number of 200mm f/1.8L lenses produced. It is estimated about 8,000 was only produced based on these scholarly sources
- https://petapixel.com/2017/05/20/canon-200mm-f1-8-legendary-lens-known-eye-sauron/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_200mm_lens
- https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/1713210
Production ended in 1998... makes me wish I was able to buy one 5 years prior to buying the 10D.
But then again many owners have told me that my purchase of the 2008 200mm f/2.0 IS is a better buy. As it was stated by Canon to be discontinued 13 months ago I wonder if the direct replacement will be a fraction of a f-stop faster or slower?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 387325
Guest
I’m not going to continue wasting my time anymore with you on this. You seem to have a hard time with reading comprehension as you keep trying to make the point of separation that the wildlife community is small and sports and PJs are bigger. I’ve told you several times now that I agree sports and PJs account for more than wildlife shooters. Not sure why you’re stuck on that and keep digressing there. You also keep going back to the spin of me being offended I’m in a small niche, which is ridiculous.
They’re all supertelephoto purchasers. There’s a ton of overlap; they buy the same gear. So it’s the supertelephoto market, not a wildlife market or a sports market or a PJ market. Arguing over which of those sub-niches buys more is silly; we’re talking superteles here and this is the group of photographers that buys them. It’s been weird talking with you, but good night and we’ll agree to disagree I guess.
Upvote
0
I am speaking about which segment buys more.
You are asserting that wildlife/bird photographers buy equal quantities to the press, which will never be the case unless the price & physical weight of the gear becomes accessible enough.
Typically equipment like these are bought to generate revenue.
Hobbies are blackhole for money
Upvote
0
Going back to the the topic of lenses here is a table to help provide a side by side comparison of relevant lenses introduced in 2008 & later that are comparable to the Z 800mm.
These are arranged (L-R) from physically lightest to heaviest.
These are arranged (L-R) from physically lightest to heaviest.
Brand | Canon | Canon | Nikon | Canon | Canon | Canon | Nikon |
Year of Introduction | 2020 | 2010 | 2022 | 2008 | 2022 | 2008 | 2013 |
Model | |||||||
Mount | RF | EF | Z | EF | RF | EF | F |
Weight without lens hood | 1.26kg | 2.35kg | 2.385kg | 2.52kg | 3.14kg | 4.5kg | 4.59kg |
f-number | f/11 | f/2.8 | f/6.3 | f/2.0 | f/5.6 | f/5.6 | f/5.6 |
Price | $1,000 | $6,100 | $6,500 | $7,000 | $17,000 | $13,000 | $16,300 |
Status |
Last edited:
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 387325
Guest
I literally just told you I’m not asserting that and you respond with saying I am. No. No, I’m not. I never once said or implied wildlife photographers were buying more than sports or press. Maybe you’ve managed to convince yourself of your own story but it doesn’t make it true.
And when we’re talking about segments, I’ve been talking about the supertelephoto segment (wildlife/sports/PJs combined) this whole discussion. For whatever reason you are hung up on trying to prove bird photographers and wildlife photographers are a small and recent market. I don’t really care. It has nothing to do with the discussion about how people who buy supertelephoto lenses and fast pro bodies influence Canon.
Sorry, dolina, but you’re driving me a little crazy and clogging up the discussion. Muting.
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
Wait, aren't you the guy who got offended by the word "niche"?? I recall you insisting that wildlife/bird photography is as large as the press segment.
I never stated that wildlife/bird photography is a recent market. What I said was Canon/Sony/Nikon are trying to expand this relatively small market to a larger one by introducing tech that improves AF in relation to photographing the eye of animals and by way of making cheaper & physically lighter gear that are nearly as good as earlier faster 800mm lenses.
Why the renewed focus on this market? Because they're trying to increase sales in what they may see as a non-mature market.
Press segment is already saturated and may not buy any further. So the excess production capacity would not be redirected to over 60yo men looking to enter wildlife/bird photography it is an untapped market.
The photographer who did that model shoot of the Z 800mm was clever enough to hire a short, waif-like girl to carry the lens around. It conveys to me that the lens hand holdable for "weaker" sex which adds to the allure of this lens to those who do not do weight training or who are baby boomers.
Here are news article on the great wealth transfer that may be either sent to their children or spent on wildlife/bird photography gear
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/joseph...shouldnt-cash-that-check-yet/?sh=7deb5fcf2dde
- https://www.euromoney.com/article/b1n0rl4jwqpvx8/generation-next-and-the-great-wealth-transfer
- https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/12/the...-a-big-tax-impact-how-to-reduce-the-bite.html
Upvote
0
Ehm, it actually has a larger subject distance at 1:1
The EF100L had a working distance of 67mm at 1:1, the RF100L seems to actually be 100mm at 1:1. So you get 50% more working distance at 1:1!
The EVF shows about 34mm horizontally when I put the tape measure in front, so it's slightly more that 1:1, since that would need to have 36mm.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 381342
Guest
I get paid selling photos of foxes and birds. Enough to cover my gear, insurance, expenses, and trips. If I put more in, I would get more out. But I already earn enough money so I don’t push for making more.
Upvote
0
I want a 600/5.6L or 600/6.3L (No PF). Priced at maximum 3K.
Meanwhile I'm waiting I use my 400/5.6L with 1.4 extender on fullframe or without extender on my 7D.
Alternatively I use my Tamron 150-600 G2 that is 6.3 at the long end that I got brand new for 1K. It's a really nice lens, well built etc. I wish canon would make a competitive 600 prime, that would be an instant buy.
Meanwhile I'm waiting I use my 400/5.6L with 1.4 extender on fullframe or without extender on my 7D.
Alternatively I use my Tamron 150-600 G2 that is 6.3 at the long end that I got brand new for 1K. It's a really nice lens, well built etc. I wish canon would make a competitive 600 prime, that would be an instant buy.
Upvote
0