Nikon Releases Z 800mm at 1/3 Cost of Canon’s

[Deleted member 381342]

You can get some idea of relative lens sales from this amazing site that catalogues Nikon serial numbers http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html . The 800/5.6 VR has sold only about 3,500 copies since 2013. The latest 600mm f/4 6, 6,900 since 2015, the 500/4 3900 since 2015 and the 400/2.8, 4,200 since 2014. The consumer 200-500, 225,000, give or take, since 2015. The 80-400 f/5.6, about 88,000 since 2013, and the 500mm f/5.6 27,000 since 2018. The "professional" big blacks are only very roughly 5% of those sales.

Maybe Canon does know where the sales are - those long expensive primes are niche products in the telephoto and supertelephoto categories and miniscule in the total lens sales.

By the data presented and your own comment about where sales are. It looks like Nikon knows where the sales are too, making much more affordable PF super tele lenses and 200-500 consumer lenses as a priority instead of £20k lenses. According to the numbers posted here people do need/want a 500mm lens, they just don't want a £10,000 f/4.0 one or could never justify that cost. Canon should get out a small range of DO lenses and something to take on the 200-500/600.

 

[dolina]

I wonder how many ever bought the EF 800mm f/5.6? @dolina on CR has one but I've forgotten or missed who else has. It has been pretty much a niche lens for a few real experts. Maybe it was because of the serious pricing and Nikon will make it much more popular. But, it is still a fairly specialised focal length.

I think Canon was able to sell enough to make it profitable.

It's back-ordered at BH until today even when multiple 600/4 versions have since been released in 2011, 2018 & 2021 and the 2020 & 2022 RF800mm has been announced.

One way to determine the number of lenses or products have been released is to ask a forum who among their members bought theirs brand new within the last 1 to 12 months and share a somewhat accurate serial #. This was done for the 200/1.8 by asking who had the highest value serial # but I am having difficulty finding the site with this figure.

Here's the Lens Gallery of the Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM with other CR users posting their photos from EF800mm. FM & POTN has their own EF800mm photo threads as well by roughly the same set of people.

For those under 50 the over $6.5k price point held back purchase while for the over 50 its the over 2.4kg + misc weight.

With the Z 800mm 6.3 it addresses all those concerns. For the birding group this will be a very popular lens and will push down the price points of older 800mm 5.6 lenses from Canon, Nikon and Sigma to $5k or lower.

In the Philippines I count about at least 3 users between 2008-2015. I'm the youngest and longest using user of this lens model.

If after sales support was not a factor in where you live I'd push for the Z 800mm. If I was 60 & older I'd buy that and keep it up to 85 and beyond.

Not to scare anyone but I now recall how critical after sales support is. Back in 2012 a service notice involving the the 200/2 & 800/5.6 was issued. As I never bought the 2012 5D3 I never had my 800 looked over until the 2015 5Ds R was released. Thankfully by then the next 2 users of the 800 had their Image Stabalizers replaced so the lens tech who upgraded mine had experience doing the upgrade.

 

[dolina]

The Canon EF 800 f/5.6 was one to avoid as the 600 II gets you a sharper image with the 1.4x. The Nikon 800 was one to rent when you knew you needed it and could carry it to the right location.

The new Nikon 800 is looking like it can replace the 600 + 1.4x that many birders resort too but in a smaller package that you can get down with lower than your tripod and still get a sharp image at 1/320s.

Among the 3 other 800 users in the Philippines from 2008-2015 I know one of them sold theirs for a 600 IS II while the other one kept their 800.

If I was buying a birding lens from those 2 years I may be tempted to go with your way of thinking for weight reduction. The F 800mm VR is more than 4.5kg and is more expensive. So unless you're on the F mount I wouldn't bother with it.

 

[dolina]

I cannot understand Canon's marketing policy. From one hand they enter to milc world with innovative lenses such as 28-70, 50 1.2, 85 1.2 including DS version and others and from the other hand they stuck on old patterns with super telephoto lenses! Don't they understand that?

Could be internal inertia or what their market surveys tells them.

Many photographers forget the relationship between f-number and lens weight when it comes to long focal lengths. I recall one instance a film photographer who does mostly people photos asking why Canon would offer such a "slow" f/5.6 lens for a 800mm. I even found one CR thread asking about a 800mm f/4.0 being a future product.

Something similar can be read on this thread when some users consider f/6.3 is too "slow".

Sigma & Tamron's 600/6.3 super zooms of the past decade proves that there is a largely ignored market by Canon/Nikon. With improvements in camera body AF & ISO sensitivity a "slow" lens isn't that much of an issue anymore.

I know this is none of my business and this is not intended to offend but if you are considering getting into birding or wildelife photography consider your status in life. If you're 40 & below, without a partner/spouse & without kids but want to get married and have kids then prioritize that first.

The birds & wildlife can wait until you're 60 & above or better yet 70 & above ideally doing this activity with your love in life. A CIPA market research on who buys birding & wildlife gear aligns with that. Just don't ask me to look for it. I read about it half a decade ago.

 

[AlanF]

I think Canon was able to sell enough to make it profitable.

It's back-ordered at BH until today even when multiple 600/4 versions have since been released in 2011, 2018 & 2021 and the 2020 & 2022 RF800mm has been announced.

The EF 800 has officially been discontinued by Canon https://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/old-products.html

One way to determine the number of lenses or products have been released is to ask a forum who among their members bought theirs brand new within the last 1 to 12 months and share a somewhat accurate serial #. This was done for the 200/1.8 by asking who had the highest value serial # but I am having difficulty finding the site with this figure.

I am not sure whether it is easy to analyse Canon serial numbers in the same way as they include location and other data in them. Perhaps someone more expert could advise.

If after sales support was not a factor in where you live I'd push for the Z 800mm. If I was 60 & older I'd buy that and keep it up to 85 and beyond.

I wish you all good health in reaching 85 and being able to handle the lens!

I know this is none of my business and this is not intended to offend but if you are considering getting into birding or wildelife photography consider your status in life. If you're 40 & below, without a partner/spouse & without kids but want to get married and have kids then prioritize that first.

The birds & wildlife can wait until you're 60 & above or better yet 70 & above ideally doing this activity with your love in life. A CIPA market research on who buys birding & wildlife gear aligns with that. Just don't ask me to look for it. I read about it half a decade ago.

Agreed! Just what I have done.

 

[dolina]

Seems like a thinly veiled comment at me from our previous discussion, so I’ll bite. You never responded to my last comment about the wildlife/sports/PJs buyers and instead chose to drop this little jab. We buy mostly the same gear so for you to discount the wildlife community as a niche group that doesn’t really account for much is akin to saying all of these types of shooters who buy the top-tier products (wildlife/sports/PJs) are a niche group. Every top of the line body with the fastest specs, all the high-end telephoto lenses used in these genres—all for niche users that don’t account for much according to your logic. It’s just flat out silly. Sure, they probably sell a larger quantity of wide lenses like you mentioned, but the margins are also a lot less. They wouldn’t be targeting wildlife/sports/PJs with the best, pro bodies and lenses if it was a niche group they didn’t make a significant amount of money from. Fewer quantity of higher priced goods with better margins. It’s a big deal for them. Not sure how you’re even trying to argue this, honestly.

Personally I wouldn't take offense to the word "niche".

~99% of all photography done globally is about people so what I've been doing for over 13 years is really niche.

How else to explain the rapid decline of the digital still camera market in the last 10 years?

~99% of all use cases are sufficiently covered by smartphones like Galaxy & iPhone.

Many are unwilling to spend more $2k or even $3k for any lens much lens a prime lens.

If I was smarter when I was under 40 I'd only stick to older equivalents of these hardware & buy the ones below this year.

• Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM
• Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8 L IS USM
• Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM
• Canon EOS R5

Canon/Nikon/Sony are doing business in niche segment as they know there's money to be made with a better margin. They also buy on a predictable schedule.

Photonews agencies align their scheduled purchases of new hardware within 12 months of the next Olympics, World Cup or other major sporting events. They typically buy in the dozens so what they want next in the next lens, flash or body is R&D to their specifications.

After them its world govts who need it for law enforcement, military, etc. They may buy less on a schedule but almost as large a quantity.

After orgs and govts the next priority market would be working photographers and eventually hobbyists like me.

I learned about this through discussions with working photojournalists, sports photo journalists, other professionals and maket research easily read on websites, PDF and youtube.

 

[Fischer]

The Nikon's MTF curves aren't corrected for diffraction whereas Canon's are, which is the major reason why Nikon's look so much better. I couldn't find the uncorrected MTFs for the EF 800mm f/5.6, but here are the uncorrected and corrected for the EF 600mm f/4 II to show the huge difference. The difference will be greater for f/6.3.

View attachment 202999View attachment 203001

MTF charts are just all over the place even between lenses from the same company.

 

[dolina]

The EF 800 has officially been discontinued by Canon https://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/old-products.html

I am not sure whether it is easy to analyse Canon serial numbers in the same way as they include location and other data in them. Perhaps someone more expert could advise.

I wish you all good health in reaching 85 and being able to handle the lens!

Agreed! Just what I have done.

Are all the lens in that Canon.jp link a one time update? If it is then it should be aligned with the announcement of the discontinuation of the 200/2.0 13 months ago.

Changes in Canon serial # took affect fairly recently.

Z 800mm isn't in my timeline as I have not used the EF800mm in almost a decade. Liquidating it should have been my priority a dozen years ago or before COVID became a thing more than 2 years ago.

I'd prefer to have a wife with a number of kids the wife wants.

I only speak for the Z 800mm as I'm a gear head. Its fun talking about them toys as an intellectual activity especially when prospective buyers do not not understand the importance of (1) gear you're willing to carry and gear you leave in the dry cabinet, (2) why the Z 800mm is "cheap" and (3) losing 1/3rd a stop is not that important with IBIS, lens IS and mind bending ISO sensitivity from 2020s tech that induced by 3rd party advances in smartphone camera tech.

If I could do a redo I may have taken up birding in the 2040s or 2050s assuming I have not met so many notable a-holes in the birding community during the 2010s.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Seems like a thinly veiled comment at me from our previous discussion, so I’ll bite. You never responded to my last comment about the wildlife/sports/PJs buyers and instead chose to drop this little jab. We buy mostly the same gear so for you to discount the wildlife community as a niche group that doesn’t really account for much is akin to saying all of these types of shooters who buy the top-tier products (wildlife/sports/PJs) are a niche group. Every top of the line body with the fastest specs, all the high-end telephoto lenses used in these genres—all for niche users that don’t account for much according to your logic. It’s just flat out silly. Sure, they probably sell a larger quantity of wide lenses like you mentioned, but the margins are also a lot less. They wouldn’t be targeting wildlife/sports/PJs with the best, pro bodies and lenses if it was a niche group they didn’t make a significant amount of money from. Fewer quantity of higher priced goods with better margins. It’s a big deal for them. Not sure how you’re even trying to argue this, honestly.

See the numbers in the post by @AlanF.

I know I’m a niche buyer. Some people cannot be convinced of their own lack of importance in the larger picture. To be clear, that’s also a thinly veiled comment directed at you.

Note that niche doesn’t mean unimportant. Companies can and do focus on niche markets. I think it makes sense for Nikon to do so. They used to have a much larger market share than they do now. They’ve lost out to Canon and Sony. Sony did the same a decade ago when shifting to FF MILC. Sure, you could argue that they were prescient. But it’s no coincidence that they launched FF MILCs the same year Canon entered the MILC market. When the 800 lb gorilla enters your room, leaving is a good idea.

Leica has never gone after the majority market. Rich hipsters are a viable niche for them. I remember Nikon tried breaking into that one with the Df. Didn’t work for them.

Nikon used to hold around 40% of the ILC market. Now their share is well under 20%. Clearly they need to try something different.

As for margins, the RF lenses seem to focus on that. The production costs for lenses like the 14-35/4 and 70-200/2.8 are probably not much higher that the EF lenses they replace. The MSRPs are much higher. Pure profit for Canon.

Your suggestion that Canon ‘rushed to meet the demands of the high-end wildlife crowd’ doesn’t really hold up. They expended marginal effort. They redesigned the 400/2.8 and 600/4 as EF lenses. Then they turned those two new lenses into four expensive RF lenses by bolting an adapter or a TC+adapter. That’s not a focus, that’s a very limited effort. The novel designs are the 600/11 and 800/11, and the 100-400 non-L, all of which indicate a focus on the consumer market. Not on us. I’m fine with that. Seems you’re not. Deal.

 

[entoman]

I wrote that the price in the UK is decided by Canon Europe. Countries like India, China and Australia are not in Europe and their pricing is decided by other sectors of Canon. Different regions have different pricing and that is how there are cheap grey market imports.

Long live cheap grey market imports!

Beats me why so many people pay a crazy £4299 to get an R5 from Canon UK, when you can get a grey imports for £3040 with a 3 year warranty!

 

[2 cents]

I hope that Nikon and Sony keep on biting at Canon's feet. We need competition.

Been using Canon for over 30 years and the only gripe I ever had was when they dropped the DEP mode that was on early AF models. Loved that mode. Since this R system and RF lenses, I've been really cross. I have an ageing 5DMk4 that want to replace but the R5 I got is just way too uncomfortable for my work, and eats batteries like there is no tomorrow. EF is dead so no point looking there. Prices are just offensive and for the first time ever, I'm looking forward for Sigma once they decide to offer something.

Good to see Nikon showing a way forward, hopefully Canon will take a hint. Nikon was once the king for pro photographers after all.

 

[2 cents]

It's a temptation to switch gear every time another manufacturer comes out with something better, but they leapfrog each other. It's taken Nikon 18 months to equal (better in some ways, worse in others) the AF on Canon's cheaper R5, and the Z 800/6.3 will have limited availability for quite some time. In 18 months time, Canon will undoubtedly have a new generation of bodies and new lenses. So jump to Nikon now and then jump again?

Yeah Canon will have a new generation, at even higher prices. I'm a pro photographer, and can't justify these prices in my market. I simply can't.

 

[2 cents]

Long live cheap grey market imports!

Beats me why so many people pay a crazy £4299 to get an R5 from Canon UK, when you can get a grey imports for £3040 with a 3 year warranty!

That's still an insane amount of money for a camera that will be last generation in a couple of years.

 

[dolina]

Prices are just offensive and for the first time ever, I'm looking forward for Sigma once they decide to offer something.

Edit:

After some thought I removed the "Total point & shoot, SLR & Mirrorless" graph and replaced it with this new one that only shows Total SLRs & mirroless cameras shipped as they're the focus Canon Rumors.

Doing this shows that year 2021 shipment numbers of SLR & mirrorless bodies is now closer to year 2006 shipments. I would hazard a guess that crop sensor SLRs like Canon's Rebel shrunk the most while sales volume of full frame bodies remained largely unaffected.

Below the years are the cameras/phones year of introduction to give you context what that year meant in photography.

With economies of scale declining expect a lot of further consolidation among companies or gear doubling in price to their 1 decade ago equivalents.

The focus being differentiating their cameras enough from iPhone & Android

 

[2 cents]

We'll only see a change in Canon's pricing policy if enough NEW (pro) customers decide in favour of Nikon's Z9 and the new teles.
Especially in Europe, we suffer from abusive pricing by Canon (RF 800 and 1200), which cannot be justified by taxes or other duties.
A US-Europe price difference is OK, but not to the current extent.
If I were new to photography, I'm not certain I'd opt for Canon...
PS: Sony wouldn't be the alternative.

Canon user for over 30 years here. Heavily invested. Never before considered switching brands. Never. If this trend of stupid prices, and stupid lenses continues, I have to seriously consider biting the bullet and jumping ship. It will be hard, but not impossible.

I have a gripe for example with the RF 100mm macro. More expensive than EF, larger, and stupidly has a shorter front lens to subject distance at close focus 1:1. The EF version with adapter is better for nature closeups.

Another little thing that annoys me. They used to have a small red ball on the lens mount side. This is now a cheaper elongated dot. Problem is I can't feel it with my finger so I have actually look to find it. It mattes for a pro. Yet prices are higher.

 

[dolina]

That's still an insane amount of money for a camera that will be last generation in a couple of years.

Replacement cycles of mirrorless or SLRs tend to be every half decade. If I were to do a redo I'd replace every decade.

Unless it makes me money or a project pays for its expense then I do not see a purpose of upgrading that quickly if the use case largely does not change.

 

[entoman]

That's still an insane amount of money for a camera that will be last generation in a couple of years.

Cameras and lenses are expensive, there's no doubt about that, and prices will rise a lot more as the photography market shrinks. But it's pointless worrying about how soon a camera will be outdated. Any camera you buy today should last at least 10-15 years before it becomes worn out or unreliable, and most 10 year old cameras will produce results indistinguishable from the latest releases. Too many of us get sucked into advertising hype and believe that the only way to get better photos is to get the latest and greatest gear. Not many of us really need 30fps, 8K or bird-eye AF - the truth is that we just like to have new toys and tools to play with.

 

[entoman]

I have a gripe for example with the RF 100mm macro. More expensive than EF, larger, and stupidly has a shorter front lens to subject distance at close focus 1:1. The EF version with adapter is better for nature closeups.

Well no one is forcing you to buy it. I use the EF 100mm macro and the EF 180mm macro on my R5, and they are both stunning lenses. Canon have to offer extra features or higher specs in order to sell the RF lenses, but I'm not at all tempted by the RF 100mm due to a) the shorter front lens to subject distance at 1:1, b) the 1.4x magnification which I don't need, c) the aspherical aberration control that I don't need and d) the cost.

 

[Del Paso]

Canon user for over 30 years here. Heavily invested. Never before considered switching brands. Never. If this trend of stupid prices, and stupid lenses continues, I have to seriously consider biting the bullet and jumping ship. It will be hard, but not impossible.

I have a gripe for example with the RF 100mm macro. More expensive than EF, larger, and stupidly has a shorter front lens to subject distance at close focus 1:1. The EF version with adapter is better for nature closeups.

Another little thing that annoys me. They used to have a small red ball on the lens mount side. This is now a cheaper elongated dot. Problem is I can't feel it with my finger so I have actually look to find it. It mattes for a pro. Yet prices are higher.

No intention to switch brands, but I'm afraid my EOS mirrorless activity will remain limited to the EOS R plus 24-105 f4.
Since I have most lenses I need, I could perhaps buy in RF a new 14mm TS and save my money for travel. I certainly won't replace excellent EFs with only slightly better (?) RFs.
The RF 1,2 50 & 85 are superb, much better than the EF counterparts, but, having Leica M Summiluxes, I just don't need them.

 

[djack41]

If 1340g is excessive then I'm interested to know your description of belly fat?

The weight of the Z9 is close to the weight of the venerable Canon 1DX2 which is like a battleship compared to new offerings such as the Sony A1 or the Canon R3. That said, I'm confident the build quality of the Z9 is very high and superior to the Sony A1 or the R5.