Save those pennies! A Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L USM is coming up for auction

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
286
317
Orewa , New Zealand
This lens is merely a curiosity, a museum piece. Like the EF 200 f/1.8 or the EF 50 f/1.0, there are superior alternatives to owning a lens merely for bragging rights.
No one will be buying this because it out performs an EF600 f/4.0 L IS III and a 2X III.
It doesn't.
I think it probably does outperform the EF600 and 2X as that combo is f/8 which is a full stop slower.

The EF50 f/1.0 is actually reasonably affordable and no other AF lens is that bright so it's still a great lens if you can afford it and works great with bodies like the R5 and R6 and 1DXiii or any eos body. Check out Ken Rockwell's review https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/50mm-f1.htm
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

KiagiJ

EOS M6 Mark II
Apr 27, 2015
60
6
So I coincidentally just did a video review on the FL 1200mm from 1972, Canon’s first 1200mm lens - aka the “poor man’s EF 1200mm” - the FL is only max f/11 but performs surprisingly well on an R5. It’s a very very niche piece of kit because of the focal length. Would have loved to do a side by side with the EF 1200mm but I can’t afford the insurance!

Great video quality, review and humor !!!

You deserve 1000s of subscribers :)
 

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
1,058
2,332
No I’m not bothered by your vitriol, all it does for me personally is to give any other comments you make less weight or value.

You are an experienced big white owner and user, something the forum could benefit from, yet you limit your input across threads to bitching about non lens specific irrelevancies. Most people here are keen amateurs not professionals, many would be happy for their images to be used by charities and non profits because they are more worried about the wildlife they are photographing than recovering the cost of their big lens.

Yes unlawful image use is a problem, that is not limited to images shot with big whites, and it should be talked about, but not by hijacking every thread that has anything to do with a long lens.


Thanks for voicing a widely held opinion.
 

juststeve

EOS M6 Mark II
Nov 29, 2018
65
99
A couple of things. I never had my hands on the lens, but a friend did while on assignment (a loaner from Canon via employer). He remembered it and I remember his rememberance as 33 pounds, or a bit more than a pound an inch.

Also, the variable pitch cam mentioned as an upgrade with 1200/5.6 being converted to the EF mount, might have actually existed with the FD version of the lens. Later versions of superteles in FD mount also had a varipitch cam for focusing. It started with the 400/4.5 which I owned and was introduced in 1978. The 500/4.5 and 800/5.6 and 400/2.8 in FD mount also had it. I owned and still own the 400/2.8 and had the 500/4.5 on loan from CPS. It slowed focusing speed at longer distances and was a tremendous advantage over Nikon lenses of the era, which were damn near impossible to focus accurately at longer distances.
 

GoldWing

Canon EOS 1DXMKII
Oct 19, 2013
283
214
Los Angeles, CA
en.wikipedia.org
Not sure what that has to do with anything.


"Someone who would never have paid you for using a photo is not paying you for using a photo"

If you stick your photos online and get flustered when a non-profit uses it without permission then you probably need a better business model.
Use watermarks... always. Sites like DPReview that will demand you not use watermarks in their rules and not allow links to your work are prime examples of where people's work is stolen. Always use watermarks!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

dsut4392

EOS M6 Mark II
Jul 31, 2014
81
35
Your lengthy response says different.

I invite everyone to look at my post history. I only bring up this warning when the topic falls into the category of the law of diminishing marginal utility.

I'm not here to win the internet so just watch the video I linked to that debunks your points.

Think of my warning this way.

I often travel long mountain roads. As a motorist I appreciate signs like this one below as it cautions everyone both experienced & inexperienced travelers the challenges they may face ahead.

oGaI62d.jpg


Again, if it bothers you then kindly ignore/mute me. I do not mind not seeing any of your posts.
Lurker/infrequent poster here - we get it, we've been warned. Can you please spare yourself the embarrassment and stop the off-topic whining?
 

Phil

EOS R, RF24-105 f4, RF35 1.8, RF50 1.2, RF85 1.2
Oct 17, 2018
40
32
The lens was very long time ago (must have been in the 90's) on tour in Holland and I was able to make some test shots with it. From what I remember, the lens was very slow in focussing. I had the first edition of the 300 2.8L, compared to that one the difference in AF of the 1200 was a joke. In my opinion back then, the lens was not suitable for fast tracking sport events. Beside, I think the lens was 20 kilograms, insane heavy to carry around.
These days....it belongs in a museum.
I got a chance to play with it many years ago as well you’re right it is slow to focus and it had to be set up on a massive video tripod so with the lens and tripod combined you aren’t taking it far without a pickup truck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

stefang

EOS M50
Dec 15, 2014
42
37
I got a chance to play with it many years ago as well you’re right it is slow to focus and it had to be set up on a massive video tripod so with the lens and tripod combined you aren’t taking it far without a pickup truck.
I got that opportunity too at the Photokina in Köln somewhere in the 90s. Canon had a row of their super-teles on a stand for the public to play with. I guess my EOS5 is one of the lucky few to have interfaced with this legend :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB and Phil

Phil

EOS R, RF24-105 f4, RF35 1.8, RF50 1.2, RF85 1.2
Oct 17, 2018
40
32
I got that opportunity too at the Photokina in Köln somewhere in the 90s. Canon had a row of their super-teles on a stand for the public to play with. I guess my EOS5 is one of the lucky few to have interfaced with this legend :)
Lol I had an EOS 5 at the time to!
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,235
10,265
So I coincidentally just did a video review on the FL 1200mm from 1972, Canon’s first 1200mm lens - aka the “poor man’s EF 1200mm” - the FL is only max f/11 but performs surprisingly well on an R5. It’s a very very niche piece of kit because of the focal length. Would have loved to do a side by side with the EF 1200mm but I can’t afford the insurance!

It was a fun review and I really like your understated sense of humour. In practice, I am now regularly using a 1000mm f/14 (= RF 100-500 + RF 2x TC) on my R5 for hand-held nature photography from close-up dragonflies to far-distant birds, as well as at in-between distances (and have used 2400mm with 6x of TCs on a 400mm/f4), and others are using the RF800 f/11 with TCs so the framing of a 1200mm f/11 is not that outlandish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

Cochese

EOS 90D
Oct 22, 2014
149
93
Your lengthy response says different.

I invite everyone to look at my post history. I only bring up this warning when the topic falls into the category of the law of diminishing marginal utility.

I'm not here to win the internet so just watch the video I linked to that debunks your points.

Think of my warning this way.

I often travel long mountain roads. As a motorist I appreciate signs like this one below as it cautions everyone both experienced & inexperienced travelers the challenges they may face ahead.

oGaI62d.jpg


Again, if it bothers you then kindly ignore/mute me. I do not mind not seeing any of your posts.
Do you strive to be this insufferable?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Bert63 and dolina

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
815
671
Frankfurt, Germany
This lens is merely a curiosity, a museum piece. Like the EF 200 f/1.8 or the EF 50 f/1.0, there are superior alternatives to owning a lens merely for bragging rights.
No one will be buying this because it out performs an EF600 f/4.0 L IS III and a 2X III.
It doesn't.
I wouldn't say "no" if someone gave it me as a birthday gift ;) In fact, I guess you'll hardly find any reliable lab test charts comparing its optical performance with a current EF600mm III lens 2.0x III extender combo, which would be interesting to see. But it would offer f/5.6 @ 1200mm instead of f/8.0, so if it is reasonably sharp in the center, it could outperform the combo in some lower light settings. I guess its AF could be noticeably slower, Canon's 1st generation USM drives weren't as fast as modern ones, this behemoth was introduced in 1993.

But, for sure, it is a rich collector's item now, for those guys with big shelves I fear. I personally regret that most probable perspective, because I think vintage gear should still be used, since it was made for photography, not for a shiny display.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB