New Canon 200-400 f/4 -- with 1.4x build in

pthpth Registered Users Posts: 49 Big grins
edited February 27, 2011 in Cameras
I fear it will be out of my price range, but I still want...

http://dpreview.com/news/1102/11020708canon200400mm.asp
«1

Comments

  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,156 moderator
    edited February 7, 2011
    Here is the official Canon statement:

    http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e02480288844
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,967 moderator
    edited February 7, 2011
    Cool idea. It will be interesting to read the reviews.
    My Pics
  • dantambokdantambok Registered Users Posts: 152 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Awesome.. I think it's gonna be soooo expensive :(
    Canon 7D, 450D, 50mm 1.8, 50mm 1.2, Mp-e 65mm, 70-200mm f/2.8L USM, 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM, Canon 100mm f/2.8L macro IS USM, 580exII, some sigma lenses:D
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    wings.gif

    Finally! Anyone have $6K?
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,967 moderator
    edited February 7, 2011
    I hope it's really, really, really heavy. That way I won't feel so bad about not being able to afford it. lol3.gif
    My Pics
  • cmasoncmason Registered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    I don't get it. why an integral 1.4? then you cant use the 1.4 with any other lenses? seems odd.

    is this just the *new* 100-400?
    Photos
  • mercphotomercphoto Registered Users Posts: 4,550 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Its a really great idea in a lens. I have lusted a 200-400/4 for some time, but I'm Canon guy, not Nikon. It would be great for my track photography. The built-in extender is a great and convenient new feature as well.

    We'll see what it comes in at price-wise. I doubt I can justify the price. I can only do about 8-9 events per year. Would be hard to justify an expensive lens on that low an amount of volume.
    Bill Jurasz - Mercury Photography - Cedar Park, TX
    A former sports shooter
    Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
    My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
  • mercphotomercphoto Registered Users Posts: 4,550 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    cmason wrote: »
    I don't get it. why an integral 1.4? then you cant use the 1.4 with any other lenses? seems odd.

    Its a GREAT idea. You don't need to unmount the lens to put on the extender. Its just a flip of a switch. This feature rocks.
    Bill Jurasz - Mercury Photography - Cedar Park, TX
    A former sports shooter
    Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
    My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
  • chrisjohnsonchrisjohnson Registered Users Posts: 772 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    mercphoto wrote: »
    Its a GREAT idea. You don't need to unmount the lens to put on the extender. Its just a flip of a switch. This feature rocks.

    You can switch it out? I wonder how that works..
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,967 moderator
    edited February 7, 2011
    mercphoto wrote: »
    Its a GREAT idea. You don't need to unmount the lens to put on the extender. Its just a flip of a switch. This feature rocks.
    15524779-Ti.gif No mucking around to change range. The release doesn't say anything about whether it becomes an f/5.6 with the extender engaged, but one would think so.
    My Pics
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    I'll sell some stuff for this one!wings.gif
  • mr peasmr peas Registered Users Posts: 1,369 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Am I the only one thinking...of putting another 1.4x to the one that's already built in?? :)
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    I heard there was a football game last night... I'll bet this lens was there, if they're gonna release it this year there are probably already pre-production testing ones out there... same with the 500 and 600 superteles.

    So with the TC it's a 280-600 5.6? ok, not that useful but maybe wildlife photogs will like that feature.
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Richard wrote: »
    15524779-Ti.gif No mucking around to change range. The release doesn't say anything about whether it becomes an f/5.6 with the extender engaged, but one would think so.

    20110207-tmypfxsu4gx1w92b6eeijq8tqd.jpg
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,967 moderator
    edited February 7, 2011
    Ah, well, in that case...

    rolleyes1.gif
    My Pics
  • CuongCuong Registered Users Posts: 1,510 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Hopefully this will come out in time for Andy's safari in October.

    Cuong
    "She Was a Little Taste of Heaven – And a One-Way Ticket to Hell!" - Max Phillips
  • kurtwkurtw Registered Users Posts: 100 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    mr peas wrote: »
    Am I the only one thinking...of putting another 1.4x to the one that's already built in?? :)

    Most likely possible, but you would lose AF capability.
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    If you think of it as being a Canon 200-560mm f/4-5.6 L IS lens,
    a guestimated price of 7-8k does not seem too far fetched does it? :cry
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    1-Series bodies can AF at f/8 can't they?

    And I think it will be 6K. Just my guess.
  • davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Seeing as I almost sold everything to switch to Nikon because of their 200-400 f4 lens, this is great news for me and others that shoot wildlife.
    My 300 f2.8 and 100-400 will be going bye-bye.

    So 560mm with the TC on a crop camera brings it very close to 900mm.
    Although this is slightly less than my 300 with a 2X tc on a crop camera, (960mm) it would be much easier to adjust to different shooting conditions.

    I hope the price is more like $5000, and even that's more than what I want to pay for it.
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Here are some actual photos of this lens.
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • pthpth Registered Users Posts: 49 Big grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    5k would surprise me. I would expect it in the 6-7k range. Of course even at 5k we are in the serious marital issue range.

    For the sake of the kids college fund it is a good thing my wife is not a subject to lens lust.
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 7, 2011
    My guess is this lens will be at least $8K. It is apparent that Canon is finally starting to price like Nikon. The new Canon 500 II is $9K, which is $500 higher than the current Nikon 500.

    There's no way this lens is going to be thousands less than the Canon 500 II. The Nikon 200-400 is almost $7K. The Canon is a newer design plus, it has the integrated TC. So add $500 for that, and the $500 over the Nikon price because it's a newer design, and you have $1K over the Nikon price and that makes the Canon 200-400 at $8K. Minimum.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • davevdavev Registered Users Posts: 3,118 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    kdog wrote: »
    My guess is this lens will be at least $8K. It is apparent that Canon is finally starting to price like Nikon. The new Canon 500 II is $9K, which is $500 higher than the current Nikon 500.

    There's no way this lens is going to be thousands less than the Canon 500 II. The Nikon 200-400 is almost $7K. The Canon is a newer design plus, it has the integrated TC. So add $500 for that, and the $500 over the Nikon price because it's a newer design, and you have $1K over the Nikon price and that makes the Canon 200-400 at $8K. Minimum.

    You may be right, but I can dream can't I.mwink.gif

    If it's $8k, hell, if it's $7k, they can keep it.
    dave.

    Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    kdog wrote: »
    My guess is this lens will be at least $8K. It is apparent that Canon is finally starting to price like Nikon. The new Canon 500 II is $9K, which is $500 higher than the current Nikon 500.

    There's no way this lens is going to be thousands less than the Canon 500 II. The Nikon 200-400 is almost $7K. The Canon is a newer design plus, it has the integrated TC. So add $500 for that, and the $500 over the Nikon price because it's a newer design, and you have $1K over the Nikon price and that makes the Canon 200-400 at $8K. Minimum.

    Well...I hope you are wrong on this one, Joel.

    I was hoping for $2500 or so....even at $4000...forget it.
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    The Nikon is $6800 new.
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 7, 2011
    ThatCanonGuy wrote: »
    The Nikon is $6800 new.

    That's what I said, "almost $7K". I also gave good reasons why the Canon will be priced at least $1K above that.
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • ThatCanonGuyThatCanonGuy Registered Users Posts: 1,778 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    Yeah. I was just clarifying for any who didn't know the exact price.
  • racerracer Registered Users Posts: 333 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    I dont understand it, why not just release a 200-400 f4, since people already own the 1.4 and 2x extenders? or better yet, combine it all and make it a 300-500 f4, that you would be able to attach the 1.4 & 2x to? (for the same pricerolleyes1.gif)
    Unless there is actually some optical advantage to having it build in, it just seems like a gimmick to get people to buy a super expensive 200-400. ne_nau.gif

    Canon seems to be releasing some pretty strange products lately, and it is getting hard to tell apart the innovations from the gimmicks headscratch.gif
    Todd - My Photos
  • AndyAndy Registered Users Posts: 50,016 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2011
    racer wrote: »
    I dont understand it, why not just release a 200-400 f4, since people already own the 1.4 and 2x extenders? or better yet, combine it all and make it a 300-500 f4, that you would be able to attach the 1.4 & 2x to? (for the same price)
    Unless there is actually some optical advantage to having it build in, it just seems like a gimmick to get people to buy a super expensive 200-400. ne_nau.gif

    Canon seems to be releasing some pretty strange products lately, and it is getting hard to tell apart the innovations from the gimmicks headscratch.gif
    If it's as good as it sounds, I'd MUCH rather have the tcon built-in - no lens changing required! This could be a killer lens.

    Want.
    Andy

    Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.