Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Start Saving Canon Guys...  
User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1057 posts, RR: 33
Posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3221 times:

Well this one is going to be awesome...and with an equally awesome price tag.
Love the idea of a built in dedicated 1.4TC.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1102/11020708canon200400mm.asp


2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineB757FAN From Finland, joined Jun 2009, 2 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3209 times:

I really hope that that lens droppes the price of the 100-400L  

User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3192 times:

Can't wait to see the price tag! Will be a perfect combo with the 70-200 on the lower end.


Jet Visuals
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3182 times:

I don't think it will affect sales or price of the 100-400 too much as the lens is clearly being marketed in a different sector by the look of it. 200mm at the short end isn't ideal for us aviation photog's, but the constant f/4 does sound excellent.

In my opinion it's only like the 70-200 f/4 and the f/2.8 - which don't really affect sales of each other enough for one's price to drop. Could this be Canon trying to muscle in on similar products offered by Sigma and Tamron perhaps? Or even Nikon?

Karl


User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1057 posts, RR: 33
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3181 times:

Sure will Flo!
Imagine tack sharpness from 70 all the way to 400 or 560 with the built in converter.
Really like the converter deal in not having to swap body off converter on body on all the time.
Also the new weights on these lenses is amazing...i think you should remember how heavy the 600 is!
The 400/2.8 is losing over 30% weight and the 600F4 27%...Canon are doing an insane job in getting the weights down on the big pipes.
The new 600F4 will be the same weight as the old 500F4..a great achievement in lens technology..new IS mode 3 to.
Awesome..

[Edited 2011-02-06 23:30:33]


2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3160 times:

Noooo!  There goes our one advantage over Canon!

I'll be there will be a lot of people rushing to get those lenses. The switch-in converter is a brilliant idea, I often swap the converter off and on the camera. On in moderate light for extra range, and off when it gets dark for the maximum aperture of F/4.0 on my 200-400. Good on Canon for realising this.

I wonder if the 400/4 DO will quietly disappear?

[Edited 2011-02-06 23:58:24]

User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6418 posts, RR: 38
Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3149 times:

A pretty wicked lens! Looks huge though.. Especially seeing what looks like a strap holder on the side of the lens? Any idea what the third 'zoom/focus' ring could be, if it has any practical function?

[Edited 2011-02-07 00:22:30]


It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3136 times:

I'm wondering what the IS 'mode 3' entails? I imagine it'll be an advanced panning mode, which will be sensitive to both horizontal and vertical movements?

As for the built-in teleconverter, it really is a superb idea. Has anyone offered anything like this before?

Looking like an awesome piece of glass, but I'm guessing it will be more suitable for sports and wildlife photog's. I often struggle with atmospheric conditions at 300-400mm so I can only imagine the effects at 560mm!

Still, I'm sure there will be no end of takers who'll find such a range and flexibility useful. I'll go with an initial R.R.P. of around GB£3,000/US$4,800 (just a pure guess).

Karl


User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6418 posts, RR: 38
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3130 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 7):
I'm wondering what the IS 'mode 3' entails? I imagine it'll be an advanced panning mode, which will be sensitive to both horizontal and vertical movements?

Here's that answer:

Canon USA: Lens Image Stabilisation

Basically the first part of what you described - advanced mode 2.

[Edited 2011-02-07 00:40:12]


It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4680 posts, RR: 50
Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3128 times:

Finally, I don't have to switch to Nikon anymore  .

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 7):
Still, I'm sure there will be no end of takers who'll find such a range and flexibility useful. I'll go with an initial R.R.P. of around GB£3,000/US$4,800 (just a pure guess).

The Nikon variant (without the built in extender) currently retails for $6800 at B&H, so I expect the price for the Canon to be higher!



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3068 times:

And for those in Australia, expect very little change from AUD$10,000.

Never mind that our currency is equal to US$... We get ripped off because we are a small market!

Jaxtrax: to my knowledge, nobody has done a built in TC before. Though Sigma offered one (2x) as standard with the stupidly large 200-500mm F/2.8 lens (so large it has it's own battery for autofocus)! But you still had to connect it.


User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1743 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3050 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I recall predicting this a while back... Funny how a non-Canon user gets it right.  

I bet it'll cost somewhere around $8,000-9,000 USD.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3238 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3012 times:

Quoting dvincent (Reply 11):
I recall predicting this a while back... Funny how a non-Canon user gets it right.

Dan, my hat's off to you sir. You did predict it indeed. So, 100-400 users that want a replacement they can either get the less capable (in terms of range) 70-300 L or the 4x the price 200-400. Great choice!

Quoting dvincent (Reply 11):
I bet it'll cost somewhere around $8,000-9,000 USD.

Nikon's 200-400 is around $6,300. And Canon have been pricing their lenses higher than Nikon. So you can do the math!

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2986 times:

Wow! Looks like the price will be astronomical! As I said then, definitely NOT a 100-400 replacement, so there's little to no chance of Canon dropping the price of the 100-400, or the 400 prime for that matter.

It's an impressive lens no doubt; however will it be good enough compared with what already exists to justify the high price? For most people I doubt it - I certainly won't be adding it to my collection in a hurry!

I can't help but feel one of the reasons they've done this is because it's a niche where they currently can't compete with Nikon and Sigma. I guess we'll just have to wait for its release for the lowdown.

Karl


User currently offlinePC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2434 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2956 times:

I have a question - is it wrong to be drooling after reading about a new lens?   


Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
User currently offlineMcG1967 From UK - Scotland, joined Apr 2006, 511 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2881 times:

I think the 100-400 may well end up being dropped from the Canon line up. The introduction of the 70-300L now makes more sense, in that they are bringing out the 200-400 F4 and instead of a revamped 100-400 that could impinge on sales of this, offer the 70-300L instead. That's why I think the 100-400 may have a short time left in the Canon lens range.

The 800 F5.6 is cheaper in the UK than what the new 600F4 will be.


User currently offlinecodeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2878 times:

This TC concept is quite interesting. I wonder how it will work in the converter mode with an additional converter ?
Nikon will need to step up the work on trhe 80-400 replacement, but still the recently updated, although mainly with Nano coat and VR, 200-400 is the main competitor here.

KS/codeshare



How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
User currently offlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2871 times:

Wow that sounds like a fantastic lens for aviation. I have been thinking of saving for a 500 f/4 prime (in the distant future) so it will be interesting to see how this new lens compares on price.

Isn't Canon doing a mkII version of the 100-400? I'm sure I read that somewhere just before christmas....

Andy S



Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineMcG1967 From UK - Scotland, joined Apr 2006, 511 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2865 times:

Andy,
I really can't see there being space in the line up now for a MkII 100-400. It would impinge on sales of the 70-300L and the new 200-400L.

Mark


User currently offlinewaketurbulence From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1294 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2856 times:

Quoting McG1967 (Reply 18):
I really can't see there being space in the line up now for a MkII 100-400

While it is impossible to say for sure, I agree with Mark. I think the 70-300L is the new version of the 100-400. I am thrilled Canon innovated to come up with the 200-400 with 1.4 included, however, I am not happy to carry another lens in my bag (if the 200-400 fits) to cover the range I currently have. The price point will probably further my dislike.

I currently own 10-22, 24-105, 100-400, and 500 (which I can't really carry in a backpack)
I could own 10-22, 24-105, 70-300, 200-400

That would cover essentially the same range, but I'd need to carry all lenses with me all the time. I like the 100-400 because it is portable, has great range, and I can leave the 500 at home unless I have a specific application where I need it.

I could swap the 100-400 for the 70-300, and the 500 f/4 for 200-400 with 1.4, but the price difference is probably over $1500 when all is said and done. Plus I just don't see myself parting with the 500. Do I sound conflicted???  
-Matt



Jetwash Images - Feel the Heat!!!
User currently offlineunattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2326 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2817 times:

Quoting McG1967 (Reply 15):
I think the 100-400 may well end up being dropped from the Canon line up.
Quoting McG1967 (Reply 18):
I really can't see there being space in the line up now for a MkII 100-400. It would impinge on sales of the 70-300L and the new 200-400L.
Quoting waketurbulence (Reply 19):
While it is impossible to say for sure, I agree with Mark. I think the 70-300L is the new version of the 100-400.

What? How else is the poor Canon shooter going to achieve 400mm without spending $8k?

The dust pump 100-400 has got to be one of Canon's best selling lenses. Every Canon shooter I know has one and is integral to their aviation photography.



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlineua935 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 610 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2793 times:

Quoting waketurbulence (Reply 19):
and 500 (which I can't really carry in a backpack)

Matt, I carry the 500 in a backpack all the time, Lowepro Vertex 200.

Just got back from 9 days in the states where I took MK III, 500 F4, 100-400, 24-105 and 1.4 II.

The Vertex 300 will take 2 x 1 series bodies and all of the above and both bags are carry on, no issues in the overheads.

Whilst the lens looks nice it's not for me, I love my 500 too much.

70-200 2.8 II, 300 2.8 and 500 is the ideal for me excluding wide angle.



Live every second like you mean it
User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2745 times:

Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 20):
What? How else is the poor Canon shooter going to achieve 400mm without spending $8k?

Think of it differently, if you have one - you'll have a very desirable lens.  

You can still buy the Sigma/Tokina/Tamron super-zooms. Still - I very much doubt the 100-400mm Canon lens will be retired. It's easily one of the most popular Canon lenses I see. Just about every spotter using Canon equipment has one of those.

Quoting McG1967 (Reply 18):
It would impinge on sales of the 70-300L and the new 200-400L.

The 100-400 and 200-400 are very different beasts. The 100-400 is a more consumer orientated lens, the 200-400mm is a top-end professional lens, most like with a frightening price-tag to match. If anything, the 200-400 1.4xTC lens might infringe on the 500mm sales. Apart from it's huge size - it'd be the ultimate airshow lens too. I can tell you from my experience with the Nikon equivalent lens, using the 1.4x TC on it gives superb results - if only we could just flick a switch to swap in the TC when needed so you have effectively a 200-560mm with little effort.

Really convenient and I hope Nikon will take notice. But then, they only just recently upgraded the 200-400 - and we know how fast Nikon upgrades things (not).

[Edited 2011-02-07 15:05:17]

User currently offlineEMA747 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 1171 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2718 times:

Is there any hint of the price of this 200-400?

I might have to get a 100-400 before they run out. I sold my old one to fund the amazing 70-200 f2.8 IS mkII but that is a bit short sometimes for aviation.

Andy S



Failing doesn’t make you a failure. Giving up and refusing to try again does!
User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1057 posts, RR: 33
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2705 times:

Personally i dont think the 100-400 will become extinct anytime soon.
The 200-400 is aimed at the media and high end pro's not the same market as the 100-400.
As one of Canon's best ever selling Lens's the 100-400 is a golden egg that they would be insane to remove from the line up.
The great thing is the 200-400 will come in i think way lighter than everyone expect.
Given the new 600F4 and 400/2.8 have shed almost a third of their(now weighing within 50 Grams of the old 500F4)I think weight by going to Titanium construction etc it will weigh quite a bit less than expected.
These new lens's are amazing with weights and performance never seen before and even with astronomical prices will be walking out of shops all over the world.
If you have ever hand held a 600 or 400/2.8 all day at an airshow you will know why....



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
25 ckw : Well, what I wanted from Canon was a 200-400 f4, so I'm happy with that. Not so sure about the built in convertor though. Why not just produce a varia
26 spencer : In a way I agree with you Colin. However, what I do like over the fixed 500mm (for example), is the fact you still have the zooming capability (and of
27 Rotate : With the TC "in" .. it becomes 5.6F ... I really like the idea behind it ... but I defenetly want to see some sample pics before judging if this is a
28 JakTrax : If it is you can bet that'll add another £1,000 to an already expensive lens! Thought I heard somewhere it would be a 5.6 once the extender is activ
29 ua935 : Spencer, 5.6 with the converter. The 500 F4 will hold it's own, different animal and I would rather have my F4 over 5.6. Shooting last week at night e
30 spencer : f/5.6, as I presumed. Didn't wanna say it though as I hadn't read the link...hehe. Still a lot of range and f/5.6, even though a stop down from f/4, i
31 angelwings : hey guys Anyone know if we can start placing orders yet?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon Rebel 2000 A Good Camera To Start With? posted Sat Sep 28 2002 05:27:33 by Airplanetire
Canon EOS-300 Kit: 28-90 & 75-300mm. Good Start? posted Sat Jan 13 2001 14:52:22 by Mon330
Start Saving Canon Guys... posted Sun Feb 6 2011 22:28:49 by Dehowie
Questions On Buying The Canon 550D (T2i) posted Thu Feb 3 2011 13:18:04 by B747forever
Canon Gear For Sale (Boston Area) posted Tue Jan 25 2011 20:32:11 by SNATH
Canon 100-400mm IQ Issues posted Mon Jan 17 2011 07:21:15 by SIA6696
Canon EOS 50D V 550D posted Tue Jan 11 2011 02:39:18 by yerbol
Canon EF-S 28-135mm Is USM posted Tue Jan 4 2011 03:35:15 by yerbol
Canon EF24-105 F/4 L First Impressions posted Sun Jan 2 2011 11:37:59 by JakTrax
IQ Comparison Of The New Canon Teleconverters posted Thu Dec 30 2010 12:51:30 by SNATH