Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Archive 2013 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed
  
 
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Thank you Stu, at least someone participating in this discussion has held the lens, if not shot with it.




Mar 24, 2013 at 08:47 PM
Jefferson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Ok...I'll go with 2m...Have not seen the lens in person, so I'll take your word on it

Now about the possible IQ question?...Could that be the reason...?



Mar 24, 2013 at 10:46 PM
scalesusa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Deborah Kolt wrote:
I suspect the problem is the same one that has slowed delivery of the 500mm and 600mm: the shortage of fluorite because of extreme weather in India last year. You can't rush Mother Nature.



How much Fluorite does India Produce? They are not even on the map as far as major producers.

Canon grows their own fluorite crystals in any event.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorite



Mar 24, 2013 at 11:02 PM
DavidP
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


PetKal wrote:
One way or another, a purchase of that lens would be extremely hard to justify. The only reason for getting it would be


Or to further flame my GAS for it.

I just wish it were a DO (or as light as small as the 400/4 DO)



Mar 24, 2013 at 11:14 PM
Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


dolina wrote:
Canon made a mistake and discovered that for the price they are targeting the 200-400/4 1.4x will not sell in sufficient volume.


Link?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Mar 24, 2013 at 11:39 PM
PetKal
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


DavidP wrote:
Or to further flame my GAS for it.

I just wish it were a DO (or as light as small as the 400/4 DO)


I am with you there......I wish they had just come up with 400 DO MkII, or if they had to have a zoom, why not 200-400 f/4 DO ?

However, it would be safe to assume such DO lenses would be:
(1) irresistibly compact and light, and
(2) hideously expensive.

And then there is the issue of IQ....



Mar 25, 2013 at 12:07 AM
uz2work
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


DavidP wrote:
I just wish it were a DO (or as light as small as the 400/4 DO)


Yep. I have little need for a lens capable of extending to a bit longer than 500 mm and a bit shorter than 600 mm but whose weight is in the range of the 500 and 600 mm lenses with a price tag in the range of those lenses and that is only capable of a maximum aperture of f5.6. If I need 500 or 600 mm and I'm going to deal with a lens that large (and that costs that much), I want it to be able to shoot at f4. On the other hand, if I only need 400 mm, I don't want my lens to weigh as much as a 500 or 600 mm f4 lens. While I'm sure that there will be an appeal to some for the zoom range of this lens (if it ever becomes available), the downsides of the lens are significant enough that I'd guess that the appeal will be to a limited audience.

However, what is a guarantee is that those who do buy the lens will quickly fill the forums with posts suggesting that everyone else should buy this lens and questioning the judgment of those who decide that it is not a lens that meets their needs because that is that forum posts tend to go.

Les



Mar 25, 2013 at 12:31 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Anyone who thinks they can make a 200-400 f4 DO as light as a 400 f4 DO prime must know something I don't.


Mar 25, 2013 at 01:00 AM
15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


PetKal wrote:
My gut feel tells me they had to go back to the drawing board with the lens......some operational aspects of it might have received unfavourable feedback from the Olympics photographers.


Optical performance would have been sorted in their labs before they loaned them out, same for handling, weight, balance etc: It would be surprising for them to get so far along the design process before deciding the IQ was poor, the handling was crap or that they could shave off a significant amount of weight. My guess is that the Olympics was a major field test to assess the lens in real and relatively harsh field conditions, and when they got the lenses back and re-tested/disassembled them they found a serious structural flaw of some sort.



Mar 25, 2013 at 10:06 AM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


PetKal wrote:
Thank you Stu, at least someone participating in this discussion has held the lens, if not shot with it.



I just opened a file from last year, blew it up to 100% (unfortunately my 35L ceased to be razor sharp because the Sigma 35 f/1.4 now exists, so I could only just make out the numbers )

This year I did try conning the Canon rep into letting me mount the 200-400 on my 5D3 to get some samples but he just looked at me like I was a naughty child They did at least let us "shoot" but the 1DX had no CF cards in it so it was just for AF speed testing, which, as I've said before, is excellent. Probably as fast as the 500ii IME.

I think Canon do care how many they sell, and I don't think this lens is just an exercise in technical know how. They've seen how popular the Nikon version is. A canon 14-24 has also been touted and thats one of Nikons best...



Mar 25, 2013 at 10:59 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Bones74 wrote:
I think Canon do care how many they sell, and I don't think this lens is just an exercise in technical know how. They've seen how popular the Nikon version is.


It's hard not to laugh when it'll cost 2x as much, so I don't think they are that serious about selling more than minute numbers.



Mar 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Pixel Perfect wrote:
It's hard not to laugh when it'll cost 2x as much, so I don't think they are that serious about selling more than minute numbers.


The senior Canon rep I spoke to said that Canon are well aware if they price the lens too high it won't sell. That says to me that, while it wont be as "cheap" as the Nikon version, it may be realistically priced to sell in reasonable numbers (for a premium lens). The lens should outperform the Nikon and has a built in extender. Not that I'm saying it justifies a ridiculous price in excess of the 600 ii, but it does justify a higher price than the Nikon.

I'll take info from a Canon rep over internet speculation... that is until the lens is released and we have the price in print and we need a mortgage to purchase one



Mar 25, 2013 at 12:21 PM
Chris B.
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


PetKal wrote
... I am with you there......I wish they had just come up with 400 DO MkII, or if they had to have a zoom, why not 200-400 f/4 DO ?

However, it would be safe to assume such DO lenses would be:
(1) irresistibly compact and light, and
(2) hideously expensive.

And then there is the issue of IQ....


Last December, Canon Rumors showed that Canon had applied for patents for a series of new DO lenses. While I love my 400 DO, I think I'd almost kill for a 600 DO, assuming though that I wouldn't have to remortgage my house to get it... but given Canon's pricing, I'd have to mortgage my house as well as my neighbors!

Chris



Mar 25, 2013 at 03:23 PM
Bones74
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Chris B. wrote:
Last December, Canon Rumors showed that Canon had applied for patents for a series of new DO lenses. While I love my 400 DO, I think I'd almost kill for a 600 DO, assuming though that I wouldn't have to remortgage my house to get it... but given Canon's pricing, I'd have to mortgage my house as well as my neighbors!

Chris


If I was your neighbour I'd be happy to live under a hedge as long as you shared the lens I'd very seriously consider the 400 DO as an option, but I'm not convinced the IQ merits the rather large price tag.



Mar 25, 2013 at 03:31 PM
Roland W
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Well, the long delay in releasing the Canon 200-400 has for me an unusual but very real reason why I may now not get this lens. One of my main uses would be for air shows, where for me the zoom and built in extender make it a much better choice than any given fixed focal length super telephoto. The problem is that with the budget cuts, the chances of any good air shows with Military jet performers happening this season are very small, and the long term future of good air shows is also in question. That makes this lens much less valuable to me, and I may decide to cancel my long standing pre-order. On the other hand, if the delay continues long enough, there is a chance that air shows will be back by the time the lens comes out, and I will still want to get one.

One thing that Canon tries to do for new bodies and new lenses is to make a fair number to have in stock for the initial release. Between final changes and difficulty in building them and low production rates for Fluorite lens elements and making Fluorite elements for the other Super telephotos, they may just be working on having enough on hand for release, and they may be guessing wrong on the high side on how high the demand may be. I also do not think they can afford to even rumor another release date and then fail to meet it, so I think the next time (3rd time? or 5th time?) will be the real deal.



Mar 25, 2013 at 04:48 PM
mitesh
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Roland W wrote:
I also do not think they can afford to even rumor another release date and then fail to meet it, so I think the next time (3rd time? or 5th time?) will be the real deal.


While I agree that there have been several "false starts", it's worth remembering that Canon have never given an official release date- all of those supposed/rumored dates were contrived by outsiders. So, technically, Canon haven't missed any release dates for this lens.



Mar 25, 2013 at 06:07 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


mitesh wrote:
While I agree that there have been several "false starts", it's worth remembering that Canon have never given an official release date- all of those supposed/rumored dates were contrived by outsiders. So, technically, Canon haven't missed any release dates for this lens.


Yes, I have not seen an official Canon release date, but you still get the whiners complaining about a non-existant release date being late.



Mar 25, 2013 at 06:46 PM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


Bones74 wrote:
The senior Canon rep I spoke to said that Canon are well aware if they price the lens too high it won't sell. That says to me that, while it wont be as "cheap" as the Nikon version, it may be realistically priced to sell in reasonable numbers (for a premium lens). The lens should outperform the Nikon and has a built in extender. Not that I'm saying it justifies a ridiculous price in excess of the 600 ii, but it does justify a higher price than the Nikon.

I'll take info from a Canon rep over internet speculation... that is
...Show more

Pull the other one, it yodels. People get blaze about pricing. I'll bet if it's $10K it'll be called a bargain (or is that realistically priced) by a quite a few people.

Anybody that puts any faith in what a sales rep says is a bit naive.



Mar 25, 2013 at 08:34 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


As I think I posted in a previous 200-400 thread, back in September I was at an NFL game where an SI photographer was shooting with a 200-400. While I didn't get to handle it, I did quiz him briefly about it. His opinion was that it was sharp and that everyone will buy one. By "everyone" I interpret him to mean field sports photographers.

Therein I think lies a bit of an issue for Canon. This lens has the potential to cannibalize sales of the primes, particularly the 300 & 400/2.8. But at least based on what I've seen on the sidelines at sports events I've covered, most photographers have not made the switch to the latest super-teles. While these lenses offer some improvements, the image quality difference is likely not significant enough for many to justify the upgrade (clients will never notice the difference and aren't going to pay more in any case). At least for the sports photography market, this lens could be what Canon needs to realize a surge in super-tele sales. The downside will probably be poor resale value for those, like me, looking to unload previous version lenses due to oversupply on the used market.

While many here may seem to think the one-stop penalty is significant, the reality is the convenience of a zoom with a built-in teleconverter will likely outweigh this drawback for many sports photographers, especially for those with newer bodies capable of very good high ISO performance, even if the weight is the same or slightly more than the new 400/2.8. From my perspective, having recently moved to the FF 1DX after shooting APS-H since 2001, the biggest change in how I've been shooting sports is much more frequent use of the 1.4x TC on the 400. With the 1DIV, I rarely used it because I had the crop factor and pixel density to allow additional cropping, which was somewhat lost with the 1DX. But it has also been great to finally have 'real' 400mm back again for those times when the 520mm equivalent crop was too tight with ASP-H. While I could also shoot with a 600, it's a hassle to lug both around. And I hate using a teleconverter in poor weather conditions because of the probability of things getting wet and messing with the rain cover. To have a lens I'll never disconnect from the body during the entirety of an event and that replaces at least three prime lenses (300/400/600), is pretty significant. While f/4 is a slight tradeoff in background separation, I've yet to receive feedback from a client complaining of insufficient subject isolation. Just like the difference between the 70-200 2.8 vs. f/4 lenses, it's not going to be that much in practical use. Of greater influence will be the photographer's choice of camera to subject to background distances or whether the camera used is FF vs. APS-H vs. APS-C.



Mar 25, 2013 at 08:38 PM
jkhalifa
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Possible reason the 200-400/4 1.4x is delayed


The guy next to me was shooting with this at the Big Ten Tournament a couple weeks ago. He didn't seem to be in a very chatty mood, but he said he liked it.


Mar 25, 2013 at 08:54 PM
1      
2
       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password