Of course, if you want to haul around a 36-pound lens that costs around $120,000, go for it. I'm pretty sure an 800mm with a 1.4x TC is a bit more practical.
Being realistic, the Canon EF 800mm f/5.6 L IS USM Lens is going to be the better option for most people. While obviously not as long in the focal length spec, the 800 is a better lens in most other aspects. It is sharper wide open, focuses faster, is smaller and lighter - and the Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 L USM Lens price makes the 800 L look like a bargain.
Imagemaster wrote:
Of course, if you want to haul around a 36-pound lens that costs around $120,000, go for it. I'm pretty sure an 800mm with a 1.4x TC is a bit more practical.
It is. The 800L is awesome!
The 1200L was actually sold new for under $90,000 but due to its rarity they sell at a much higher price. Its basically a colector's item not a practical tool.
I mean, want/need very long reach? Put a small sensor camera like a Nikon V1 behind any of the more mundane super teles and problem is solved and then some.
In the past, I've seen ones for sale with prices reduced to "only" something in the range of around $50,000-60,000. I suppose that, with the way that super telephoto prices have risen in the last couple of years, those prices seem to be a bit less outrageous.
On the other hand, the utility of the lens has decreased for those who have bought or who intend to buy a 1DX because, with only f5.6 auto focus, now you can't use the lens with a 1.4x and maintain auto focus.
Based on Canon's super-telephoto price increases, imagine with a version II of this thing would cost!
I would think a Canon 1DMKIV with a 800mm f/5.6L and 1.4TC would be a more reasonable option for most pro's who need the ultimate reach...and about $100k cheaper
Or my way, the really poor mans method- a Sigma 120-300 OS with stacked TC's on a 7D...even autofocuses in good light!!
EF 1200 f/5.6 is probably the ultimate photography icon, at least in the Canon system.
However, if one tries to dig a bit deeper, it is not easy to see what the lens performance is like. A couple of people have shot some very distant targets with it, and reported this or that, yet it would be great if someone would do a comparison shoot of the 1200 vs. 800L + 1.4xTC. My feeling is that other than a stop of light loss, the 800L based combo would pulverize the old 1200 lens every which way.
Grantland wrote:
Tony, why rip on Rod? Your negative intrusion comes across as arrogant and ignorant. Reminds me of why I left DPreview.
I guess Markle is not interested in 1200 f/5.6 lens. And why should he be ? Most of what he shoots are 8 ft distant hummingbirds in his backyard bird bath.
PetKal wrote:
I guess Markle is not interested in 1200 f/5.6 lens. And why should he be ? Most of what he shoots are 8 ft distant hummingbirds in his backyard bird bath.
What else can I do? Unlike you, I can't go to the city park and shoot hand-fed pigeons with an 800.
Grantland wrote:
Tony, why rip on Rod? Your negative intrusion comes across as arrogant and ignorant. Reminds me of why I left DPreview.
If the Search feature on this site was used by more people, forums would not get cluttered with subjects that have already been discussed many times already.
As you can see from this thread, once again, most find the 1200mm lens to be so impractical and expensive that these repetitive threads just turn into one big joke.
