One reason for high Nikkor 800 price ought to be the cost of those two rather large fluorite elements. For Canon, fluorite lens technology is a 20 year old business, for Nikon it is very new. In fact, I believe they are probably buying those fluorite elements from a telescope making source, or even from Canon.
With a lens that costly and specialized you must consider the body lens system. For the price of the Nikon 800 you could have a Canon 800 and the 1Dx too. This even if you considered the 1Dx unique to the 800 and never used it on another lens.
Is the 1.25X TC-Nikon's answer to Canon's discontinued 1.3x sensor? Really the ultimate, end of the line, focal limited solution for max FL under F8. Nikon's MTF charts are really the best I have ever seen for any lens. Kudos to Nikon for their first (double) Flourite stupertele.
But the economics are really mind boggling. Especially at such a price Nikon is guaranteed to to sell a minimum of 800s and lose money on each one. Most of these must go to event loan programs where a driver's license gets a pro a loner.
dolina wrote:
I think Canon will feel at liberty to charge $20,000 for a 800mm IS II that is say... 8lbs?
I think $20,000 would limit the sales severely, unless they would go for the DO variant.
Then we might have a 3kg light EF 800mm f/5.6 DO IS USM which would be very pricey indeed, and very desireable too, assuming the lens IQ would be commensurate to its price.
Because being extremely light at the expense of a compromised IQ, wouldn't sell a $20,000 lens very well.
Photobufff wrote:
Are the current super telephoto lenses from both brands crap IQ wise to the Nikon 800mm 5.6 or will the difference in IQ be very very subtle?
I don't know. I have a hard enough time deciding about relative sharpness of the Canon lenses I own, let alone pass verdicts on a Nikon lens that nobody has seen yet.
You may wish to ask that question on some more expertly and specialized sites such as Birds as Art, Naturescapes Net, etc.
Photobufff wrote:
Are the current super telephoto lenses from both brands crap IQ wise to the Nikon 800mm 5.6 or will the difference in IQ be very very subtle?
If you base your assessment of sharpness on the MTF chart with and without custom TC then the Nikkor really makes both brands look "bad".
But as someone has pointed out on FM or on my Facebook feed for the price being asked for the Nikkor you may as well get a 1DX + 600mm IS II and have change for extra trips.
Based on today's technology the Nikkor uses "ancient" tech and is very heavy for what it can do.
I was expecting under 7lbs to justify $18,000. If they managed that then....
dolina wrote:
But as someone has pointed out on FM or on my Facebook feed for the price being asked for the Nikkor you may as well get a 1DX + 600mm IS II and have change for extra trips.
Extra trips to your local zoo garden ? Check your math, Pogito.
Nikon's theoretical MTF chart looks impressive. It will be nice for Nikon fans (at least, those who can afford it) to finally have a long telephoto lens that isn't at least a decade behind Canon's offerings.
come on you guys. Nikon users can definitely afford this. They were the ones who was able to ditch the Canon system and buy into a completely new system. We're still using Canons because we can't afford to switch.
tuantran wrote:
come on you guys. Nikon users can definitely afford this. They were the ones who was able to ditch the Canon system and buy into a completely new system. We're still using Canons because we can't afford to switch.
, you guys crack me up.