Interesting. Their rental rate for it is also similar to the rate for the 600 II which could indicate thats what the price will be like. Yikes! This is all assuming they are posting on actual information they got from Canon.
That date happens to jive with the info I got from a Canon Canada retailer a month or so ago, although I haven't put much stock on it.
As far as the price goes, I am 100% sure it is going to be way too expensive.
PetKal wrote:
Dood, who do you think I am ? A Canadian senator ? A motivational speaker who gets $15,000 for one hour of rambling platitudes about the environment ?
Peter just remember on the release date your NDA ends and you will be alble to show us lots and lots of BIF's that you already took with this lens that you have been secretly using that last little while.
burningheart wrote:
Peter just remember on the release date your NDA ends and you will be alble to show us lots and lots of BIF's that you already took with this lens that you have been secretly using that last little while.
splathrop wrote:
You know, a 200-400 f/4 is a damned inconvenient way to take a 200mm f/4 photograph.
The physics are pretty damned rough for taking a 400mm f/2.8 photograph also.
I think I had too long to think about the 200-400mm lens. I was originally totally phyched about the original rumours & announcements - even to the point where I started to re-jig my wildlife kit. In the end, I went with the 400mm f/2.8 II because the weight rumours & physical length of the 200-400 just turned me off. I also realized that I'm putting an awful premium on the seldom used (for me) focal range of 200-350mm - especially if I eventually go with a full-frame sensor camera. I also realized that I wasn't putting enough of a premium on the ability of f/2.8 for my type of shooting.
It'll be interesting to hear how people find the weight & balance of the 200-400 to be. I have to say that the 400mm f/2.8 II is a dream for balance when I have on my 1DMIII. I can handhold it quite easily - something I couldn't really do with the 500mm f/4 (m1), which is the same weight.
For a modest finder's fee of $200 payable to me, I could intervene with Canon Canada so that Ron Scheffler's early copy of 200-400L is reallocated to you.
PetKal wrote:
For a modest finder's fee of $200 payable to me, I could intervene with Canon Canada so that Ron Scheffler's early copy of 200-400L is reallocated to you.
Peter Pan,
If the lens is at CPS Canada price, I will take you up on that
PetKal wrote:
For a modest finder's fee of $200 payable to me, I could intervene with Canon Canada so that Ron Scheffler's early copy of 200-400L is reallocated to you.
If the lens is at CPS Canada price, I will take you up on that
Mitesh, of course it will be our CPS price + 13% sales tax + $400 fully insured shipping by Fedex ground + $200 my commission, all toll about $14,000 CDN.
A Canadian senator ? A motivational speaker who gets $15,000 for one hour of rambling platitudes about the environment ? 
It is very convenient if you want to use only one lens and also shoot at any focal length from 201-560mm.