Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  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              5              7       end
  

Archive 2023 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR

  
 
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #1 · p.6 #1 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


EB-1 wrote:
The latest CR2 indicates $16K. https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-rf-200-500mm-f-4l-is-usm-update-cr2

EBH

lighthound wrote:
As expected. It's going to be a fantastic lens but too rich for my hobbyist blood.
All the more reason I'm praying they release a mid priced RF 500 f4.5 prime. But in todays ridiculous world, even that will likely be hitting 10K.


It's probably hobbyists that will buy most of these. $16K for a lens is difficult to swing when a wire agency is paying only ~$200-250 to cover a game. (Maybe they pay more now? Doubt it would be much more).

So back in May 2013 the CAD and USD were nearly on-par. I just checked the receipt for mine, bought back then. MSRP was CAD 12K but Canon Canada had "CPS pricing" through which you could buy L lenses at dealer cost, which for the 200-400 was CAD 10,200. Talk about a bargain! Well, fast forward to now and that Canon Canada CPS pricing discount is gone and the exchange rate means USD 16K will be about CAD 21,400. Ouch!

Bank of Canada's inflation calculator indicates CAD 10,200 is about CAD 13K now. MSRP of CAD 12K would be about CAD 15,300... so for this lens, the weaker CAD is costing us up here about 40% more than 'regular' inflation. Granted, a 200-500 is not a 200-400 and would be expected to cost more, but this will be one very difficult hurdle to justify spending > CAD 20K.



Aug 04, 2023 at 10:36 PM
Al Goldis
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #2 · p.6 #2 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


Imagine how much it would cost if they made it f/2.8.


Aug 05, 2023 at 12:02 AM
marximus4192
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #3 · p.6 #3 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


I've been seeing 500 f/4 IIs going for close to $4k. No way could I ever justify $16k.


Aug 05, 2023 at 01:29 AM
Uarctos
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #4 · p.6 #4 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


No reason to buy new at that price. All new lenses are very expensive and then lose value when they become ''obsolete'', in 1-2 years


Aug 05, 2023 at 02:58 AM
EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #5 · p.6 #5 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


The RF lens mount is a major transition after ovyer 31 years of the EF mount. It's not going to happen again anytime soon. The 200-500/4 should be good for 8-10 years.

EBH



Aug 05, 2023 at 06:45 AM
Alan Kefauver
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #6 · p.6 #6 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


Al Goldis wrote:
Imagine how much it would cost if they made it f/2.8.


Imagine how much it would weigh if they made it f/2.8.



Aug 05, 2023 at 07:55 AM
CelesteForza
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #7 · p.6 #7 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


This will be one hell of a soccer, football, baseball, track & field, horse racing, motor sports, tennis, rugby, lens. For only $26K you can have a dream combination of this and the RF100-300 F/2.8L


Aug 05, 2023 at 08:27 AM
EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #8 · p.6 #8 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


Gosh, I would never use the 200-500/4 for any sports subjects.

EBH



Aug 05, 2023 at 08:46 AM
thedutt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #9 · p.6 #9 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


$16k USD seems a bit too high given where the RF 600 F4 / 400 2.8 have been priced. Without the built in TC, i would be hard to justify that price point given other options. But who knows; more options for us in any case.


Aug 05, 2023 at 11:23 AM
action99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #10 · p.6 #10 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


thedutt wrote:
$16k USD seems a bit too high given where the RF 600 F4 / 400 2.8 have been priced. Without the built in TC, i would be hard to justify that price point given other options. But who knows; more options for us in any case.


What other options I see no zoom from 200 to 500 at constant F4 from any vendor?

I owned the 200-400 for 9 years and I surely wished it was a 200-500 F4.... assuming the 200-500 would weight the same or less than the 200-400.

For sports I would take a 16k 200-500 F4 vs a 12k 200-400 or the Nikon 400 2.8 1.4x that costs 14k...

In theory people that could afford the 200-400 in 2013 they should be able to afford the 200-500 today based on inflation.

The good news is that price of used 200-400 and probably the 500 F4 will go down even further making some amazing lens more affordable to people...







Aug 05, 2023 at 12:22 PM
docusync
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #11 · p.6 #11 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


Suddenly the 100-300 started looking like a bargain. The theory of relativity in action
Seriously, it's more flexible and 1.6x cheaper.



Aug 05, 2023 at 12:24 PM
lighthound
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #12 · p.6 #12 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


rscheffler wrote:
It's probably hobbyists that will buy most of these.


You forgot to use the words "overly wealthy" hobbyists, of which I and many many other hobbyist are not. Sure I/we could afford it, but not justify it over perhaps a very nice once in a lifetime photography trip somewhere. If I actually sold any of my images then it would be much easier to justify but I don't see that happening anytime soon. And that would put me outside being just a hobbyist.




Aug 05, 2023 at 12:27 PM
action99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #13 · p.6 #13 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


lighthound wrote:
You forgot to use the words "overly wealthy" hobbyists, of which I and many many other hobbyist are not. Sure I/we could afford it, but not justify it over perhaps a very nice once in a lifetime photography trip somewhere. If I actually sold any of my images then it would be much easier to justify but I don't see that happening anytime soon. And that would put me outside being just a hobbyist.



The TCO is not that bad the problem is the cash and insurance.... I brought a used the 200-400 in 2014 for 10'000, sold it for 7600 in 2022... it makes 300$ a year.... for example the lost in value of a R5 is much more per year... it is almost equivalent to a PS subscription.... I lost much more money over the same 8 years in CF, CFast, CFexpress than the lens..




Aug 05, 2023 at 12:38 PM
lighthound
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #14 · p.6 #14 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


action99 wrote:
The TCO is not that bad the problem is the cash and insurance.... I brought a used the 200-400 in 2014 for 10'000, sold it for 7600 in 2022... it makes 300$ a year.... for example the lost in value of a R5 is much more per year... it is almost equivalent to a PS subscription.... I lost much more money over the same 8 years in CF, CFast, CFexpress than the lens..



STOP IT!
I can't hear you... la...la...la...la.. Nope, still can't hear you.... la...la...la...la.....





Aug 05, 2023 at 12:42 PM
armd
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #15 · p.6 #15 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


Who wants my 500 f4 IS II? I still think the 200-500 f/4 will be a wonderful sports lens and the purview of the wealthy enthusiasts. For the rest of us…


Aug 05, 2023 at 02:06 PM
jedibrain
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #16 · p.6 #16 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


SIGMONSTER

Alan Kefauver wrote:
Imagine how much it would weigh if they made it f/2.8.




Aug 05, 2023 at 03:10 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #17 · p.6 #17 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


thedutt wrote:
$16k USD seems a bit too high given where the RF 600 F4 / 400 2.8 have been priced. Without the built in TC, i would be hard to justify that price point given other options. But who knows; more options for us in any case.


Why compare prices of a prime to a zoom. A prime has one single focus-length, and zoom many. You are comparing the price of one lens to the price of many lenses.



Aug 05, 2023 at 04:08 PM
Al Goldis
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #18 · p.6 #18 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


Alan Kefauver wrote:
Imagine how much it would weigh if they made it f/2.8.


Probably about 60% more than the f/4 version will weigh. They've made pretty amazing advances in weight reduction over the years, so it would still weigh less than my original non-IS 600/4.



Aug 05, 2023 at 04:30 PM
thedutt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #19 · p.6 #19 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


Imagemaster wrote:
Why compare prices of a prime to a zoom. A prime has one single focus-length, and zoom many. You are comparing the price of one lens to the price of many lenses.


Tony, you have such an annoying habit of being right - and I suspect you are also in this this. But my thesis is that canon cannot really price a 500mm F4 lens targeted at the nature & wildlife demographic, that is getting downward pressure from 100-500 and peer pressure from 400 f2.8 & 600 F4, while not having a 500mm f4 option available at 4k over 400/600 pricepoint.

But quite frankly, I have zero clue of what canon is thinking. I know I wont consider the lens at 16k. I might consider it at 12-13k.







Aug 05, 2023 at 04:54 PM
thedutt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #20 · p.6 #20 · RF 200-500 F4 Confirmed by CR


action99 wrote:
For sports I would take a 16k 200-500 F4 vs a 12k 200-400 or the Nikon 400 2.8 1.4x that costs 14k...

In theory people that could afford the 200-400 in 2013 they should be able to afford the 200-500 today based on inflation.

The good news is that price of used 200-400 and probably the 500 F4 will go down even further making some amazing lens more affordable to people...


I have zero clue about sports, so if this is a sports-targeted lens, then I am out of my element. I am simply evaluating it from a wildlife perspective. Since there is no 500 F4 available in Canon RF glass and if this is to replace that, then going from 8k new glass to 16k new glass, even inflation adjusted is a big jump. FWIF, if they charged 2k extra to have built-in 1.4x on the 400mm f2.8, I would have gladly paid that. ( I have the 400RF and lust after the Nikon). But that is because having 400mm @ f2.8 is worth it while being able to easily switch to 560mm F4;

50/50 chance I will be eating crow and getting this lens if it can replace by 100-500 & 400 2.8 in field. On the other hand, if canon does come out with 1x-2x teleconverter, I would be preordering that can calling it a day.





Aug 05, 2023 at 04:59 PM
1       2       3              5              7       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5              7       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.