rscheffler wrote:
This comes up every so often with Canon's releases. It would appear that Canon likes to spread around the joy to as many shops as possible. That way everyone gets something, even if initially only one or two. I'm guessing B&H probably could have taken Canon USA's full initial shipment, but that would leave everyone else SOL.
Right the issue is that if most lenses are purchased in the first months of availability, sending all the lenses from the first batches to a few of the largest camera stores in the world would kill all the other stores basically. Small stores are important so that as many people as possible can talk in person to the sales people and handle gear. Brands that sell on ergonomics including Canon probably think this service is very important. Film sales, processing, and printing used to be the main business of many smaller stores but now that part is diminished.
I'm interested in this lens but not in any real hurry to buy it (I'm concerned about the weight and will be looking for feed back). I'll probably wait until it's stocked as "Refurbished" at Canon Online.
BrianP wrote:
Ordering photography gear these days has gotten ridiculous. I am still waiting for the RF 10-20 since I ordered it a few minutes late. I ordered the 200-800 in the afternoon since I was debating in the morning. I think Canon is the worst, but I have had problems with others as well. The Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 took me over 6 months to get since I didn't order on day one. The days of blaming things on COVID are passed. It does make you wonder what they are thinking.
Nikon is significantly worse than Canon in terms of product delivery though this problem affects all camera manufacturers. It seems paradoxical given that the overall ILC camera market is stagnant (increasing in China, contracting elsewhere), however with supply chain and manufacturing challenges, it is not.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Right the issue is that if most lenses are purchased in the first months of availability, sending all the lenses from the first batches to a few of the largest camera stores in the world would kill all the other stores basically. Small stores are important so that as many people as possible can talk in person to the sales people and handle gear. Brands that sell on ergonomics including Canon probably think this service is very important. Film sales, processing, and printing used to be the main business of many smaller stores but now that part is diminished.
or order directly from Canon. I put my order in for the 200-800 less than a week ago and got it this morning
Just remember that the performance of any lens varies with the distance. These tests are only accurate if your subject fills the frame at the same distance as the test chart he uses. A long time ago I bought or did not buy lenses based on TDP test charts. Luckily later I have bought a few despite the charts and got very satisfying results. None the less, the charts are a starting point.
mslino wrote:
Wow! If B&H, one of the largest Canon retailers in The USA, received only seven copies, the waiting would be longer than I thought!
rscheffler wrote:
This comes up every so often with Canon's releases. It would appear that Canon likes to spread around the joy to as many shops as possible. That way everyone gets something, even if initially only one or two. I'm guessing B&H probably could have taken Canon USA's full initial shipment, but that would leave everyone else SOL.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Right the issue is that if most lenses are purchased in the first months of availability, sending all the lenses from the first batches to a few of the largest camera stores in the world would kill all the other stores basically. Small stores are important so that as many people as possible can talk in person to the sales people and handle gear. Brands that sell on ergonomics including Canon probably think this service is very important. Film sales, processing, and printing used to be the main business of many smaller stores but now that part is diminished.
I think it's simply to keep all their dealers relatively happy that they are being looked after, even if only dribs and drabs of inventory for a while after initial release. The big shops don't really have any choice. It's not like they're going to stop stocking Canon products.
Still hanging on to my preorder through B&H but seeing the image samples it makes me start to think again if picking up a 2x for my 100-500mm would be a better option. I guess if there's a silver lining for my order being backordered, it's time to think this one through a bit more.
Z250SA wrote:
Just remember that the performance of any lens varies with the distance. These tests are only accurate if your subject fills the frame at the same distance as the test chart he uses. A long time ago I bought or did not buy lenses based on TDP test charts. Luckily later I have bought a few despite the charts and got very satisfying results. None the less, the charts are a starting point.
yes, and the jury is in for me
After testing the Canon 200-800 against the Sigma 150-600 "C" and Canon 100-400 (v1) I'm keeping the 200-800.
The 200-800 images are obviously better when shooting at extreme distances (in decent light) and then cropping the image.
It would be interesting to compare the 200-800 with the RF100-500 and extender or RF 800mm but I don't have those lenses.
I wish you could remove the tripod collar on the 200-800
coppertop wrote:
Still hanging on to my preorder through B&H but seeing the image samples it makes me start to think again if picking up a 2x for my 100-500mm would be a better option. I guess if there's a silver lining for my order being backordered, it's time to think this one through a bit more.
My BH order is also backordered. I have the 100-500 but not into using tele, esp the design where it can't be stored at 100 length.
Besides, 200-800 is so cheap compared to other lenses I own, no risk in trying it.
coppertop wrote:
I have the 100-500 but not into using tele, esp the design where it can't be stored at 100 length.
Besides, 200-800 is so cheap compared to other lenses I own, no risk in trying it.
I've seen others post this sentiment as well, and as a 100-500 owner agree -- I hate using my 1.4x for this reason. But this argument makes no sense in trying to justify buying the 200-800 since that lens in its most compact state at 200mm is about the same as the 100-500 w/ TC attached at 300mm (effectively 420 or 600mm depending on which TC is used). The better justification to me would be the 200-800 is faster than a 100-500 w/ TC. Without TC the 100-500 is faster.
But also in your case, if you have considerably more expensive lenses (and I don't consider the 100-500 to be in that class. The RF 400 or 600 f4's would be though) how could you be satisfied with the compromises the 200-800 requires one make over those lenses?
CW100 wrote:
After testing the Canon 200-800 against the Sigma 150-600 "C" and Canon 100-400 (v1) I'm keeping the 200-800.
The 200-800 images are obviously better when shooting at extreme distances (in decent light) and then cropping the image.
It would be interesting to compare the 200-800 with the RF100-500 and extender or RF 800mm but I don't have those lenses.
I wish you could remove the tripod collar on the 200-800
Though I´m pretty certain the 200-800 will be a keeper, the 100-500+extender is The critical comparison. I have briefly tried my 100-500 with my 2x and the results are surprisingly good. For a very handy 1000mm at that price point extremely good!
I would actually be satisfied with the 200-800 if the image quality would be at 800 f/11 level with the added benefit of the 200-799mm zoom. Of course I would not mind the RF 800 f/5.6 IQ.
Yes, that tripod collar... Oh well, I have not received my yet, so no problem with any collar so far.
The value of the zoom is huge. I had my R5+100-500 with me at my morning walk at sunrise, that is 10.30... and there were polar stratospheric clouds with an intensity I have never seen before! The PSC name is so inferior to the swedish pärlemormoln, mother-of-pearl cloud. I would have hated any heavy, bloody expensive, useless Big White, but the nice 100-500 worked beautifully. One lens to rule them all! Though this is a 200-800 thread, and 200 would have been satisfactory too. Ok, wiki tells that mother of pearl cloud is used as well as the pro PSC. Incredibly beautiful clouds, the strongest rainbow colours!
Z250SA wrote:
I would actually be satisfied with the 200-800 if the image quality would be at 800 f/11 level with the added benefit of the 200-799mm zoom. Of course I would not mind the RF 800 f/5.6 IQ.
I would be satisfied if the image quality is like the RF 100-400, but with double the focal length. The TDP charts seem to support that, with a few minor gives and takes.
Let's hope these charts showing it doesn't beat the 100-500, help us get the lens sooner
Oh well, I have not received my yet, so no problem with any collar so far.