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       8       end
  

Super telephoto lens rumors?

  
 
ilkka_nissila
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #1 · p.6 #1 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


alundeb wrote:
What the Nikon 180-600 (and Sony 200-600) have over any of the older 150-600 variants is in the quality and not in the specs.

The 400 4.5 and Z8 is almost nothing more in weight than the Canon 400 DO alone.

Having used teleconvertes for a couple of decades, I have come to hate the user friendliness of them. Integrated TC has a nice mix of qualities. Paired with a high resolution sensor for cropping, you have a true variable aperture narrow range zoom. The weight of a lens with integrated TC is less than one with an external attached.


The Nikon 180-600 (and Sony 200-600) are also internally zooming which is a huge advantage to handling in use (the zooming is light and doesn't change the external length of the lens) this is especially relevant when on a tripod as it stays in balance even when adjusting focal length.

AnotherMike, while there was some early speculation that the 400/4.5 would be PF, this didn't turn out to be the case and as a result of the refractive design, it doesn't have the harsh appearance of images nor the bokeh issues of PF lenses.

At least I find the FTZ and FTZ-II to work excellently on newer (Expeed 7) cameras such as the Z8. VR is clearly better even on a Z6 II due to the combination of in-camera and in-lens VR compared to less stability on a DSLR when using the same lens. AF performance of adapted lenses such as 200/2 and 300/2.8 is very similar to native Z lenses. The one reason to not use adapted high end telephoto lenses is that the Z lenses is that they're newer and much lighter in many cases. But the adapters do work well with the latest high-pertormance Z bodies. The long and short distances focus more accurately than on DSLRs, and the only flaw is that the mirrorless camera can have a tendency to focus on faces (sports audience) or grass (deer on a field) in the background, something that a D6 would not do in custom group-area mode, but again this is not due to the lens being on an adapter but also happens with native lenses with similar frequency. I would estimate the AF differences between native and adapted lenses to affect maybe 5% or fewer images. For video, native Z lenses are better because the motors are nearly silent.



Apr 11, 2024 at 12:18 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #2 · p.6 #2 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


Do you want a 15+ year old tc?

I probably wouldn't care too much, asdum8ng excellent results, depending on what comes out in the next several years, but the 1.4 v2 isn't too popular these days. Time flies, it's an expensive lens.

I'm anxiously looking forward to the threads asking why stupid Canon built a 1.4 in, adding weight, when they knew 1x-2x coming. If that appears



Apr 11, 2024 at 12:27 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #3 · p.6 #3 · Super telephoto lens rumors?




alundeb wrote:
What the Nikon 180-600 (and Sony 200-600) have over any of the older 150-600 variants is in the quality and not in the specs.

The 400 4.5 and Z8 is almost nothing more in weight than the Canon 400 DO alone.

Having used teleconvertes for a couple of decades, I have come to hate the user friendliness of them. Integrated TC has a nice mix of qualities. Paired with a high resolution sensor for cropping, you have a true variable aperture narrow range zoom. The weight of a lens with integrated TC is less than one with an external attached.


I would hope the 200-600/180-600 is better, given it is 2x the cost, with less zoom range. Seems like the 150-600's have been around for years, over a decade.

So you're saying that the R5 + 400/4 is about half pound heavier than the Z9 + 400/4.5? That's not much, that's my point. The Z9 is roughly pound heavier than Z8, the R5 is only a little over 1.5lbs .

I bought my Tamron 1.4 in 2005, and used 2x vivitar macro before that several months before upgrading. Finally seemed to stop working properly, did drop it last year, probably didn't help. A flickable tc sounds great, might be nice, but do you want an almost 20 year old tc?



Apr 11, 2024 at 12:38 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #4 · p.6 #4 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


molson wrote:
I didn't think many people still went to zoos... but then not everyone is wealthy enough (or cares so little about the environment) to jet off to Africa or South America, either.


Some people just seem to think their photos of African or S. American wildlife look better than photos of wildlife in their own country. They may look different, but not necessarily better. I see lot better video of wildlife from foreign countries on the National Geographic TV Channel.

At least these trophy hunters of today are using cameras and not guns like:

Roosevelt and his companions killed or trapped approximately 11,397 animals. According to Theodore Roosevelt's own tally, the figure included about four thousand birds, two thousand reptiles and amphibians, five hundred fish, and 4,897 mammals (other sources put the figure at 5,103).



Apr 11, 2024 at 12:53 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #5 · p.6 #5 · Super telephoto lens rumors?




AmbientMike wrote:
I would hope the 200-600/180-600 is better, given it is 2x the cost, with less zoom range. Seems like the 150-600's have been around for years, over a decade.

So you're saying that the R5 + 400/4 is about half pound heavier than the Z9 + 400/4.5? That's not much, that's my point. The Z9 is roughly pound heavier than Z8, the R5 is only a little over 1.5lbs .

I bought my Tamron 1.4 in 2005, and used 2x vivitar macro before that several months before upgrading. Finally seemed to stop working properly, did drop it last year, probably didn't
...Show more

I don't know why you insist on comparing the weight of the R5 to the Z9 when we talk about lenses. That is just a meaningless thing to do. The weight saving of the Nikon lens is one and a half pounds, even mounted on comparable bodies, and that is much.

And why would I be concerned about the built in TC being as old as the lens eventually? Since current teleconverters are close to perfect optical magnifiers, that would only be a problem in real life if the built in TC is significantly worse that the external ones we have today, and that would be known before I buy the lens.




Apr 11, 2024 at 02:25 PM
thedutt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #6 · p.6 #6 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


I am invested in canon, no plans to change / add more to make things more complex.

Still, as a wildlife photographer, Nikon lineup is more appealing. Z8 + 800 6.3 PF is about the best birding setup you can imagine for the value taking into account performance, price & weight. Many of my friends have it. My RF 400 f2.8 + 2x on a R5 completes nicely, but its a lot more expensive combo and significantly heavier.

Z8 + 400 f2.8 with built in TC: The best setup for large mammals in the wild. Heck put on a 1.4x and you have a phenominal setup.

Most tests indicated that the 180-600 / 200-600 lenses are on part or better than 100-300 + 2x.

Those are the facts.

But the reality is, that at the high end, canon 400F2.8, 2x, 100-300 2.8, 24-105 provide all the gear that I can ever effectively use. Plus the 100-300 double duty for sports, which as a dad of track & field kiddo, gives me greater joy than wildlife does.

At the mid range, EF 500 F4 II + 1.4x & RF 100-500 is an exceptional combination

At the serious amateur range: nothing anyone has to offer comes close to RF 200-800; A jack of trades lens for wildlife.


In the end, what a glorious time to be in wildlife with so many tools available to choose. I for one, cannot wait to see how the 100-300 + 2x perform in the wild for bears & eagles this summer/fall. If the 1x-2x happens to become real anytime soon, boy, I would be jumping with joy. 100-300 + 1x-2x is a dream single-lens wildlife setup for everything but bird portraits. Put on a 24-105 on the second body, and well, I will be done for all my travel needs in the wild.












AmbientMike wrote:
The more people post about the pf lenses, on the Canon board, the more I look at them. And the less appealing they look.

The 500pf looked really great, then some guy got to posting about how the 100-500 is so inferior, and I got to looking. 100-500 is about the same weight, zooms, and must be very sharp to take a 2x. I'd probably prefer a zoom.

800pf, idk if it's about the posts on here, but it looked really great, only 5lbs $6500!! But, it's over 5lbs and $6500 pretty expensive, people apparently use the much heavier, $2k+ more expensive
...Show more




Apr 11, 2024 at 02:33 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #7 · p.6 #7 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


AmbientMike wrote:
I'm anxiously looking forward to the threads asking why stupid Canon built a 1.4 in, adding weight, when they knew 1x-2x coming. If that appears


It would be great to combine or alternate an internal flippable TC with an external variable TC.

A variable TC will probably not do 1.0X. If it would, it will likely not be without light loss like an internal flippable one. So it would not replace the internal one.



Apr 11, 2024 at 02:49 PM
jschn372
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #8 · p.6 #8 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


They should allow sigma to sell their vast array of good lenses in RF mount. As someone interested in astrophotography, canon has zero quality primes wider than 50mm and the EF ones are garbage. Sigma also has a 500mm 5.6 that just came out for E and L mounts thatís 3 grand.

AmbientMike wrote:
Canon has Rf 1200/8, 800/5.6, 600/4, 400/2.8, 100-300/2.8. Numerous 800/5.6, 600/4, 500/4, 400/4, 400/2.8, 200-400/4, 300/2.8, 200/2 can be adapted using the best out there. And I don't see the adapter being a problem, especially on lenses this size

Canon has new Rf 200-800, 3 EF & Rf 100-400's, 600/11, 800/11, 3rd party 150-600's, 300/2.8, 120-300/2.8, 500/4.5, EF 300/4, 400/5.6, several 70-200's. And I could easily be forgetting some.

So it's ridiculous to hear Canon isn't competing. Sony has 600/4, 400/2.8, 300/2.8 & some zooms, Nikon has Z mount but the adapter isn't as good.




Apr 11, 2024 at 05:18 PM
middlerockies
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #9 · p.6 #9 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


I keep seeing a lot of comments about this mystical 1-2x flippable TC. Have I missed something other than just a patent a while back? Seems a few people made assumptions with regards to both how it works as well as whether Canon is actually making it, and now itís talked about as if itís expected and people are planning for it. What did I miss?


Apr 11, 2024 at 11:56 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #10 · p.6 #10 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


middlerockies wrote:
.... What did I miss?


You missed the realization that if you say it often enough, it becomes true.



Apr 12, 2024 at 07:00 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

garyvot
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #11 · p.6 #11 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


middlerockies wrote:
I keep seeing a lot of comments about this mystical 1-2x flippable TC. Have I missed something other than just a patent a while back? Seems a few people made assumptions with regards to both how it works as well as whether Canon is actually making it, and now itís talked about as if itís expected and people are planning for it. What did I miss?


Could be like the EOS-3 "D" which we were all sure would come...

We finally did get it (the R3), but it only took 22 years.



Apr 12, 2024 at 07:02 AM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #12 · p.6 #12 · Super telephoto lens rumors?




alundeb wrote:
I don't know why you insist on comparing the weight of the R5 to the Z9 when we talk about lenses. That is just a meaningless thing to do. The weight saving of the Nikon lens is one and a half pounds, even mounted on comparable bodies, and that is much.

And why would I be concerned about the built in TC being as old as the lens eventually? Since current teleconverters are close to perfect optical magnifiers, that would only be a problem in real life if the built in TC is significantly worse that the external ones we have
...Show more

Seriously?

The Z9 is over a pound heavier than the R5. Z9+ 400/4.5 is only about half pound lighter than the R5 + 400/4 DO II.

I don't necessarily mind using older gear but most people on here do. Sure the current tc's look good today, but are they going to in 15 years? How often do you plan on upgrading



Apr 12, 2024 at 10:49 AM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #13 · p.6 #13 · Super telephoto lens rumors?




middlerockies wrote:
I keep seeing a lot of comments about this mystical 1-2x flippable TC. Have I missed something other than just a patent a while back? Seems a few people made assumptions with regards to both how it works as well as whether Canon is actually making it, and now itís talked about as if itís expected and people are planning for it. What did I miss?


You apparently missed me saying "if it appears."



Apr 12, 2024 at 10:57 AM
Sy Sez
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #14 · p.6 #14 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


Rumor's-Rumor's-Rumor's = So much to disagree about= "Much ado about nothing"


Apr 12, 2024 at 11:00 AM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #15 · p.6 #15 · Super telephoto lens rumors?




AmbientMike wrote:
Seriously?

The Z9 is over a pound heavier than the R5. Z9+ 400/4.5 is only about half pound lighter than the R5 + 400/4 DO II.

I don't necessarily mind using older gear but most people on here do. Sure the current tc's look good today, but are they going to in 15 years? How often do you plan on upgrading


Again, why do you compare to the Z9? The Z8 is the comparable body to the R5.

To make the teleconverter point once again, current teleconverters do not have any meaningful room for improvement. The situation was different 15 years ago.



Apr 12, 2024 at 11:05 AM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #16 · p.6 #16 · Super telephoto lens rumors?



alundeb wrote:
Again, why do you compare to the Z9? The Z8 is the comparable body to the R5.

To make the teleconverter point once again, current teleconverters do not have any meaningful room for improvement. The situation was different 15 years ago.


If you get a Z8 it is only the size of the 2lb DSLR'S that were supposedly so big and heavy and bad. That saves a pound but a lot of people would get the Z9.

The current TCs are perfect in your view until something better comes out

I liked my 2005 tc and could probably use 1.4 v2. That is a minority opinion on fm though



Apr 12, 2024 at 11:29 AM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #17 · p.6 #17 · Super telephoto lens rumors?




AmbientMike wrote:
If you get a Z8 it is only the size of the 2lb DSLR'S that were supposedly so big and heavy and bad. That saves a pound but a lot of people would get the Z9.

The current TCs are perfect until something better comes out


You can't use the option to choose a heavier body as an argument that the weight difference between a 2100g lens and a 1245g lens doesn't matter. That doesn't make any sense.



Apr 12, 2024 at 11:42 AM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #18 · p.6 #18 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


It doesn't make a lot if sense to assume nobody is going to buy a Z9, or that there aren't going to be any tc improvements over the next several years

R5 + Rf 600/4: about 8.4 lbs

Z9 + 800/6.3 pf: about 8.1 lbs



Apr 13, 2024 at 09:25 AM
crisdesign
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #19 · p.6 #19 · Super telephoto lens rumors?



Why comparing completely different lenses and bodies?
If your frame of reference is the r5+rf 600 f4 then the nikon alternative is the z8+z600 f4 with 1.4 teleconverter Ė a much better setup indeeed

If your frame of reference is a z8 + z800 f6.3 good luck finding anything similar in canon land. Or do you want to bring the embarrassing rf 800 5.6 to the table?

AmbientMike wrote:
It doesn't make a lot if sense to assume nobody is going to buy a Z9, or that there aren't going to be any tc improvements over the next several years

R5 + Rf 600/4: about 8.4 lbs

Z9 + 800/6.3 pf: about 8.1 lbs




Apr 13, 2024 at 01:01 PM
ilkka_nissila
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #20 · p.6 #20 · Super telephoto lens rumors?


AmbientMike wrote:
It doesn't make a lot if sense to assume nobody is going to buy a Z9, or that there aren't going to be any tc improvements over the next several years

R5 + Rf 600/4: about 8.4 lbs

Z9 + 800/6.3 pf: about 8.1 lbs


Someone buying a Z9 today isn't going to think the weight is an issue, whereas those who prioritise lighter weight will choose the Z8 instead, for basically the same functionality (or another camera such as the Zf which is still lighter). The Z9 is an older camera; most copies of products are sold in the first year of availability. Nikon will probably put out the Z9 II quite soon. I generally prefer the weight to be as close to my chest as possible so the camera weight is not as much a problem as the lens weight especially with longer focal lengths of older design.

Since a built-in TC is designed specifically for the lens which it is part of, it is unlikely they can do much better unless there is a radical development in optical technology. I would not expect Nikon to make a second generation of Z TCs in 15-20 years, just looking at their past history.



Apr 13, 2024 at 01:14 PM
1       2       3              5              7       8       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5              7       8       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.