The prototype 400/4 non-DO may not be functional or have usable image quality. I have not seen any sample images. As metnioned previously I doubt that it would be any less expensive than the 300/2.8 IS and probably would be a bit more. The market is too small IMO.
Pinetree wrote:
By the way. The EF400 F4L IS USM is not a all new lens. Canon has produced a protype of it at the same time as the DO -version was released. There is also pictures of it at this address for those who are interested: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0009/00090604canon_400do.asp
The good thing about the EF400 F4L IS USM even though it weighs 1 kg more than the DO -version is that itīs price would be about 2.000 $ less, making it a possible investment for many who otherwise would never have the money to buy a F4 supertelephoto lens.
Not quite. We could think of a 400/4 as a 300/2.8 with a built in 1.4x (or something close to it). As a result there is little chance the price would be half that of the 300/2.8. This is at least a 4000$, 3kgs chunk of glass, if it is not more like 4500$ (newly released lenses are seldom cheap). Not so many people would afford it and those who could would consider the 300/2.8 and a set of extenders closely.
Pinetree wrote:
It would also be about time at last to release the EF400 F4L IS USM.
I donīt think it would kill of the DO-version as itīs purpose is a totally other (less weight and so forth).
By the way. The EF400 F4L IS USM is not a all new lens. Canon has produced a protype of it at the same time as the DO -version was released. There is also pictures of it at this address for those who are interested: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0009/00090604canon_400do.asp
The good thing about the EF400 F4L IS USM even though it weighs 1 kg more than the DO -version is that itīs price would be about 2.000 $ less, making it a possible investment for many who otherwise would never have the money to buy a F4 supertelephoto lens....Show more →
The ef 400 f4 L was probably made only for demonstration purposes - to show how much smaller DO lens can be compared to classic reffractive lenses.
MX5NC wrote:
So what's this about Canon buying Pentax to give them MF and get the number one slot back off Nikon?
So will we get an EOS 645d or EOS 67d !!
It wouldn't be called the EOS system if it's medium format. There would be a new name and brand. EOS system is all about the current 35mm system of bodies/lenses.
"The last shoot had a Canon rep come by with the new 22MP digi demo body. It is half the size of the 1Ds Mark II. They said they are hustling to make lenses that will work with what this body can resolve. They may even make a new mount again for an entirely new lens design. It won't be out before Phot Show East."
"Phot Show East" refers to the PhotoPlus Expo 2007, slated to be held at the Jacob Javits Convention Center in Manhattan on October 1820, 2007. "The TomKat cover" refers to the recent, um, Leibovitz "homage" to Linda McCartney on the cover of Vanity Fair."
Pinetree wrote:
It would also be about time at last to release the EF400 F4L IS USM.
I donīt think it would kill of the DO-version as itīs purpose is a totally other (less weight and so forth).
By the way. The EF400 F4L IS USM is not a all new lens. Canon has produced a protype of it at the same time as the DO -version was released. There is also pictures of it at this address for those who are interested: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0009/00090604canon_400do.asp
The good thing about the EF400 F4L IS USM even though it weighs 1 kg more than the DO -version is that itīs price would be about 2.000 $ less, making it a possible investment for many who otherwise would never have the money to buy a F4 supertelephoto lens....Show more →
Don't believe that prototoype. It was desiged as a worst case scenario to make the DO lens look as good as possible. A 400 f/4L would weigh less than 3kg quite easily - in fact closer to 2.5kg at worst. Yes the length would be a round 300mm, it must be longer than 400 f/5.6 but shorter than 400 f/2.8 to maintain the same fov, but overall it should be about the same price as a 300 f/2.8L IS IMO.
"The last shoot had a Canon rep come by with the new 22MP digi demo body. It is half the size of the 1Ds Mark II. They said they are hustling to make lenses that will work with what this body can resolve. They may even make a new mount again for an entirely new lens design. It won't be out before Phot Show East."
[...]
"A body half the size of the 1Ds Mk II" ... Hmmm, could it be that Canon is testing the prototype 22 mpixel sensor in a 5D? I don't see why not, now I think about it.
dinoadventures wrote:
Half the size? too bad it's not half the price...
Remember that you always need a "whole" so if it's only half the size, you need to double the price to make up for it. Now you have a "Whole" lot of money going to Canon.
Wow, Monito,
First, your anger issues are a little scarry.
Second, No rumors here, The guy said wait a few weeks for an announcement from Canon USA. He said the EF-S lenses are not selling, get over it already.
Go out and make some photo's.
jc
Juan55 wrote:
"The last shoot had a Canon rep come by with the new 22MP digi demo body. It is half the size of the 1Ds Mark II. They said they are hustling to make lenses that will work with what this body can resolve. They may even make a new mount again for an entirely new lens design. It won't be out before Phot Show East."
A 22mp FF sensor would be about the same pixel density as the 20D and 30D. Why would the new sensor require lenses with better resolution?
I did not read Monito's response as being angry. I believe he just thinks your information is incorrect. I think he was just trying to share his information with you - IMO.
Actually I read your response as trying to "pick a fight" with Monito - I could be wrong but reading it that is how it made me feel.
Jim,
I read it through again and it still sounds like a rant to me... bogus, uninformed, doesn't belong in this thread, laughable, fools, EF-S may outlive even EF... all that sounds rational to you
Picking a fight, I'm not, I'm just telling him to chill out.
jc
RJJR wrote:
[A 22mp FF sensor would be about the same pixel density as the 20D and 30D. Why would the new sensor require lenses with better resolution?
Excactly
Let alone a new mount
Still some super resolution L series (zooms with the resolution of the 135 F2L etc.) could be a great merketing oportunity for the well heeled who would 'need them'...
Edited by Geoff Costello on Jan 29, 2007 at 09:17 AM GMT
