jdben622 wrote:
Come on people...enough with the high-price guessing game.
"Even at $9000, it will be worth it".
Sheesh...you think Canon reps don't read this board??
FOR THE RECORD: if this lens is more than $4K, I'm selling all of my gear and moving to Nikon.
hah, well we raised up a storm over the 70-300 L pricing, tore canon to shreds in every forum, this way and that and after the reps read all of that....
they bumped the price UP $100 AND removed the tripod collar from the box!!!!
so maybe it's time to try reverse psychology hah, i predict $12,000+
ultimate image quality and one stop advantage of EF 400 f/2.8L IS II for $11,000 USD
or convenience of a telezoom with built in extender in the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM EXTENDER 1.4x for (guessing) $9,000 USD
EB-1 wrote:
The internal TC will probably add at least $500, yet that is worth it.
EBH
Yes, and a tack on premium on the initial price, probably. I have always wished Canon would come out with this ever since the Nikon lens was introduced, and I believe it will be very popular for some who can benefit from this focal length range in one lens.
ultimate image quality and one stop advantage of EF 400 f/2.8L IS II for $11,000 USD
or convenience of a telezoom with built in extender in the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM EXTENDER 1.4x for (guessing) $9,000 USD
There will be certainly a weight difference between the 100-400 and the 200-400. The 100-400 is a handheld option, and I don't see the 200-400 as a lens that will facilitate handheld shooting in general, although some will no doubt be able to use it this way. If I do get one, it will probably only see monopod or tripod use.
Canon EF 400 f/2.8L IS II lens weights 8.49 lbs (3.85kg)
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II lens weights 7.4 lb (3.4 kg)
I expect the Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM EXTENDER 1.4x to weight in very close to the Nikon because of the added weight of the built in extender canceling the lighter materials used in the barrel.
As someone who spends most of my time shooting motorsports I am very, very interested in this lens. Hopefully the execution of the design lives up to its potential.
jdben622 wrote:
Yes, it's nice to see the innovation. I'm not sure it counters the laws of physics, but an extender design that DIDN'T lose a stop of light would be remarkable.
I'm not sure how that would be possible, unfortunately. An extender works by magnifying the image-forming light that has emerged from the exit pupil. Unless everything in front of the extender admits more light to compensate, the extender necessarily loses light in proportion to the square of the magnification.
Another way to think about it is to visualize a slide projector illuminating a blank wall. The light bulb in the projector is of a fixed intensity. If you move the projector or adjust the beam so that the projected image is twice the area as before, you have taken the same total amount of light and spread it over a region twice as large, so the result is going to be half as bright--one stop light loss for a magnification factor of Sqrt[2] = 1.414.
So, once the light has emerged from the exit pupil, that's that...you can't get more magnification without losing more light. To compensate for the losses, the lens would have to be designed to admit more light from the start.
Awesome, awesome, awesome. As a photog who lives in Africa, this should be just perfect for safari photography. You really need versatility in focal length, as the range of subject matter and distance varies dramatically (from insects and birds to elephants!), and you often can't move your position closer or further away. The ability to add the converter immediately without removing a lens and introducing dust to the camera literally saves the cost of an extra camera body and lens. I'm gonna have to afford one somehow!
It will be big, so not much of a handheld/walking lens, but perfect for shooting from a vehicle on a beanbag. Can't wait.
wickerprints wrote:
I'm not sure how that would be possible, unfortunately. An extender works by magnifying the image-forming light that has emerged from the exit pupil. Unless everything in front of the extender admits more light to compensate, the extender necessarily loses light in proportion to the square of the magnification.
Another way to think about it is to visualize a slide projector illuminating a blank wall. The light bulb in the projector is of a fixed intensity. If you move the projector or adjust the beam so that the projected image is twice the area as before, you have taken the same total amount of light and spread it over a region twice as large, so the result is going to be half as bright--one stop light loss for a magnification factor of Sqrt[2] = 1.414.
So, once the light has emerged from the exit pupil, that's that...you can't get more magnification without losing more light. To compensate for the losses, the lens would have to be designed to admit more light from the start....Show more →
Damn...blindsided by science again!!
Well, if a Peltier cooler can passively draw in heat, maybe there is some optical material that can draw in light.
