Re: 300mm/f2.8 versus 400mm/f2.8 - why the usually huge price difference?
markpariente wrote:
RT's answer is the right way to think about this - the cost scales with the size of the lens elements, and for super telephoto lenses the front element size dominates this calculation.
Ask yourself a similar question, why is there such a price difference between a 200mm f2.8 (ie. the 70-200 f2.8) and a 300mm f2.8 ? After all 200mm vs. 300mm is only slightly more difference in field of view compared to 300mm vs. 400mm. The answer again is the size of the front lens element needed for 300mm f2.8 is much larger than the 200mm f2.8.
This is also the reason why at 600mm we have f4 instead of f2.8. The 600mm f4 ends up being quite a similar front lens element size to 400mm f2.8 (hence the cost is in the same ballpark). If there ever was a 600mm f2.8 it would have to be massive (aperture would be 214mm so the front element would be more than twice larger than the 400mm f2.8).
The price and weight considerations aside, I also wonder if at what point the DOF would be too narrow to be usable for most subjects.
Jul 04, 2025 at 04:14 AM
Previous versions of umut_h_toprak's message #16844981 « 300mm/f2.8 versus 400mm/f2.8 - why the usually huge price difference? »
