just when you think you've got all the canon "L"s

[sGu]

what a collection!!!

http://images1.fotopic.net/?iid=y3mxar&outx=600&noresize=1&nostamp=1
photo belongs to Jeff on FM board

btw, what's the lens next to 70-200mm f2.8? slightly bigger and taller but it was definitely not 100-400mm, but which one is that? Also were there 2 24-70mm f2.8 in the pic? anyone wanna volunteer writing down lens details in order?

[timmyquest]

i tink they are both 70-200's but i think the bigger one is f/2.8 and the smaller an f/4

[roanjohn]

Hey!!! Why did you post my pic without my permission!!!

:twisted:

Ro1

[sGu]

i tink they are both 70-200's but i think the bigger one is f/2.8 and the smaller an f/4

you are right, smaller one is f4 version of 70-200mm, tallest one is 400mm f2.8 L IS and second tallest one is 300mm f2.8 L IS, those primes are biiiiig

[Lamplight]

Man, I knew the primes were large but that really gives a good idea of how truly huge they are! And those aren't even the 500 or 600?! :shock:

[mttmrphy]

Anyone care to guess the dollar ammount sitting on the table?

[CyberDyneSystems]

Man, I knew the primes were large but that really gives a good idea of how truly huge they are! And those aren't even the 500 or 600?! :shock:

The 400mm f/2.8 pictured above is actually larger than the 500mm f/4 due to it's larger aperture.. it is almost the same size as the 600mm f/4.. and perhaps heavier? (can't remeber) but virtually identical when being lugged around!

[sGu]

when carrying so many heavy gear around, who needs gym? :P

[Bruce Hamilton]

Anyone care to guess the dollar ammount sitting on the table?

Somewhere between $15-20K... :shock:

[Lamplight]

The 400mm f/2.8 pictured above is actually larger than the 500mm f/4 due to it's larger aperture.. it is almost the same size as the 600mm f/4.. and perhaps heavier? (can't remeber) but virtually identical when being lugged around!

There I go again, learning yet another thing because of the folks on this forum. :D

[Steveo31]

I'm crying.