Scrumhalf Cream of the Crop  More info | Oct 04, 2016 23:22 | #1 At least according to CanonRumors.com Sam
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Orogeny Goldmember  More info | Oct 05, 2016 07:48 | #2 I'm surprised that this isn't getting more attention. I posted about this in the lens rumor section yesterday and no one has commented. I probably still can't afford one, but I love to dream! There's someone in my head, but it's not me! - Roger Waters
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BigAl007 Cream of the Crop  8,106 posts Gallery: 556 photos Best ofs: 1 Likes: 1675 Joined Dec 2010 Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK. More info | Oct 05, 2016 08:41 | #3 So what advantage does a DO lens of the same maximum aperture provide? Also I noticed that they couldn't even get the image correct. One thing I do know is that the DO lenses are NOT L series, and so don't get a red ring, IIRC they have a green one.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
FarmerTed1971 fondling the 5D4  More info | Weight and size. Getting better at this - Fuji X-t5 & X-t3 - 16 1.4 - 35/50/90 f2 - 50-140 - flickr
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 05, 2016 08:45 | #5 FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18148899  Weight and size. It's a DO. It's going to be small and light, relatively speaking. If it is the same weight as my 500 II, then I'm looking at it pretty hard. The 500 II is perfectly handholdable for me. Sam
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 05, 2016 15:26 | #6 I wouldn't consider replacing the 500 with one for the weight alone, but if the IQ is better, we'll have to wait & see. Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
buddy4344 OM System Ambassador  More info | Oct 05, 2016 15:49 | #7 Scrumhalf wrote in post #18148903 It's a DO. It's going to be small and light, relatively speaking. If it is the same weight as my 500 II, then I'm looking at it pretty hard. The 500 II is perfectly handholdable for me. Weight and size are key, but they also actually are compounding in that if it is shorter but even the same weight, it would be easier to handhold. I had the old 400 DO and loved how comfortable that was to handhold and shoot. The only reason I sold it was that the newer 100-400mm verII was just as sharp and, considering we can shoot hight ISO's these days, it was basically a redundant lens to carry along. Buddy4344
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 05, 2016 15:53 | #8 Agreed with Buddy. The DO will be a better form factor. If it is the same weight as the 500 II (which can be handheld all day), and IQ isn't compromised, I'll take the extra 100mm at F4 any day! Assuming I can pay for the damn thing, of course! Sam
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Assuming I can pay for the damn thing, of course! Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
FuturamaJSP Goldmember  2,227 posts Likes: 82 Joined Oct 2009 More info | Oct 06, 2016 04:32 | #10 a few years ago there were a rumor about a EF 200 f2.0 DO IS... They asked me how well I understood theoretical physics. I said I had a theoretical degree in physics. They said welcome aboard! - Fallout New Vegas
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 06, 2016 09:30 | #11 Tapeman wrote in post #18149288 Assuming I can pay for the damn thing, of course!  Probably ten grand. We'll have to wait and see. I guess it depends on how much my 500 II will sell for and whether bridging the out-of-pocket difference is something that I want to do. Sam
LOG IN TO REPLY |
John_TX Goldmember 1,471 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2007 Location: Texas More info | Oct 06, 2016 22:38 | #12 A 600 DO IS is badly needed! Canon, please release some information on where this lens is! 5D4 | 5D3 | 16-35 f4 IS | 24-105 f4 IS | 70-200 f4 IS | 100-400 II | Sigma 20 f/1.4 ART | Sigma 35 f/1.4 ART | EF 1.4x III | EF 2x II | 430EX II |
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000)  More info Post edited over 6 years ago by CyberDyneSystems. | Oct 06, 2016 22:47 | #13 If the assumptions and math I did here; GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 06, 2016 22:49 | #14 CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18150446 If the assumptions and math I did here; https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?p=18149017 ...are accurate, we are looking at a 7 pound 600mm f/4. I'll be down for a 7lb 600/4! Sam
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 30, 2016 07:35 | #15 CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18150446 If the assumptions and math I did here; https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?p=18149017 ...are accurate, we are looking at a 7 pound 600mm f/4. I would totally be down for that! But I'd also be down for just being able to pack other lenses with my 600mm. Shooting with that lens is such a chore in comparison.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is NightowlNZ 437 guests, 184 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
