Canon EF 200-600 F/4.5-5.6 IS

New patent from Canon, a little late to the party but if it does come out the IQ should be killer (price too).

http://www.canonrumors​.com …ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/

Just guessing here, but I have a hard time with this lens. Price it over $2,000 and people will continue to buy Tamron/Sigma flavors. Price it much below $2,000 and it kills sales of the 100-400II.

I could see it at 3500+, to keep 100-400II safe.

No point in it at that price. Tammy and Sigma are boatloads cheaper. They wouldn't sell.

Bassat wrote in post #17810238
Just guessing here, but I have a hard time with this lens. Price it over $2,000 and people will continue to buy Tamron/Sigma flavors. Price it much below $2,000 and it kills sales of the 100-400II.

nikon has a 200-500?

priced less than the 80-400. I dont know how it is optically, but the 200-500 is probably made in china, where the premium lens made in japan.

I have no idea if nikon is killing itself, however it has done similar to what you mention.

Bassat wrote in post #17810366
No point in it at that price. Tammy and Sigma are boatloads cheaper. They wouldn't sell.

Unfortunately I am sure they would sell some because there are some people dumb enough to pay it just because it has canon's name on it. Instead of buying a lens that would be a 1/3rd the price and probably perform just as good or the canon may have a 5-10% improvement in IQ that would only matter to a pixel peeper. But some people are blinded by a name

05Xrunner wrote in post #17810643
Unfortunately I am sure they would sell some because there are some people dumb enough to pay it just because it has canon's name on it. Instead of buying a lens that would be a 1/3rd the price and probably perform just as good or the canon may have a 5-10% improvement in IQ that would only matter to a pixel peeper. But some people are blinded by a name

Wow. I prefer to think of those types of folks as individuals who find the last 5% of performance worth paying for.

I dont..I look at them as brand fanboys who will pay whatever the brand prices it for. For very little return.

peteg1 wrote in post #17810148
New patent from Canon, a little late to the party but if it does come out the IQ should be killer (price too).

http://www.canonrumors​.com …ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6-is/

It's not late if it's 600mm f/5.6!
The Tamron and SIGMA are not in that league at all. Compare instead to SIGMA 120-300mm f/2.8, that's the amount of weight of glass this thing will pack.

That will put this lens in a whole new category as yet unseen. (well as mentioned it will weigh in about as much as the SIGMA 120-300mm, but being Canon will cost a bit more But we KNOW it can be done for $3k

IMHO IF canon prices it like that, $3k, $3,200.00 ish, it will fill a new niche and may be a seller.

Sadly from Canon I expect it would cost more like $4k +

05Xrunner wrote in post #17810710
I dont..I look at them as brand fanboys who will pay whatever the brand prices it for. For very little return.

Drop the name calling on the forum please, thanks.

Referencing my last post, I do not think it is possible for SIGMA or Tamron to field a lens with the specs of this one for much under $3K either. Again, SIGMA has already done so and it sells for abou7t $3K, in a different league from the current 600mm zooms on the market.

f/5.6 would offer a lot of AF advantages over a 6.3 counter part. That and the better consistency with canon vs third party AF would make this lens very attractive. Honestly though, canon wouldn't care if this lens cannibalized sales of the 100-400 ii, they want sales regardless of which lens it was. If it took a decent amount of sales back from tamron/sigma from their 150-600s then it would be worth the small cannibalization of the 100-400 ii. That being said, the 70-300: still finds a market despite the 100-400l ii, and I'm sure the 100-400L would still find a market despite the existance of a 200-600.

Wow! 600/5.6! Yes please. Oh, but wait it's going to cost a bunch...

Consider that the 200-400 is constant f/4 to 400mm then f/5.6 from 400 to 560mm and the focal length and max aperture specs of this rumoured lens aren't all that far behind (if at all). How much was the 200-400 again? Last I looked it was in the order of 4 times the cost of the 100-400.

So for me it would be the variable max aperture between 200 and 400mm and the f/4.5 max aperture which would reduce the premium of this lens on the spec sheet. If they were to price it near the 100-400 there would have to be other less premium aspects to it like maybe an extending barrel, no fluorite and less of the other exotic materials and coatings.

Charlie wrote in post #17810592
nikon has a 200-500?

priced less than the 80-400. I dont know how it is optically, but the 200-500 is probably made in china, where the premium lens made in japan.

I have no idea if nikon is killing itself, however it has done similar to what you mention.

Better to be the one disrupting yourself than leave an opening for others to disrupt you.

Maybe this will be just "cheap" non L telezoom, having reasonable good IQ and so on basic stuff.. just not all the "L" quality. Canon's alternative for Sigma/Tamron 150-600 lineup (and nikkor 200-500).

OR, another option is very expensive full L grade lens costing > $4000. Big brother for 100-400L II

Anyway it would be pleasure to see some cheap alternatives for long L telephoto zooms, because they only have those 70-300mm models there.

840mm at f/8... sounds nice to me. I would hope it would be stellar with a 1.4X III.

I agree with one of the price guesses..... $4k, give or take a few hundred.

I'd say there would be a a market for it vs the 3rd party lenses even if it is a fair bit more price wise. For all we know it could be optically Superior, its also faster at 5.6 vs 6.2 of the competition. And lastly and most important to me, the third party lenses never focus as good as there native mount counterparts, and there probably won't be an exception here.