I predict that a 500 f/5.6 or 600 f/5.6 will come out in next few years

smythie wrote in post #18003944
Ok, my understanding of your post can be summarised as "Canon should/would not produce this type of lens because it might hurt sales of their current big whites"? Is that correct?

No, it's not what I meant.

What I meant was more along the lines of,

"If Canon does produce a 500 or 600mm f5.6, it has to be crippled so that it is not a whole lot better than the third party competition, because if it is a whole lot lot better, then they may lose some sales of the $10,000 lenses, which they must protect."

.

Sorry for the misunderstanding and thanks for the clarification.

To your intended point, I still disagree. Such a lens in this category would not need to be crippled. It need only the level of performance and build quality of the 100-400 mk2.

The slower max aperture would provide a sufficient differentiation factor to the current big whites and create a pathway for Canon to entice customers up their ladder of super telephoto lenses.

There is a much smaller differentiation between the 500/4 and 600/4 at the moment. I've seen many arguments on here that the 500 is a much more flexible lens (lower weight and cost and ability to get to 700mm with a 1.4x TC), yet the 600 is still the go to option if you are going to be needing 600mm+ a lot of the time. There is a similar comparison that could be made between the 600/4 and 800/5.6 or even the 500/4 and 800/5.6 . Yet Canon continues to offer all 3 of these to the market and none of them are crippled in any fashion.

smythie wrote in post #18003961
There is a much smaller differentiation between the 500/4 and 600/4 at the moment. I've seen many arguments on here that the 500 is a much more flexible lens (lower weight and cost and ability to get to 700mm with a 1.4x TC), yet the 600 is still the go to option if you are going to be needing 600mm+ a lot of the time. There is a similar comparison that could be made between the 600/4 and 800/5.6 or even the 500/4 and 800/5.6 . Yet Canon continues to offer all 3 of these to the market and none of them are crippled in any fashion.

But crippling is done with items that are at vastly different price points. It wouldn't make any sense at all for the 500, 600, or 800 to be crippled to protect one another because they are all right around the same general price point, $10,000 - $13,000.

The last thing Canon needs is to lose a 600mm f4 sale to someone who figures that a 600mm f5.6 would be just as good. The way it is now, that person is pretty much forced to buy a $12,000 600mm f4, so Canon gets $12,000. There are some people who buy 600mm f4s that would be just as happy with a 600mm f5.6. But they go ahead and buy the f4 because there is no f5.6 with top-notch build quality and image quality. Canon wins.

We (those who are in the market for $10,0000+ lenses) benefit from this because sales volumes remain kinda high, so Canon can continue to provide these lenses at reasonable rates. I am afraid that if they offered an L series 600mm f5.6 or 500mm f5.6 at just $4000 or $5000, that a lot of people would buy these lenses and that some of those sales would pirate sales from the $10,000+ f4 models. With fewer f4 lenses selling, then at some point the price on the f4 lenses would probably rise significantly, which would leave someone like me in quite a bit of a quandary.

Sometime within the next few years, I plan on buying a new 600mm f4. If it remains at $10,000 to $12,000 I will be able to do this. If it rises to $14,000 or $15,000 that will be impossible, and that would put such a lens forever out of reach for me. A $4,000 600mm f5.6 could very well end up hurting me pretty deeply.

We need the volume of $10,000+ lens sales to remain as high as possible, so that the prices remain in the $10,000 to $13,000 range and don't creep any higher.

.

smythie wrote in post #18003961
Sorry for the misunderstanding and thanks for the clarification.

To your intended point, I still disagree. Such a lens in this category would not need to be crippled. It need only the level of performance and build quality of the 100-400 mk2.

The slower max aperture would provide a sufficient differentiation factor to the current big whites and create a pathway for Canon to entice customers up their ladder of super telephoto lenses.

There is a much smaller differentiation between the 500/4 and 600/4 at the moment. I've seen many arguments on here that the 500 is a much more flexible lens (lower weight and cost and ability to get to 700mm with a 1.4x TC), yet the 600 is still the go to option if you are going to be needing 600mm+ a lot of the time. There is a similar comparison that could be made between the 600/4 and 800/5.6 or even the 500/4 and 800/5.6 . Yet Canon continues to offer all 3 of these to the market and none of them are crippled in any fashion.

What he said. And I would throw in that a lot more birders are getting excited about the new 400 DO VerII with a 1.4x T/C or even a 2x t/c. That might be the combinations that would be hurt by a 500 f/5.6 or 600 f/5.6

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18003997
The last thing Canon needs is to lose a 600mm f4 sale to someone who figures that a 600mm f5.6 would be just as good. The way it is now, that person is pretty much forced to buy a $12,000 600mm f4, so Canon gets $12,000. There are some people who buy 600mm f4s that would be just as happy with a 600mm f5.6. But they go ahead and buy the f4 because there is no f5.6 with top-notch build quality and image quality. Canon wins.

We (those who are in the market for $10,0000+ lenses) benefit from this because sales volumes remain kinda high, so Canon can continue to provide these lenses at reasonable rates. I am afraid that if they offered an L series 600mm f5.6 or 500mm f5.6 at just $4000 or $5000, that a lot of people would buy these lenses and that some of those sales would pirate sales from the $10,000+ f4 models. With fewer f4 lenses selling, then at some point the price on the f4 lenses would probably rise significantly, which would leave someone like me in quite a bit of a quandary.

Sometime within the next few years, I plan on buying a new 600mm f4. If it remains at $10,000 to $12,000 I will be able to do this. If it rises to $14,000 or $15,000 that will be impossible, and that would put such a lens forever out of reach for me. A $4,000 600mm f5.6 could very well end up hurting me pretty deeply.

.

I think your logic may be off. What we saw with the 200-400 f/4 was the price went DOWN when the 100-400 ver2 was released. You can't easily raise the price on features rarely valued. I worked in R&D and marketing way to long to not understand that one. Unless Canon adds value features to the 600 f/4, they really will have trouble increasing cost other than the basic across the board price increases we see time to time.

i don't really see it happening...how much are you predicting this thing will cost? i feel like that's what the killer is going to be...the only thing i could see canon doing is coming up with a longer than 400mm zoom to match the ones already out...but that'd be cheap and probably f6.3 on the long end

DreDaze wrote in post #18004608
i don't really see it happening...how much are you predicting this thing will cost? i feel like that's what the killer is going to be...the only thing i could see canon doing is coming up with a longer than 400mm zoom to match the ones already out...but that'd be cheap and probably f6.3 on the long end

The Canon 400 f/4 DO ver 2 is $5600 and the 300 f/2.6 is about the same at $6100. You jump to $9000 for the 500 f/4 ver2.

In poor caparison cost wise, the 1-4 is $2100. and a slow f/5.6 at long end.

those are big jumps for a consumer. Seems to have price gaps at $4000, but as this is more quality than the 104, I'd think they would target the $5000 to $6000 price point for this slower lens.

BTW, it's not about selling price, it's about profit. If the $5000 price for the 500 f/5.6 makes as much profit as the 500 f/4 and brings a larger audience then ... well you can do that math.

but it is about selling price as well...priced the same as the 300f2.8 would probably lose a few people who would look at getting the 300 f2.8 and a 2X for more flexibility over the 500/600f5.6...also i do think used lenses are to be considered...a version I 500f4IS would take away buyers at a $5-6K price

One of the big advantage of the current long super-primes is focus speed. The difference in focus speed and tracking between an f2.8 and an f4 lens can be quite dramatic in low light which is why sports shooters consider them an essential part of their kit.

If you mostly shoot static stuff in good light, then the idea of a 500 and 600 f5.6 lens weighing and costing much less than the current models would be very appealing.

JohnStewart wrote in post #18009987
One of the big advantage of the current long super-primes is focus speed. The difference in focus speed and tracking between an f2.8 and an f4 lens can be quite dramatic in low light which is why sports shooters consider them an essential part of their kit.

If you mostly shoot static stuff in good light, then the idea of a 500 and 600 f5.6 lens weighing and costing much less than the current models would be very appealing.

That's a good point. Bigger diameter = more light = faster lock on focus = faster focusing makes sense.

I just saw this post by Art Morris of images by Jim Robellard.

http://www.birdsasart-blog.com …or-under-1000-it-cant-be/

While not a prime 500 or 600 f/5.6, they show the potential of higher ISO with the new 1DxMkII and lighter hand holding reach. I'm still convinced canon will be coming out with a lighter weight, higher f/stop super-telephoto.

Hows about this,
http://www.canonrumors​.com …non-ef-28-560mm-f2-8-5-6/
May have been mentioned already but I can't find any posts about it.

crofter wrote in post #18019798
Hows about this,
http://www.canonrumors​.com …non-ef-28-560mm-f2-8-5-6/
May have been mentioned already but I can't find any posts about it.

Man right there is a good reason why this thread is in rumors section. Pure fantasy IMHO.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18019875
Man right there is a good reason why this thread is in rumors section. Pure fantasy IMHO.

Ha, you could be right,One lens to rule them all. lol

Canon already have this tiering in place at 400mm - 400/5.6L, 400/4L DO, 400/2.8L
I reckon they could easily do a 500/5.6 and not cannibalise sales of the 500/4.