erb_duchenne Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 I see there aren't any zooms in the EF range which goes beyond 400mm. Is there a fundamental problem with optics which limit this? Or is it a price barrier? Also, the EOS range of 'cheaper' optics runs roughly from 28mm to 300mm. Any idea why Canon does not make cheaper alternatives for 400mm, 500mm and 600mm? Do we HAVE TO turn to third party mirror lensmakers like Tamron and Sigma for these focal lengths? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philippe Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 Look at the Sigma 300-800mm zoom. It's a monster and the price is certainly also nomore in the range of 'cheaper' lenses. At the long end, those zooms get heavy, big and expensive. In addition, zooms are always a compromise for quality. Ok, there are top-quality optical zoom construction (e.g. the 70-200 zooms), but the market for lenses that cost thousands of dollars and go beyond 400mm is probably not that big that it becomes worth it for Canon to construct them. If it would sell enough, Canon would probably produce it sooner or later. At the short end, the EF 20-35/3.5-4.5 is quite reasonably priced and the 24-85 also goes down to 24mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimvanson Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 Canon used to make the 10 pound, 20 inch long by 6 inch in diameter <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/fdzooms/150600.htm">FD 150-600 f5.6L</a>.<p>Nikon, not to be outdone, still makes the 35 pound (or so) 30 plus inch long <a href="http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/zoomsMF/12001700mm.htm">1200-1700mm f/5.6~8.0s P ED IF</a>...along with slightly smaller brethren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_n Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 Could a prototype 400-600 be at work here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_n Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 <a href "http://flood.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2003/ad_picnumb.dsml?catdescrip2=abb&posdescrip2=hc&picnumb=ss04">D'Oh!</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_n Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 <a href=http://flood.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2003/ad_picnumb.dsml?catdescrip2=abb&posdescrip2=hc&picnumb=ss04>TryAgain</a></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_n Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 <A HREF="http://flood.nhm.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wildwin/2003/ad_picnumb.dsml?catdescrip2=abb&posdescrip2=hc&picnumb=ss04">Again</A> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_n Posted October 20, 2003 Share Posted October 20, 2003 Hmm, I wonder if it didn't like my small case tags, or maybe I was using weird quotes. <P> Oh well, I actually got some use out of the <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005Jmx">FAQ</A> <P> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erb_duchenne Posted October 21, 2003 Author Share Posted October 21, 2003 "Look at the Sigma 300-800mm zoom. It's a monster and the price is certainly also nomore in the range of 'cheaper' lenses." The Sigma 300-800mm certainly is quite a lens. But it IS cheap, compared to Canon's selection of similar focal lengths. Looks at the EF 600mm f/4L, or perhaps 400mm f/2.8L with 1.4x and 2x. Now, for these focal lengths, these are pricey! I believe Sigma also has a 135-300mm f/2.8. With a 2x it's a 270-600mm! Now that's really good range. Zoom range! This lens is also said to be tack sharp by reviewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now