Come on canon, make a production model EF1200mm f/5.6 IS USM L!

How many would like to see a production model EF1200mm f/5.6 IS USM L with reworked optics, and of coursea more resonable price tag. Could be a bit lighter to.


Ihave a Minolta 600mm f/6.3and usealmost exclusively with a 2X extender.I would love to see a new 1200mm L.

Would have to be DO glass to be much lighter, but would still cost as much as a BMW M3 and would be tripod only even with IS. Intriging thought though. How bout it Canon!


JeffersonPoster

To be honest, i dont think its necessary. Even with a new model of the lens, how much cheaper could they make it? Not Much. So i dont think there is a high demand for it. MOst people use the 800 5.6 more often due to IS and eve nthen its a beast and too much length. I see it as obnoxious and too big to be a lens. Its more of a telescope to me. I think canon should work on making more lenses such as maybe a 120-300 2.8 like sigmas. or maybe a new lens like a 70-300 2.8. That would be cool becasue it might be expensive but it is reasonable and do-able for sure.


--Matt

I thought too that 1200mm was not necessary, at least for themost of us. Until I tried my hand at small bird photography! You can almost never have to much focal length!


As for cost, they could make it a lot cheaper. The only reason they charged so much for the 1200mm is because it was made on demand, Sigma makes a 200mm-500mm zoom which is far more complicated to design and make and they can sell it for $29,000. I think iftheyintroduced a production model they could sell it for something around what the Sigma costs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fast Glass

The only reason they charged so much for the 1200mm is because it was made on demand

---

It is made on demand because the flourite crystals take so long to grow. A whole year right?

Photographers should get that "grow your own crystals" kit they had when I was a kid, wait a year, then ship them to canon to refine. Should be a whole lot cheaper, right?

As long as we're dreaming, I'd like an 800mm f/11 IS MF (manual focus) for $2,000.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

As long as we're dreaming, I'd like an 800mm f/11 IS MF (manual focus) for $2,000.

---

And I'd like a 10-500mm 1.8....how about it!? [:P]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LoneSierra

And I'd like a 10-500mm 1.8....how about it!? [img]/emoticons/emotion-4.gif[/img]

---

I'm not interested unless it has IS and costs under $2000.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

As long as we're dreaming, I'd like an 800mm f/11 IS MF (manual focus) for $2,000.

---

As I'm sure you're aware, Daniel, one can buy refracting telescopes with specs not too different from that (sans IS, of course) for far less than $2000. (I just bought a 750mm f/9.4 for $399)


Of course forget hand holding. And they tend not to have enough travel to be useful for stuff that isn't far away.


I agree with you. It would be nice to have a long slow IS lens made to work with my camera.

WHY!


<span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 6pt;"]<span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 6pt;"]


<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 11pt;"]Buy a 800mm and crop the image to 1200mm, less cost, lessweight and better optics.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p><o:p></o:p>