Hey Guys, It looks like the 1D Mark III will be replaced between June and next February, along with a new 100-400, a new 400 5.6, and new 400 2.8, 500/4 and 600/4 lenses.
Any Predictions??
Hey Guys, It looks like the 1D Mark III will be replaced between June and next February, along with a new 100-400, a new 400 5.6, and new 400 2.8, 500/4 and 600/4 lenses.
Any Predictions??
Looks like? I would love a new 400 5.6, but where does this "looks like" information come from.
Thanks
Joel
Cool!
I'm very anxious to see the new superteles. Canon has awestruck us lately with the 200 f/2 and 800 f/5.6. I'm very excited for the 100-400 II, and would love to see a 400 5.6 IS.
I'm waiting...
IS would be WAY cool on a 400 f/5.6.
100-400 II, I'm not sure what they could add except maybe slightly improve the optics and maybe improve the stabilization, or if they could add weather sealing somehow, that'd be nifty.
Not that canonrumors.com is authoritative (can any rumors site be authoritative?), but I've heard little to no speculation on new lenses like what you list. The 1D is showing some rumors of being replaced, but only time will tell.
My guesses? The 400/2.8, 500/4, and 600/4 won't be changing any time soon. The 400/5.6 might get IS, at a hefty price, but I don't have a strong guess either way.
We're a Canon/Profoto family: five cameras, sixteen lenses, fifteen Profoto lights, too many modifiers.
Originally Posted by Colin
I just saw an article somewhere today that mentioned a 200-400mm f/2.8 LIS zoom, which was supposedly included in a factory press release and then removed. This was around 2001-2002. I want to say I remember it being possibly an f/2.8, but maybe it was an f/4. Either way. I want it! By now, though, I would guess it isn't going to happen.
As far as improving the current 100-400, I would think if they're going to have a new version, they'd dump the odd push-pull zoom mechanism and go with one like the 70-200series. Also, it would be great to see a constant f-number, like f/4, across the entire zoom range. I think they would obviously put in the latest version of IS, which is around 4 stops. If this could be had for around $2000 or less, I'd have to hock something for it.
At f/2.8, that would be quite a lens. (Even at f/4 it would be).
I'd get one for that price, but I don't think a 400mm f/4 lens is going to be under $2000, zoom or otherwise, IS or not. Right now, no canon lens near that aperture is under $4000.
I'd go for not having the push pull mechanism, though it'd be interesting to see what a twist ring zoom would look like with a 400 mm long end. the 400 f/5.6 is a long lens, but the back half is pretty much empty. the 100-400 is pretty long at 400mm as well. Moving that much glass, how much leverage would you get with a twist?
Then again, if you could essentially get the same or similar dimensions as a 70-200 with a 2x extender, that wouldn't be too bad.
Constant aperture would be nice, though f/4 might be difficult if we're keeping it the compact/affordable telephoto. 400mm/4 means a 100mm aperture. I'm guessing that'd put the front element at 110-120mm in diameter.
But it'd be cool. If I could get the image quality of the 400 f/5.6, the ergonomics of the 70-200 f/2.8, the zoom of 100-400 range, image stabilization, and f/4 speed, as well as good autofocus and maybe even weather sealing,in a package that wasn't too bulky for less than $3k, I'd sell my 400 f/5.6 and 100-400 to trade in for the single lens. Sign me up!
Just to give everyone an idea of the size, weightand cost of an already in production 200-400 f/4:
Nikon 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED, AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor:
Length 14.1"
Weight 7.2 lb
Price: $5,899.95
From what I see, comparable Nikkor lenses run slightly more than Canon's L glass but like Jon said:
A lens like this would be a terrible replacement for the 100-400. I saw a guy shooting with a Nikon 200-400 f/4 handheld a couple of weeks ago...it did NOT look pleasant...one of the great things about the 100-400 is the relatively compact size.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote