Previous news story    Next news story

Canon announces 200-400mm f/4 telezoom with built-in 1.4x extender

May 14, 2013 at 04:00:00 GMT
Share:
Print view Email

Canon has introduced the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x - a top-end telephoto zoom with a built-in switchable teleconverter, whose development was first announced back in February 2011. Simply flicking a lever at the rear of the barrel converts it to a 280-560mm f/5.6 lens. Designed for professional sports and wildlife photographers, it includes an array of top-end features such as Power Focus for movie shooting, and IS 'mode 3' that only applies stabilisation at the point of exposure, aiding panning. It also offers weathersealed construction, 4-stop image stabilisation, and a minimum focus distance of 2m. It will go on sale on 29th May, at an RRP of £11999.99 / €11800.

Jump to:


Press Release:

Introducing the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x – improved performance and versatility for professional sports and wildlife photographers

London, UK, 14 May 2013 – Canon today adds a new category to its range of high-performance super-telephoto lenses, with the introduction of the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x to Canon’s acclaimed L-series. The EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x features a flexible 200-400mm focal range with a fixed f/4 aperture, 4-stop optical Image Stabilizer and for the first time in a commercially available lens, a built-in 1.4x extender. These features combine to provide an outstandingly versatile lens for professional sports or wildlife photographers. A robust magnesium alloy design, environmental protection and specialised lens coatings also make it ideal for mobile use, combining with the finest quality optics to deliver exceptional results, even in the harshest conditions.

Get closer to the action with superior image quality

The reach of the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x is boosted by its internal 1.4x extender, which is engaged or disengaged at the flick of a lever to provide an extended focal length of 280mm to 560mm – allowing photographers to get even closer to distant action. Ensuring the highest image performance, the optical design includes both fluorite and Ultra-low Dispersion (UD) lens elements, which help minimise chromatic aberration and eliminate colour blurring. Advanced anti-reflection SubWavelength Structure Coating (SWC) and Super Spectra Coating also reduce ghosting and flare. Thanks to the use of the latest optical technologies, image performance is unaffected when the integrated extender is used.

With a constant f/4 aperture the use of high shutter speeds to capture fast-paced action or a low-light scene is possible. A newly designed optical Image Stabilizer, which provides users with a four stop advantage, while IS ‘Mode 3’ applies image stabilisation only at the time of exposure – ensuring that photographers can pan with fast-paced action without IS overcompensating for movement. This feature is ideal for sports photographers, who typically have only a split-second to capture a subject in front of them.

Powerful, flexible focusing

The EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x features Canon’s pioneering ring-type Ultrasonic Motor providing fast, silent autofocusing. For those who prefer to fine-tune focus themselves, full-time manual override allows photographers to manually focus at any moment when using AF. The Power Focus (PF) mode also increases versatility during movie shooting with the EOS-1D C or EOS-1D X, enabling photographers to achieve an accurate pull-focus effect at one of two speeds, simply by twisting the focus recall ring and stopping at a pre-set distance.

High-performance design for professional demands

Designed to answer professional demands for superior image quality and versatile zoom range, the EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x a boasts a premium-quality design befitting Canon’s industry-renowned L-series lenses.

The tough magnesium alloy chassis ensures that, despite the inclusion of the 1.4x extender, the lens is a similar weight to lenses of comparable focal length. Fluorine coatings on the front and rear lens elements also reduce the ability of dirt to cling to the lens surface, while a dust and water-resistant construction allows photographers to shoot in challenging weather conditions. The combination of outstanding optical performance, versatility, weight and tough construction will make it an essential part of any professional sports or wildlife photographer’s kitbag.

EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x key features

  • Built-in 1.4x extender, for extra magnification when you need it
  • Shoot in low light with four-stop Image Stabilizer
  • High image quality using Fluorite lens elements
  • Fast AF with USM technology
  • Robust design for use in the toughest environments 

Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x specifications

Principal specifications
Lens typeZoom lens
Max Format size35mm FF
Focal length200–400 mm
Image stabilisationYes (4 stops claimed)
Lens mountCanon EF
Aperture
Maximum apertureF4.0
Minimum apertureF32.0
Number of diaphragm blades9
Optics
Elements25
Groups20
Special elements / coatingsFluorite and Ultra-Low dispersion glass elements, Sub-Wavelength Structure Coating and Super Spectra Coating
Focus
Minimum focus2.00 m (78.74)
Maximum magnification0.15 x
AutofocusYes
Motor typeRing-type ultrasonic
Full time manualYes
Focus methodInternal
Distance scaleYes
DoF scaleNo
Focus distance limiter3 positions: Full, 2m-6m, 6m-infinity
Physical
Weight3620 g (7.98 lb)
Diameter128 mm (5.04)
Length366 mm (14.41)
MaterialsMagnesium alloy barrel
SealingYes
ColourWhite
Zoom methodRotary (internal)
Power zoomNo
Zoom lockNo
Filter thread52 mm
Filter notesRear drop-in filter holder
Hood suppliedYes
Hood product codeET-120 (WII)
Tripod collarYes
Other
NotesSwitchable built-in 1.4x extender (8 elements / 4 groups) converts lens to 280-560mm f/5.6 lens with 0.21x max magnification

Additional images

Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x

Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x

Add to: Login to add this item to your gear lists.

Comments

Total comments: 290
123
tell the truth
By tell the truth (1 week ago)

I hope this lens is sharp. It really amazes me how many lenses canon makes that really are not as sharp a they should really be at the price point they sell them at. Just because a lens is white or an L is on the lens ,, does not mean it is sharper than Sigma or Tamron or Tokina . At the super HIGH price of 12 GRAND , I really hope it is as good or better than Nikon's 200 400. I use the Nikon often. It is STUNNING GOOD, all the time. The EXTRA HI PRICE of this canon lens really is sad. Sigma makes a 150 to 500, that all of a sudden looks like a more realistic answer at almost 10 GRAND LESS. Post work may make is a winner. And the Panasonic FZ200 really IS an option. WE ALL know canon is GOUGING us on the price of this lens ,, when the BOX it comes in is at 700 Bucks! No wonder the lens is TWELVE GRAND ! The new Nikon 80 400 is WONDERFUL,, and almost 10 GRAND LESS !. So why is canon GOUGING us ? This lens IS HEAVY , EXPENSIVE , and LARGE . Not such a good deal.

0 upvotes
Erran Stewart Photography
By Erran Stewart Photography (3 weeks ago)

Has anyone used this lens? Any first hand experience with it?

0 upvotes
Kirigoi
By Kirigoi (3 weeks ago)

Andy Rouse has had his hands on one for the last 6 months or so. He's written a first impressions review at his site which is very positive: http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/index.php?page_id=174

0 upvotes
Richt2000
By Richt2000 (3 weeks ago)

Nice lens, Price is a joke!

0 upvotes
Teila Day
By Teila Day (3 weeks ago)

One could say that about all the super telephoto lens prices across all brands.
Let's look at the pricing realistically... this new lens costs just under $12k USD. That places the lens between the 600mm and 500mm f/4 lenses.

You get the benefit of a zoom, constant speed aperture, and built in teleconverter that extends your reach 140mm or the "angle of view" (for those who like to be overly technical) of 336mm on a 1.6x sensor.

While I miss the old Canon super telephoto lens prices, it is hard for me to consider the pricing of this lens a "joke" relative to the pricing assigned to Canon's current supertele lineup.

If you designed this lens yourself, at what price would YOU sell the lens?

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

DOES THIS LENS COME WITH A LENS SHADE OR IS THAT 4 GRAND EXTRA?????

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
JATO
By JATO (2 weeks ago)

Yes, it comes wit te ET-120. It mentions it in the specs.

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

I doubt you could take this lens with you traveling with out it being checked in. The 700 dollar MONDO box looks like it needs to be Shipped on a freighter ! It looks like it may be the size of a TRUNK !!! At 700 Bucks it should be GOLD PLATED !!!! The parallel universe is from CanNot !! They have been on Glue and Crack and SAKEEEEEEEE . At 4 Grand more than Nikon ! ! ! ! Now follow this ... Put this 12 GRAND lens on a Low Res body???? .. Why bother with the cannt's 20 mega pixels .. That is why I say,,,, save some MAJOR BUCKS and get the PANASONIC FZ200 instead ! Or go Nikon with 36 Mega Pixels there 200 400 and save a GRAND !! That is a lens and a CAMERA and the 1.4 extender !!And still have money left over !!!!!!!!!! DO DA MATH !

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Petka
By Petka (3 weeks ago)

What is your problem?

People either buy this lens (they usually do not read these posts as they know what they want/need), or they do not (99.99999 %).

2 upvotes
Teila Day
By Teila Day (3 weeks ago)

Short sighted?

1. Many using the lens will charter transportation or provide their own whether it be boat, car or aircraft. Does 5x14 inches and 7LBS really seem *that* large to you? That's only 3" longer than a 70-200 lens +1.7 teleconverter on my old Nikon, which I often used as a walk around.

2. The Nikon 200-400 was never "stellar", especially at the long end. Comparing this new lens to the Nikon 200-400 isn't ideal to me; I'd compare the lens against the 200, 300, 400 and 500 primes at the same apertures. If the difference is hard to discern without pixel peeping, then the price in my eyes (relative to current pricing) is well worth the admission.

3. Every job doesn't benefit from 36mp. There are FAR more things more important to many photographers than saving $1k. I'd MUCH rather use this lens with a 1Dx when a family is *running towards me through the surf*, than Nikon's version on a D4; D800 wouldn't cut it!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
garyknrd
By garyknrd (3 weeks ago)

It's not for me at this point. But, if I start traveling allot again. It might be? And the new Canon lenses are insanely good. Just a joy to use.
If you could pair a good crop sensor body with it??? hint hint Canon. That matched up with this beauty, then Wow...

0 upvotes
pbrad
By pbrad (3 weeks ago)

Seems like an awful lot of judgemental comments about a piece of equipment that nobody has gotten their hands on yet. Yes the price may be a bit of a shocker (it was for me), BUT, if you are a truly a professional sports photographer (or wildlife photographer) and you get thousands for a really good shot for publication, this lens is a no-brainer if it will help you get "the shot". The inclusion of the built-in teleconverter is a great addition for those situations where extra reach will give you "the shot" and you can do it in one second instead of grabbing your teleconverter, taking the lens off the camera, attaching the converter, then putting the lens back on the camera, then recomposing and refocussing and taking the shot. By then the touchdown would be made and the extra point would be kicked. That is the type of situation this lens is made for. I will withhold my opinion until good old dp tells us whether it is up to snuff.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
DanCee
By DanCee (3 weeks ago)

Couldnt agree with you more! Price is a shocker, ok.. but maybe its simply not for your needs/budget. If someone needs it to get the job done, theyll get one anyway

0 upvotes
Teila Day
By Teila Day (3 weeks ago)

What I find amazing is how many people are honestly shocked at the price in the first place. What on earth did people think the price was going to be for a lens that sits between the 600mm and 400mm primes, and offers the convenience of a zoom and built in teleconverter/extender?

(chuckle)

0 upvotes
BeanyPic
By BeanyPic (3 weeks ago)

Just realised I replied to a spammer on here. "tell the truth" seems to live on another parallel universe. Watch out DP Review

3 upvotes
Kirigoi
By Kirigoi (3 weeks ago)

Already wasted time replying to one of his little rants, I think that's it for me too. There's obviously some conscious thought there as he's replying to us by name, but I don't think we're going to reach this one... Shame really; it's certainly arguable this lens is (too?) expensive, but I don't think he's quite going about it the right way...

3 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

Kirigoi,, it is with HUMOR , I write these comments . I really hope you enjoy them, they are for FREE !! The CANNOT LENS IS -- 12 GRAND !!!!!!! ( that is not free ) Excuse me did CaNnOt sniff some GLUE ?? I really have to say , quite a lot of cAnNOt L glass really IS NOT that good. Just look at the new Sigma 35 mm lens ,, BETTER THAN CANnOT !! and at a less price . The Box the 200 400 lens comes in is about 700 bucks ?? Did I snifff glue ?? NO !!! So May I order 2 boxes???????? What is right about this ?? So I tell you how I feel , and I hope you get a kick out of my rants , and enjoy . If you paid for this lens YOU WOULD NOT BE ENJOYING your light wallet.

0 upvotes
Thorbard
By Thorbard (3 weeks ago)

Speaking of...
Why does DPReview not seem to give an option to block a user, for those of us who wish to avoid the madness?

3 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

Thorbard,, you want to block someone that states his opinion ?? What if that person wants to BLOCK you because you state your opionion ? Thorbard I bet you work for the Company that makes this over priced lens . The only Madness I see is the FACT that this lens IS SO OVER PRICED , it will not sell. That is sad , because IF it is a good lens optically ,it is out of reach for us photographers as a whole . So Thorbard why dont you lighten up and enjoy my HUMOR !! And seriously try the Panasonic FZ200 , that little camera makes beautiful 12 x 18 prints , has a bigger zoom range , all at f 2.8 !! And it costs less than the BOX the 200 400 comes in . So what is my madness ?

0 upvotes
tonywong
By tonywong (3 weeks ago)

Thorbard is right. tell the truth speaks no truth and just trolls to get his jollies. If he was funny there'd be merit in looking at his/her posts, but as it stands, typing in varied caps and all caps does not pass as humour.

I feel sorry for the Panasonic. With comments like this guy's, sales of the FZ200 will probably go down instead of up.

3 upvotes
DanCee
By DanCee (3 weeks ago)

Someone just has too much time to talk nonsense over price that will not change anyway.. lens that if doesnt suit you quality wise, pricewise, no body force you to buy one.

On the other hand posting message like that is like drunken peps disturbing public order.

Dpreview need dislike button like youtube... too many dislike means people in general dont want to see the comment

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

caNot get off the GLUE !

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

I think I missed something here. You can buy a Panasonic FZ200 that has a 25 600 F2.8 lens 12 Mega Pixel Camera,,,, for less money than the cost of the case that this lens comes in. No I did not miss anything,, CanNot missed something !

0 upvotes
BeanyPic
By BeanyPic (3 weeks ago)

You are joking aren't you? Please say you're joking.... I can see it now. A sports photographer sitting on the sidelines with a "Panasonic". A wildlife pro shooter taking a picture in deepest Amazon with a FZ200. Get a grip... Oh you wouldn't be able too with a pana... You need equipment that can handle the work load and this is exactly what this is.

3 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

BeanyPic,, YOU HAVE ME ROLLLLING !!!! I CANNOT see anyone on the sidelines with this white 12 Grand Telephone POLE !! But really the Panny FZ200 IQ is better than you think,,, AND you can afford it !!! I just have to say I HOPE the lens is sharp,, at that price you Can get a Nikon D 800 HI RES Camera and a NIKON 200 400 ,, and have extra Money. Or just try a FZ 200 !!! HOW HOW HOW can anyone justify a 700 dollar box for this lens????? If the lens came with a Blond ,, MAYBE !!!!!!

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

You almost, have a better camera system with a Panasonic FZ 200 . For less than 550 Bucks you have a 25mm ish to 600 mm F2.8 lens on a 12 Mega Pixel Camera . Or you can get this 200 to 580 ish F4 - 5.6 on a 20 Mega Pixel Camera for 15 to 19 Grand plus tax . This lens just MAY ?? be a good lens , I REALLY WONDER,, I really hope so . But the cameras you use it with are LOW RES. So is this lens is as good as the SUPERB EXCELLENT AMAZING Nikon 200 400 I have used with a Hi Res 36 Mega Pixel sensor ?? ,, WHY WHY would you , not mate it with a HI RES CAMERA ?? Where is canons 36 mega pixel body? Why would you not shoot with the Panasonic FZ200 instead, and SAVE HUGE !!!! A slower lens set up, for almost 20 thousand more , with just 8 more mega pixels. Yes I know the 20 grand set up will make better 16x20 prints. But 12x18 prints look amazing at normal viewing distances with the FZ200..

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Thorbard
By Thorbard (3 weeks ago)

Seriously dude, this lens is hardly going to be comparable to a superzoom bridge camera. Canon's latest lenses have been extremely sharp, though Sigma and others are making big improvements too.
But seriously, no gear/photos/examples to show? What agenda are you trying to push?

4 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

Thorbard, Try the Panasonic FZ200 , you will be AMAZzZzZED !! My Agenda here is .. CaNNot makes some good stuff , and they make some Cruddddy stuff. A lot of the L glass from CaNNot cost more than Sigma and has LESS optical performance. ( LESS SHARP at a HIGHER PRICE } . CaNNOT is so over priced on this Lens , they are tArTed. Nikon 200 400 costs 4 grand less. I hope this lens is sharp,, IT BETTER BE AT @ 12 GRAND !! Where does cANNot get off with a case that costs almost 700 BUCKS?? What is cANNOTs agenda?? GOUGING ?????

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Kirigoi
By Kirigoi (3 weeks ago)

tell the truth, your tinfoil hat is slipping. This lens is obviously not intended for you, so stop spamming the thread with your ravings about how cheap superzooms are superior. And since when is 20+MPx low-resolution??? I missed that meeting...

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

KINIGOI,,, Thank you,, I just adjusted my tinfoil hat.. Your right the lens IS NOT for me !! Or any one else !! At that price you should order 2. I am NOT spamming ,, I am just saying what I see.. Cannot is OVER PRICED !!!! CanNot is Gouging and ripping us off! Where do you get off agreeing with a 600 dollar price on a case ? Nikon 200 400 lens IS SUPER SHARP and is 4 GRAND less. Nikon D800 and Nikon D800E have 36 Mega Pixels. 20 Mega Pixels is LOW RES !! Try one you will then know less is less. 36 Mega Pixel is now the standard. You should try the Panasonic FZ 200,, It is the best Bridge camera out there and it can surprise you. 12 GRAND is no surprise !!!

0 upvotes
Thorbard
By Thorbard (3 weeks ago)

Give one example of a lens Canon released in the last 3 years that is weaker than the Sigma equivalent...

1 upvote
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

Not sure on the time line ,, But the new Sigma 35 mm lens is SHARPER THAN CANNOT. How is that ?? The 70 mm Macro Sigma is Among the best in the world . The 70 200 old 2.8 canNot was a POOR example of L glass . Sigma is better, than cannot old one , I have not checked the new one out . The 120 400 Sigma is better than the 100 400 L . The 800 cannot is ok, But NIKON BLEW THERE DOORS OFF !! The NIKON IS THE SHARPEST LENS ON THE PLANNNNNNNNET !!! Now what really gets me going ,, is the EFS lenses !! TRASH !!! THEY DO NOT NOUNT ON A FULL FRAME BODY with out a chance of damage !! BUT SIGMA TAMRON TOKINA half frame lenses can !!! DAaaa CANNOT. Yes I know there is fall of on the edges. But there are many times this would be ok. cANNOt did this to force you to buy new glass. And one last thing CaNoTT warranty BLOWS , they have BEEN SO DISHONEST to me and SO MANY of my friends it FORCED ME away from them ,, and so far 5 of my friends . If you want me to get into that let me know !

0 upvotes
Thorbard
By Thorbard (3 weeks ago)

Thanks for ignoring my question and proving to the world that you're a raving loon. You're clearly pushing some agenda, but if you talked a little more sense people might be willing to engage you in discussion.

Of course the old lenses are worse than the new lenses. My question is which current/recently released Canon lenses are weaker than their Sigma equivalents.

Honestly, if I had 12k to spend on a lens I would buy this one - it would be a very useful lens in its range. As it is, I can't, and I'll look elsewhere.

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

We do agree with each other Thorbard ,, YOU CANNOT afford this lens ! Looking else where ,,,, look at the Panasonic FZ 200 IT WILL AMAZE YOU when you try it !! It is also afffffordable !! and it will do some amazing things . It is light and fun. beautiful 12x18 prints .

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

Lets Just say, You want to BLOW 12 GRAND , because your wallet is to full. And lets assume this L lens is sharp. ( A lot of L glass is not as good as Sigma). But let us hope this is a sharp lens. Let us assume you can carry this heavy lens all day with a monopod. Ok all is good so far. Now what Hi Res camera can you put it on ?????? Why does CANNOT not have a Hi RES camera Body for this camera lens ???? OR you can get a NIKON 200 400 and it comes with a FREE HI RES Camera and with a nice cost savings !

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

So let me SNIFF SOME GLUE, with you CanNot and figure this out . Buy this 12 GRAND 200 400 lens , and put it on a 20 Mega pixel low res camera, Or Buy the NIKON 200 400 NIKON Lens and a NIKON 1.4 Extender, and get a FREE NIKON D 800E 36 Mega Pixel Camera to use it with , and still have about a GRAND left in your Pocket,, FOR MORE GLUE !!!!! Yep ,, I need the EXTRA GLUE !!!

0 upvotes
ChrisLoff
By ChrisLoff (3 weeks ago)

Unbelieveable lens, unbelievable price. No new Canon for me. I'm lucky to own the 500mm F4, which I now plan to keep for as long as I can carry it.

I switched from Nikon to Canon 16 years ago for practical and usable performance improvement of Canon's IS. Today, I can't afford Canon's new products nor justify a 60%+ premium over Nikon. Sad reality. But in today technology age I expect performance improvements at stable or reduced prices.

0 upvotes
Thorgrem
By Thorgrem (3 weeks ago)

If you sell your Canon 500mm f4 probably you can buy a brand new Nikon D800 and the 200-400 f4....

0 upvotes
Beestripe
By Beestripe (3 weeks ago)

Yikes! to the lens
Yikes! to the price

1 upvote
semorg
By semorg (3 weeks ago)

$700 just for the case!

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/973134-REG/canon_5183b001_lens_case_200_6400_for.html

0 upvotes
bcalkins
By bcalkins (3 weeks ago)

It is good to see Canon bringing out more options that will work with the EOS-M ;)

4 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (3 weeks ago)

Or you could do the D800e and the 80-400VR and be a lot sharper for half the price :^)

1 upvote
StephenSPhotog
By StephenSPhotog (3 weeks ago)

Cheaper? Yes.

Sharper? Doubt it.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 weeks ago)

the new 80-400VR improved a lot from the infamous AF-D but is still soft near the tele end. I expect 200-400/4LIS stunning sharp or Canon won't have set the price that high.

2 upvotes
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (3 weeks ago)

How do you know it's sharper??

1 upvote
Jeff Peterman
By Jeff Peterman (3 weeks ago)

That is an f4.5-f5.6 lens. So, even assuming it is as sharp (doubtful due to the longer zoom range and has optics that handle flare and distortion as well over the 200-400 range (doubtful based on comparing specifications), it is a whole stop slower at the 200-400 range. The latter is a big reason for the increase in price - shaving a stop from such a big lens is VERY expensive.

0 upvotes
Scott Wilson
By Scott Wilson (3 weeks ago)

Canon must be smoking crack. I mean really 11K for a 200-400 F4 lens even with a built in 1.4x extender is crazy. You can buy a 200-400 for a lot less and just put on a much cheaper 1.4x extender when you need it.

Come on are we getting so lazy that we can't do this ourselves. Plus if we keep bowing to the big camera companies and paying crazy money for all of these new lens they will just keep going up and up.

A lens is not a car and they don't cost anywhere nears as much to manufacture. Nikon fell and hit their heads when they increased the 200-400 they make and charged almost 2K more for adding VRII. Heck there was nothing wrong with VRI so I didn't see the big upgrade to this lens so I still have mine VRI lens. Before long even us pros won't be able to justify buying new gear. Even Nikon's new 80-400 4.5-5.6 is 2.5K. Are they serious. No 4.5-5.6 variable aperture lens is worth that. Come on Nikon and Canon get real in your pricing before we all have to switch to Sigma/Tamron

6 upvotes
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (3 weeks ago)

Agree with you Scott another evidence of wacky backy pricing is the 18K Nikon charges for the 800 F5.6 AFS VR whereas Canon's version was only £10k. Glad I got majority of my lenses couple of years ago when prices were cheaper; only regret was not picking up a Nikon 200-400 F4 AFS VR I back in 2007.

0 upvotes
Paul Farace
By Paul Farace (3 weeks ago)

Please, at these prices Canon certainly isnt smoking crack you common street hooligan! They are mainlining pure Burmese blond heroin. Ican see these being purchased by NatGeo and one or two big image houses... maybe a Washington lawyer and a Arab prince or two. You and me? F-NO! But maybe some tech will filter down to those of us whoonly sniff glue on holidays

1 upvote
AlJackson
By AlJackson (3 weeks ago)

Has anyone ever thought of a standalone tc that slides in and out like this one? i.e a mechanism such as used in the 200-400 that can be put on the front any tele lens so can switch extender in and out without removing lens. would solve lots of arguments I'm sure

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 weeks ago)

it's very different in that the distance between the original lens and the sensor doesn't change.

put the converter in front of the lens will cost huge if possible because the it has to be larger than the front element of the lens.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Abhijith Kannankavil
By Abhijith Kannankavil (3 weeks ago)

will there be a low cost version without inbuilt extender?
:P

2 upvotes
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (3 weeks ago)

Like all the big canon lenses it will be cheaper on the street,give it a few months for the early adaptor's...

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
amateurphotographer
By amateurphotographer (3 weeks ago)

looking at some websites, the pricing seems to slot between the 600mm f4 and 400mm f2.8. So its price does seem reasonable in my opinion. The target audience will be fee paying sports or wildlife photographers or ppl who just can afford the best. In terms of sports, I use the 200-400 f4 Nikon for golf tournaments as it is versatile when the player comes towards you, or for green shots in good light. Other possibilities are polo shoots where f4 is good enough to isolate the horse or even horse racing. Most big ball pitch sports photographers would use the 400 f2.8 mainly because of subject isolation. So I see it even a specialist lens for sports. Drop tele lens is convenient and eliminates the chance of dust, etc. getting in the main lens, and maybe on some occasions you will need the reach. The optics are likely to be stunning and fast focusing lens. You'll probably get a good 10yrs use of this lens and will easily make your money back, it's a nice tool to have.

5 upvotes
kkchiu215
By kkchiu215 (3 weeks ago)

For the past three years, I used my 400mm f/4 DO IS telephoto with 1.4x tele plus to make up 560mm f/5.6 to capture flying house swallow. All photographs of the flying birds came out sharp and clear, all because of the extreme light weight of the Dwflaxtive Pptics design and fast aperture to freeze the fast motion of the small body size swallow.
But the 200-400mm 2x zoom ratio seems to be not enough although the optical material and coating is very good. I will say this lens is suitable for portrait or fashion photography more then wild life.
I am looking for a 500 to 600 mm f/4 Defractive Optics telephoto lens? Since it is not possible to capture small flying object with a tripot, you have to hand hold the lens and came together and swing your entire body try to follow the bird moment because they fly in three dimensions.

0 upvotes
Teila Day
By Teila Day (3 weeks ago)

I think you are very correct. The lens is really too short for wildlife photography unless you're shooting large subject relatively close to your location, but horribly short for small birds at a distance if you're wanting to come close to filling the frame- the 500, 600 and 800mm primes are for that type of work.

This is an excellent lens for portraiture/fashion as you stated, which is something many people do not think about. It is also an excellent lens (on paper anyway) for large outdoor social or political events as well as street photography in areas where the photographer wants to be as discrete as possible.

The practical uses for the lens are endless, and I think the shortsightedness of many photographers is due to not having a use for the lens, or not having enough experience that enables them to think of the many areas on photography that can readily benefit from such a lens.

1 upvote
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (3 weeks ago)

So it is really a 200mm to 560mm f4-5.6 IS L lens.
Might as well buy a Panasonic FZ200 and get 25-600mm f2.8. Ok not the same and a tiny sensor but unless you are a serious photographer or quite wealthy what to do?. Don't get me wrong I would love this but my wallet says no. My longest lens is an old 100-300 f5.6 L lens that is a push pull design like the 100-400 L, but it is much sharper than that lens (now sold). I also have a 70-200 f4 IS and it is nearly as good as that, especially good at the long end, except it doesn't have IS. I was really surprised! Cost me almost nothing too!

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
zapatista
By zapatista (3 weeks ago)

I know, stayed up all night and can't decide between this lens or an FZ200.

0 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (3 weeks ago)

@zapatista.
If you can afford this lens then you can easily add the FZ200 on to the bill. OR try the FZ200 and see.

1 upvote
Yannick KREMPP
By Yannick KREMPP (3 weeks ago)

Gorgeous, but the price also is professional, doh.

0 upvotes
gefrorenezeit
By gefrorenezeit (3 weeks ago)

Cool Canon. Would be great if you bring 50L II, 35L II and 45 TS II along....;)

0 upvotes
davids8560
By davids8560 (3 weeks ago)

How does this new telephoto lens stack up against the Canon SX50? Lol

0 upvotes
Robert Newman
By Robert Newman (3 weeks ago)

Is it just me or is everyone else out there thinking that $12K is a ton of money to spend on this lens - or any lens for that mattter. I already own an older Canon EF 100-400mm IS lens that perhaps is not as sharp as this one and a bit slower (f4.5-5.6), but for the price difference which is about $10,700 new, there is no way I would consider buying this when I could have the lens I have and five to eight other lenses and perhaps an extra body in my camera bag.

2 upvotes
dhlee
By dhlee (3 weeks ago)

this is perfect range for me and awesome tele.

0 upvotes
Ganondorf
By Ganondorf (3 weeks ago)

Is image stabilization even relevant on these lenses, I mean who's gonna shoot this handheld?

3 upvotes
eyeport
By eyeport (3 weeks ago)

But even with tripod IS is still very useful on such long lens.

4 upvotes
Paniko
By Paniko (3 weeks ago)

Zuiko Digital 150mm F2.0 - 1100 € used (300 mm (F4 eq.DOF) 35mm)
+EC14 - 250 € (used) (420 mm f2.8 (F5.6 DOF) eq 35mm)
+EC20 - 250 € (used) (600 mm f4 (F8 DOF) eq.35mm)
+the next E-7/om-d M6 (1900€? new)

3500€...in a smaller package :D

Yeah, i could live with it :)

2 upvotes
nunatak
By nunatak (3 weeks ago)

just because someone owns one system, doesn't mean they can't own two — or more. especially at this price differential. that said, all superior optics built for high rez digital cameras are going to be much more expensive from now on. this lens, as well as the 800mm f5.6 VR nikkor, and the new 80-400mm G VR are just a few examples of the increases people are seeing.

get used to it, and get the gear which best suits what you photograph, you're preferred workflow, and what fits your budget. in the end, all photography is about story telling. if your story telling ability is weak, it doesn't matter what lens or system you buy into ... does it?

1 upvote
B-rad
By B-rad (3 weeks ago)

What a rip off. Anyone who buys this needs their head examined. PERIOD.

2 upvotes
new boyz
By new boyz (3 weeks ago)

Maybe not. If they have that kind of money, they are pretty good in making money. I think their "heads" are just fine.

6 upvotes
tocar
By tocar (3 weeks ago)

If you can't afford to buy this lens don't belittle people who can afford it.

7 upvotes
dspoel
By dspoel (3 weeks ago)

People spend that kind of money on cars all the time. I'd prefer the lens :).

6 upvotes
feraudy
By feraudy (3 weeks ago)

I would say that if they can afford to buy this then they are
pretty rich and not only are their heads worth examining and admiring but their homes as well.
Tough titty for those who dont have the money.

2 upvotes
balios
By balios (3 weeks ago)

This lens wasn't aimed at you. It was aimed at two kinds of people:

1) Professional sport and wildlife photographers.
2) Serious enthusiasts who realize that they can't take their money with them when they die. But instead of spending $12k on a weekend motorcycle, they'd rather spend it on photography gear because that's their hobby.

2 upvotes
Eric Sorensen
By Eric Sorensen (3 weeks ago)

That's the perfect lens for shooting little league baseball!

2 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 weeks ago)

From past your court-ordered 100y radius?

3 upvotes
Eric Sorensen
By Eric Sorensen (3 weeks ago)

Ha - very funny. I could use a zoom lens to get a bit closer. I currently use the 100-400L and it would only take me about 75 games to pay for the new lens!
http://www.pbase.com/ericsorensen/youth_baseball

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
T_O_M_E_K
By T_O_M_E_K (3 weeks ago)

Let’s not complain about the price now. Sigma just dropped their price on Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 APO EX DG. It went down from MSRP of $32,000 to very affordable $25,999 and they’ve included hard case, 2x teleconverter, battery pack & charger.

;)

2 upvotes
billybones1918
By billybones1918 (3 weeks ago)

down boy!

0 upvotes
Apewithacamera
By Apewithacamera (3 weeks ago)

So this lens will ship in a cardboard box with styrafoam for protection? 12k wow Canon! Please don't cheap out on customers spending that kind of money and include the case.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Dante1
By Dante1 (3 weeks ago)

Yet another rip-off. Since when have Euros been worth more than Pounds?
RRP of £11999.99 / €11800

2 upvotes
Yxa
By Yxa (3 weeks ago)

Hopefully never

0 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (3 weeks ago)

Everyone knows that tech has a special exchange rate of $1=£1=€1

0 upvotes
stratplaya
By stratplaya (3 weeks ago)

200-400? Welcome to the 21st century Canon!

4 upvotes
Brian Lund
By Brian Lund (3 weeks ago)

Look at the price... This lens should be 31st century with that price-tag...

0 upvotes
TomCreek
By TomCreek (3 weeks ago)

I call Shenanigans! How could a lens case be priced at $699!!! ;=)

5 upvotes
Jackson22
By Jackson22 (3 weeks ago)

made by louis vuitton :-)

0 upvotes
bigfatron
By bigfatron (3 weeks ago)

...because its the same company that thinks nothing of asking about £50 for an SLR battery and about £100 for a mounting ring?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 weeks ago)

at that price, will there be a free 1DX in the package ?

7 upvotes
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (3 weeks ago)

Having previously worked with broadcast ENG/EFP video cameras, where integral "range extenders" (aka TCs) are a standard component of many zooms, it's always puzzled me why this configuration has taken so long to arrive in the stills sector. Those video lenses aren't exactly cheap either.

2 upvotes
rallyfan
By rallyfan (3 weeks ago)

I wonder if it's some sort of hesitation to fit the integral extender into a body that could see harsh use, bumps, etc.? I don't quite know, I'm just speculating.

1 upvote
Mr Blah
By Mr Blah (3 weeks ago)

It could be partially due to sensor and image circle size. Those pro ENG/EFP cameras usually use 2/3" sensors and smaller. Maybe it's just harder, or more expensive, to incorporate an extender into a lens with a full frame image circle compared to just attaching a separate extender. Also, functionality-wise, those ENG/EFP cameras tend to be enormous kits that might not lend themselves to be easily reconfigured on the spot -- you want everything set up beforehand for maximum flexibility. It's probably more feasible to expect a photographer to switch extenders than to expect an ENG/EFP operator/assistant to swap in an extender in the middle of the live, video-recorded action.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
penguinman
By penguinman (3 weeks ago)

From Andy Rouse web page.

Pointless Comparison

This is a plea to the lens geeks. Please do not start comparing the Canon lens with the Nikon one, it is pointless. The Nikon 200-400 does a great job for Nikon photographers and the Canon lens will do a great job for Canon photographers. Comparing the two is just pointless, as no one is going to change camera system to use this lens are they? No they are not, so please don’t fuel the silly Canon vs Nikon debate anymore, it’s not what this lens or this review is all about.

6 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

That has merit if no one ever based initial buy-in to a system based on available lenses.

This is a specialty item. One that people seek out, and Nikon's version is very, very popular. There is a great deal of merit in comparing the two, as with the relatively low cost of a camera body in comparison to the glass there's nothing keeping one from just picking up a body of the other brand to use with a superior lens investment, even if they ARE invested in a different brand.

Compare! It's not a Nikon vs Canon debate, it's Nikon 200-400/4 vs Canon 200-400/4 debate.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Lanski
By Lanski (3 weeks ago)

A lot of people use websites such as this in order to educate themselves about a product before they buy/rent/test it. I think objective comparison is exactly what we should be doing here. I already know that the 2 lenses fit on different bodies and, for the record, I also know that photography is about taking pictures, good pictures don't just come from better cameras etc, but this is an article about a specific lens. I want to know how good it is. A comparison to the Nikon, as well as Canon primes would be a good place to start. Especially true because I can buy the Nikon and a D800 for less money than this.

Comparison doesn't have to mean brand bashing and fanboyism, although I know it often does...

5 upvotes
rallyfan
By rallyfan (3 weeks ago)

The question is how this lens performs.

How the Nikon performs might under other cirumstances be midly interesting; however, every second spent by DPR or another reviewer discussing the Nikon is a second not spent discussing this lens.

The Nikon is useless because it does not fit a Canon body.

Those saying "we need to know to make purchasing decisions" are simply not in the market.

Expecting people to believe you need to decide now, without having either system, whether a $12K USD lens is right for you in order to make it part of your "first" purchase into a system is really not on. Nobody's buying the story, and you're not buying the lens. Either lens, if we're honest.

Stop lowering the level of the discussion.

3 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

I spent a few days at Kruger with a man that owns nothing but a FF Nikon body and the 200-400vr. Someone in the position he was in years ago would certainly benefit from comparison. Aside from worry that a prized lens might not fare well against new competition, I see little reason not to run such a comparison.

Stop lowering the bar for accountability in lens performance.

2 upvotes
QuarryCat
By QuarryCat (3 weeks ago)

sorry penguin man - but I think your comment is pointless -
if I need for my work a long lens Zoom - I will keep my System and by the best Zoom and a camera for it. Time ago this was Nikon with the 4/200-400 mm - witch is not very good with converters - then it was a Olympus 2,8/90-250 and I bought an E-3 - but cam was not fast enough for me - but now I will by the Canon 200-400 mm.
For the price - more then 6000 - the camera is just a sensor - not more. I find all the system discussions stupid - if there is a need for a long lens.

1 upvote
rallyfan
By rallyfan (3 weeks ago)

@ryansholl:

The Nikon does not work. Its optics are interesting only in theory; it will not fit the camera. This has nothing to do with what you apparently perceive as... accountability in lens performance.

If DPR can muster a few contenders in this category that will actually work on a Canon body, that'd be interesting. The Nikon is neither interesting nor relevant, because it simply doesn't work.

0 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

Seldom do I see someone miss the point by such a wild margin.

0 upvotes
rallyfan
By rallyfan (3 weeks ago)

Don't be daft. The lens is not going to be a first purchase for anyone. If you're keen on the Nikon go buy three. Whether you or I or anyone like them is irrelevant; from the perspective of a Canon system, they may as well not exist.

Edit: Now that I think of it, disregard the above in favour of this response: Cool story bro. OKthanxbye!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
totunu
By totunu (3 weeks ago)

Nothing pointless, everything matter. But it is matter to one or to the other. At this class of price for a lens, you could buy a body like an accessories. In this case, the decision of buying can be think in the opposite way as for a cheap lens.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (3 weeks ago)

@rallyfan

I don't think anyone is being daft...
The fact is that Canon does not compete in a vacuum...

The Fact is that for a person that has a Canon 7d, 5DII, 5DIII, or 1DS camera, getting this lens would closely equal a purchase of a D4 and 200-400 for close to the same price as this lens is alone.

The immediate benefit is increased performance (low light, frame rate, tracking,focusing system, build) over any of the aforementioned Canon cameras.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

To be fair, I was being intentionally daft, as I imagine rallyfan with his "doesn't fit a canon camera, so doesn't matter" comment was intentionally naive.

1 upvote
lesnapanda
By lesnapanda (3 weeks ago)

given the fact that you could buy the Nikon lens + D800E for less than the Canon - I'd say comparison is valid.

0 upvotes
bigdaddave
By bigdaddave (3 weeks ago)

For all those who constantly whinge that Canon never come up with anything new and inventive, just look at this, a pro level tele zoom with a built-in converter.

Get stuffed Nikon

2 upvotes
EvokeEmotion
By EvokeEmotion (3 weeks ago)

People complain about Canon's pricing for bodies and lenses. They also complain about Canon's lack of innovation on bodies.

Few are unhappy with the quality and innovation of Canon's high end lenses.

5 upvotes
io_bg
By io_bg (3 weeks ago)

Nikon have been making 200-400/4s for 30 years. And with recent bodies one could also put a 1.7 or 2x extender and not be limited by the in-built one.

3 upvotes
Jahled
By Jahled (3 weeks ago)

Why the hostility to Nikon? It's absolutely pathetic, i'm a Canon shooter because i've bought into the system massively and see absolutely no reason to change, but they aren't football teams. I've got mates who shoot Nikon because they prefer what they do with their fingers; there's no real advantage to either

2 upvotes
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (3 weeks ago)

Agree with Jahled kudos to Canon and Nikon in bringing some quality camera and lenses to the market.

0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (3 weeks ago)

Yes it's great to see a lens that is new and inventive from Canon 10 YEARS after Nikon has had the 200-400 on the market.

Great move Canon, your inventiveness never stops surprising me and leaving me with a feeling of awe and wonderment.

2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (3 weeks ago)

Yea, Nikon surely have 200-400 with build-in TC since 10 years. Just like they have APS-C mirrorless and their own sensor manufacturing fabs. They do have them. Only there's no proof. lol

0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (3 weeks ago)

@Plastek
Nikon has never had their own fab.
They do produce the steppers that make the sensors used in most fabs, so i can assume from that that Nikon could make their own sensors if they chose to.

But why would they, that would be just plain dumb and would leave them in the same situation that Canon is in INFERIOR SENSOR's in their cameras, and using the same sensor technology for the past 5 years.

You do realize that Canon has been using the same sensors on the the last 4 cameras they have introduced and even the sensor on the 5DIII is the same sensor used on the 5DII.

0 upvotes
Beestripe
By Beestripe (3 weeks ago)

Whether it's Canon or Nikon, you can always count on naysayers here at DPReview.
It's what has made me detest the forums here for years.
moving on now...

0 upvotes
BeanyPic
By BeanyPic (3 weeks ago)

A Pro lens for the stuff people make money from. Always moaning about price. This is a precise piece of equipment and what it does is outstanding (tried one 2 months ago..). I think it's worth more and is for Pro photographers who need nothing but the best....

6 upvotes
Jahled
By Jahled (3 weeks ago)

^This

0 upvotes
Nigel Wilkins
By Nigel Wilkins (3 weeks ago)

I'd be happy to buy one if I needed or wanted it enough. Nobody bats an eyelid if you spend £12k on a car, yet the car's value will drop like a stone...unlike this lens.

5 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 weeks ago)

My last car earned me over $500k during the time I owned it by transporting me to work.

5 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

I wear a belt to work, which keeps my pants up, which keeps the crack of my ass from showing, which keeps me employed. But it definitely does not earn my living, nor did your car earn you yours.

24 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (3 weeks ago)

Oh ryansholl that's brilliant. Made my day.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 weeks ago)

ryansholl, that was funny!

But still, the relevant point here is that it's not "expensive" if it helps you turn a profit. With your analogy, the belt is an even better bargain!

1 upvote
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

Yeah, I completely understand what was meant, tkbslc. Saw the opportunity for comedy, went for it.

0 upvotes
Ruy Penalva
By Ruy Penalva (3 weeks ago)

Canon should think on things more affordable.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bigdaddave
By bigdaddave (3 weeks ago)

Why? Because you can't afford it?
It's for professionals, if you need to ask the price you don't need one

2 upvotes
Lanski
By Lanski (3 weeks ago)

Professionals need to know what things cost. What you're referring to is billionaires, they don't need to ask.

2 upvotes
Jahled
By Jahled (3 weeks ago)

They do. Just because you can't afford to buy or hire one, or aren't employed by someone who can provide you one to work with, gear like this shouldn't exist?

Idiot

1 upvote
Ruy Penalva
By Ruy Penalva (3 weeks ago)

I hope all of you can afford to buy one like myself can. That is not a strong reason to not find it pricey, almost half a car price. I have enough money but I earn it honestly so... toidI

0 upvotes
tell the truth
By tell the truth (3 weeks ago)

Nikons 200 400 ROCKS !!! It is 7 Grand ish ! - NOT , or should I say cAnnOt is ----12 GRAND ish, You do the math. NIKON IS SHARP , my buddy has one and I get to use it . Some of the cAnnOT L glass is so so average,, and WAY OVERPRICED ! Nikon has had there lens out for years. NIKON's NEW 800 mm lens is the SHARPEST LENS ON THE PLANET !!!!!!!!!!! THE SHARPEST LENS ON THE PLANET is the NIKON 800mm!!!( for you bird shooters it was stated twice ) Other brands you just pay more for and get less . Can Not understand the other brand . I hope this new lens from can not perform is above average. I heard it was a slouch in some of the first testing. I really hope it is good,, so many of there zooms are Not .

2 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

If you're willing to overlook the fact that the Nikon 200-400 is closer to f5 in light transmission, yes it is an excellent lens.

Also, please cut out the all caps, the excessive exclamation points, and try to learn how to use the different versions of there/their/they're.

21 upvotes
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (3 weeks ago)

Chill out. There is a difference between "wish" and "reality". The Canon lens and its sharpness is reality. And, btw, while people were busy throwing rocks at Canon sensors, Canon released some of the sharpest lenses in the market (even DxO had no choice for the 24-70 F/2.8 II, destroying its performance like in the case of 70-200 f/2.8 would have been really laughable). Now, I wonder for what these lenses really are for... Cheers! :)

2 upvotes
Lanski
By Lanski (3 weeks ago)

This caps-ridden post is to my eyes what the Canon 200-400L is to my wallet.

10 upvotes
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (3 weeks ago)

Isn't the Canon 200-400 also close to T5 also Ryan.. ? cannot understand the difference ?

Any both are excellent lenses and if Nikon release a Mk 3 version then it is bound to be the same or pricer than the Canon one.

0 upvotes
ryansholl
By ryansholl (3 weeks ago)

I don't rightly know thomas, as I haven't seen that data yet. What I do know is that the Nikon is pretty bad in that regard. I must also mention that I didn't imply any difference and was simply responding to Mr Grammar Buffoon above.

If the Canon is equally non-transmissive then it, too, is an underperforming lens in my book. One gets the effect of shallow depth of field at telephoto lengths without very large apertures, so to pay for a very large aperture and not get the proportional light-gathering ability seems to be a bit of a letdown in my opinion.

Don't get me wrong. The Nikon is still a fine lens, and an equivalent lens isn't even available in my mount.

0 upvotes
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (3 weeks ago)

Thanks Ryan.

Both should rock anyway and good for Canon for delivering the goods. Also must say Nikon finally delivered on the missing F4's and on the 80-400 Afs. We are all winners in the Canon & Nikon camp.

0 upvotes
QuarryCat
By QuarryCat (3 weeks ago)

even the new 4,5-5,6/80-400 mm VR II is sharper at f:5,6/400 mm - than the 4,0/200-400 mm VR II is!
And try the Nikkor 4/200-400 with TC14 III - not good enough for me.

1 upvote
thomas2279f
By thomas2279f (3 weeks ago)

Thanks your insight Q.Cat, expect that Nikon is working on Vr 3 of this lens.

1 upvote
thx1138
By thx1138 (3 weeks ago)

Nikon is well known to be soft at infinity, which is a major deal breaker for say wildlife work when you are FL limited. While the Canon pricing is insane (then again what is the price of the Nikon 800 f/5.6 VR?) the optical quality is astounding by reports I've seen even with the brilliant TC in place.

I'll never own one, but I'd buy it in a heartbeat if I could afford it.

1 upvote
QuarryCat
By QuarryCat (3 weeks ago)

yeah Nikon often needs two or three versions to keep up with one Canon lens. See 2,8/70-200 mm and they already had two 4,0/200-400 mm in just 10 years, and I think the third for over 10.000 is on its way. But Canon is going to long with his 5,6/100-400 mm L IS - 15 years is to much, it looks very soft and old against the Nikon 5,6/80-400 mm VR II

1 upvote
webrunner5
By webrunner5 (3 weeks ago)

Dude, clam down, take you meds and plz rip out the caps key on your keyboard!

1 upvote
jjl
By jjl (3 weeks ago)

Really cool lens, but it's about 3 pounds heavier & 2x the cost vs. my current setup (400DO+1.4TC). Obviously, thing is going to have better optics, the zoom is nice, waaay better IS, and other improvements, but for what I do, I just wouldn't want to lug it around.

1 upvote
Total comments: 290
123