Canon 400 5.6 with IS coming?

Steve_ZeeSteve_Zee Posts: 1Member
edited May 2014 in Other Manufacturers
Any confidence in this rumor?

Comments

  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,098Member
    edited May 2014
    n/m
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • PhotobugPhotobug Posts: 4,775Member
    edited May 2014
    Who cares?
    This is NRF not CRF. With that kind of statement I don't see the relevants to Nikon.
    Post edited by Photobug on
    D750 & D7100 | 24-70 F2.8 G AF-S ED, 70-200 F2.8 AF VR, TC-14E III, TC-1.7EII, 35 F2 AF D, 50mm F1.8G, 105mm G AF-S VR | Backup & Wife's Gear: D5500 & Sony HX50V | 18-140 AF-S ED VR DX, 55-300 AF-S G VR DX |
    |SB-800, Amaran Halo LED Ring light | MB-D16 grip| Gitzo GT3541 + RRS BH-55LR, Gitzo GM2942 + Sirui L-10 | RRS gear | Lowepro, ThinkTank, & Hoodman gear | BosStrap | Vello Freewave Plus wireless Remote, Leica Lens Cleaning Cloth |
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,098Member
    @Photobug It's posted under "Other Manufactures." Peter's (Admin) other site, Photo Rumors points to this section of the NRF.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • michael66michael66 Posts: 231Member
    Who cares?
    This is NRF not CRF. With that kind of statement I don't see the relevants to Nikon.
    Well, there is the competition thing. If Canon gets something good, wouldn't that spur Nikon to do the same and vice-versa?
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    As Nikon has the very sharp 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VRIII I cannot see a need for a 400mm f/5.6
    Msmoto, mod
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,098Member
    edited May 2014
    The Canon 400mm F5.6L is a very good lens, and beats the 80-400mm VRII on test charts, so there is room improvement, but I don't really see the need either. The 300mm F4 with a 1.4x TC is about as good as the Canon and beats the 80-400mm VRII.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    But nether the 400mm F5.6L or the 300mm F4 work very well at 80mm :)
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,098Member
    edited May 2014
    I've never bought a super telephoto lens that hasn't been used at the long end for less than 98% of the time, and I'm willing bet most people using a lens like the 80-400mm VRII don't either.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    I like to think, I am not like most people.
    but as ever, I am probably wrong
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,000Member
    I've never bought a super telephoto lens that hasn't been used at the long end for less than 98% of the time, and I'm willing bet most people using a lens like the 80-400mm VRII don't either.
    This is so true and the reason why I own telephoto primes. There is the occasional over magnified shot, that I have to take 2 pics of instead of one, but that is way better than not having enough reach.
    The Canon 400mm F5.6L is a very good lens, and beats the 80-400mm VRII on test charts, so there is room improvement, but I don't really see the need either.
    Thanks for that info. The one advantage of the canon 400 5.6 is that it weighs less than either the 100-400 or the 300 f4 IS. If you are going to keep the shutter speed up, might as well go for the 400 5.6 over the 300 f4 IS with a TC. I think people generally believe the 300 f4 IS without at TC is sharper stopped down, but the 400 5.6 is sharp wide open and is sharper than the 300 f4 IS with a TC.
Sign In or Register to comment.