10-1000mm lens f2.8 throughout

As long as it auto focuses with a 2x converter on it, can't see it being much use otherwise.
 
MarkydeSad said:
Wouldn't that be great?! :thumbs:



Please don't tell me it already exists!!! :eek:
Click to expand...

Of course you would what to handhold it as well :cuckoo:, me I'd settle for the upgrade of the 100-400 to f4, now that would be worth having :clap:
 
MarkydeSad said:
Wouldn't that be great?! :thumbs:



Please don't tell me it already exists!!! :eek:
Click to expand...

i can be pretty certain that dont exist....

Im sure its possible, but the IQ would be crap and f2.8 at 1000mm would have a front the size of a dustbin........... no one would ever buy one
 
Yep, but thats the 1200mm, B&Hphoto had a used one for sale, only $99,000.00, and only 1 of 7 made in the world. Actually, if you've ever watch a wild life programme and see one of these distant shots, artic fox chasing the hare, this lens might have taken the shot, national Geo uses one, sorry but someone was planning to buy that lens on another forum and hire it out a $5000 a week, it started an interesting thread, What would you do with 100,000 dollars............:shrug:

Peter
 
andrewc said:
The 1200 is a f5.6 which *only* needs a diameter of 214mm and it weighs 16kgs.

It uses small drop in filters at the back !
Click to expand...

I wonder who would be best for a filter to protect the front element for that? Hoya.......or Weatherseal? :lol:
 
It would be a more sensible proposition to have a 10-400, most people are rarely going to want anything longer than that and would save a lot of the weight etc. However image quality is still going to be a problem (and for it to be less of a problem would have to be incredibly expensive!).
 
i dont think a filter would matter, theres a good 6 inch of hood incorporated into it...

although if it was your walkabout lens it may take a few knocks.......lol
 
Slapo said:
That lens is going to be green, if it's ever released.

Why, you ask?

Because only the HULK will be strong enough to carry it around ;)
Click to expand...

You mean like.....

200_500_540x333.jpg
 
10-1000mm f/2.8...with VR

This guy loves his...



o8w6qx.jpg
 
MarkydeSad said:
Wouldn't that be great?! :thumbs:
Click to expand...
No. Absolutely not. It's about the most stupid idea I've ever heard of.

No hand-held photography because it's too heavy to hand-hold.
No flash photography because the lens will cast such a huge shadow.
No indoor photography because the minimum focussing distance would probably be too large.
No overseas photography because it would be too big to take on a plane.
No action photography because it would be too cumbersome.
No candid photography because it's too conspicuous.

So what would you actually do with it? (Other than show it off to your mates?)
 
andrewc said:
A 1000mm f2.8 would need a main element roughly 357mm in diameter. Can you imaging the cost of a CPL?
Click to expand...

Or an infrared filter. Like, wow.

I was actually thinking of this idea a few days ago! And then I find this thread!

It would be fantastic if it was the size of 55-200 f3.5-5.6.

Oh, the stuff dreams are made of ;)
 
StewartR said:
No. Absolutely not. It's about the most stupid idea I've ever heard of.

No hand-held photography because it's too heavy to hand-hold.
No flash photography because the lens will cast such a huge shadow.
No indoor photography because the minimum focussing distance would probably be too large.
No overseas photography because it would be too big to take on a plane.
No action photography because it would be too cumbersome.
No candid photography because it's too conspicuous.

So what would you actually do with it? (Other than show it off to your mates?)
Click to expand...

I suspect you're not quite getting into the groove with this :)
 
andrewc said:
A 1000mm f2.8 would need a main element roughly 357mm in diameter. Can you imaging the cost of a CPL?
Click to expand...

Rear mounted filters, problem solved!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top