New Year request for Canon...

GooGaBu

GooGaBu

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,457
Edit My Images
Yes
As I do lots of sports photography, there is a big gap in the Canon lens range.. or as far as I know there aren't any lenses that cover this range.

What I would really love to see is a Canon 100 - 400 L f.2.8 lens !! :clap::clap:
Or even 150 - 400 f2.8... Just something to cover the range a little over 300.

Especially during the summer when doing footy and stuff, the 120-300 from Sigma is OK. Just a little sluggish and leaves you wishing a little extra reach (still at 2.8 though!).

Is Canon so determined that everyone who wants to go beyond 200m needs to buy the 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8
What about us who really just like the flexibility of zoom....

So, if anyone has a little pushing power at Canon, could we please see 100 - 400 f2.8 from you in the next 12 months. :bat:

What do other sports togs feel like... would this be a lens you would go for if there was one to be had??
 
Nice idea, but assuming you mean a constant f2.8, I think you'd find the weight an issue, not to mention the cost! ;)
 
Cedric's right, the 100-400 f/2.8 would be a monster. The prime is over 5kg!

What I would love to see is a Canon equivalent of the Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR zoom. That is sometimes enough to make me think about jumping to the dark side!
 
A 100-400 2.8 would be a little to much to ask for maybe an f4 version though as Paul said even if its 200-4-- like the Nikon then that would be great......price wise though you be looking 3000 upwards.
 
As I have the 70-200 F4L IS and am waiting to add a 1.4 extender to bring it close to the 70-300 IS my wish would be a 70-300 IS L.:)
 
grumpybadger said:
Cedric's right, the 100-400 f/2.8 would be a monster. The prime is over 5kg!

What I would love to see is a Canon equivalent of the Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR zoom. That is sometimes enough to make me think about jumping to the dark side!
Click to expand...

Aaah, but this only has f4, so it wouldn't really do it in the f-stops.
I've looked at the same Nikon lens, but it really isn't the solution.

I can see the point in the weight issue of the lens I 'dreamed' about. But maybe the 200 - 400 at f2.8 then. Or possibly that would be too much as well...

Oh well, lets wait couple of decades and we'll all be wondering what was the impossibility of such a lens. But for now...I suppose one just should be happy with what we got!
 
I wish the price of the primes from 200+ would come down.
 
Diego Garcia said:
The word is that there is a new 400mm 2.8 due in April 09.
Click to expand...
Sources?

On rhe face of it, that would seem rather unlikely, surely. Canon only have the resources to (re-)design about 4 lenses per year, and it's hard to see the 400/2.8 as a prime candidate for a makeover. What on earth are they going to improve in it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top