# How much will the new EF 800 f/5.6L IS II cost?



## expatinasia (Mar 16, 2014)

Today, the Canon EF 800 f/5.6L IS costs US$ 13,289 if you buy it from B&H. If a new version did come out, as a CR1 is reporting here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=20042.0 how much do you think it would cost?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 16, 2014)

A lot.


----------



## BL (Mar 16, 2014)

Are you familiar with that old adage:

"If you have to ask how much it costs..."


----------



## Steve (Mar 16, 2014)

How much for the Nikon 800? Probably that much +10% Canon premium


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 17, 2014)

Steve said:


> How much for the Nikon 800? Probably that much +10% Canon premium



The Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR Lens is $17,896.95 at B&H. And the most recent customer review of the lens reads: "I use it for landscape and wildlife. Nikon case and overall quality is excellent. The soft lens cap is the worst I have ever seen in 50 years of experience. It is hard to work with and does not seal well. I have replaced mine with a shower cap that is far superior in terms of cost, ease of use and effectiveness."

So don't throw away those unused shower caps, you just never know when they may come in handy!!

Wonder who voted over US$ 21,000!! And I wonder how much over he or she thinks it is going to cost!


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 17, 2014)

If you have to ask...


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 18, 2014)

Well now there are two votes over US$ 21,000. Wonder if I should have added more options?!


----------



## 9VIII (Mar 18, 2014)

I voted for the lower end of the spectrum.

I think Nikon is charging more than Canon will.
It's their first lens using fluorite (a big lens at that), where Canon has been making the stuff for decades and is already using it in every big white they make. Economy of scale alone dictates Canon will be able to put out the same product for less. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if overall production for big lenses just goes smoother at Canon, they certainly have been getting a lot of experience doing that sort of thing lately. Canon can probably expect to sell a lot more as well. 
Nikon also included a TC (normally a $500 value) and charge an arm and a leg for a carbon fiber hood.

I would be surprised if the (street) price for the 800MkII is over $15,000. With a built in TC all bets are off though.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 18, 2014)

To justify its existens it has to be sufficiently better than the 600 f4L IS II w. 1.4xIII extender. That requires a hell of a lens and it will most certainly be expensive. I can't see why Canon shouldn't try the same pricelevel as Nikon, or maybe even a bit above. If it sell, they have excellent margins. If not, they can reduce the price and still get a healthy return on investment.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 18, 2014)

9VIII said:


> It's their first lens using fluorite (a big lens at that), where Canon has been making the stuff for decades and is already using it in every big white they make. Economy of scale alone dictates Canon will be able to put out the same product for less. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if overall production for big lenses just goes smoother at Canon, they certainly have been getting a lot of experience doing that sort of thing lately.



Canon should be able to _make_ the product for less...but that doesn't mean they'll _sell_ it for less. MAking it cheaper and selling it for more means higher *profit*...and that's what Canon is after. They'll sell it for what the market will bear, and given the reputation of Canon's supertele lenses (and the white paint), it's likely they can sell it just fine for a higher price than the Nikon 800/5.6.



9VIII said:


> Nikon also included a TC (normally a $500 value) and *charge an arm and a leg for a carbon fiber hood*.



The Canon supertele hoods are also carbon fiber, and I could buy a 70-200mm f/4L for the cost of a replacement hood for my 600 II.


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 18, 2014)

Eldar said:


> To justify its existens it has to be sufficiently better than the 600 f4L IS II w. 1.4xIII extender. That requires a hell of a lens and it will most certainly be expensive. I can't see why Canon shouldn't try the same pricelevel as Nikon, or maybe even a bit above. If it sell, they have excellent margins. If not, they can reduce the price and still get a healthy return on investment.



I guess it all depends on the supply demand ratio. How many do you sell when it is US$ 21,000+ and how many do you sell at US$ 17,000 etc.

The Canon lens today is US$ 13,289. Would they really be able to increase the price by over US$ 5,000 or more?

How did the prices change when the 300, 400 and 600 Mark IIs were launched? How much more were they when they came out compared to the Mark Is?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 18, 2014)

expatinasia said:


> How did the prices change when the 300, 400 and 600 Mark IIs were launched? How much more were they when they came out compared to the Mark Is?



The MkII versions of the 300, 400, 500 and 600mm supertele lenses launched at price increases of *40-50%* over their predecessors. An equivalent increase would put the 800/5.6 II at *~$19,000*, give or take a few hundred.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 18, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > How did the prices change when the 300, 400 and 600 Mark IIs were launched? How much more were they when they came out compared to the Mark Is?
> ...


That would line up pretty well with the Nikon, but will Canon throw in a custom extender


----------



## 9VIII (Mar 18, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon should be able to _make_ the product for less...but that doesn't mean they'll _sell_ it for less. MAking it cheaper and selling it for more means higher *profit*...and that's what Canon is after. They'll sell it for what the market will bear, and given the reputation of Canon's supertele lenses (and the white paint), it's likely they can sell it just fine for a higher price than the Nikon 800/5.6.



I guess I'm counting on Canon's comfortability as market leader to influence their pricing. If they're going to charge the same I would expect Canon to deliver a superior product (IQ), if it's not distinctly superior selling at a discount would be to their benefit.

Going by the cost/mm of current lenses I seriously doubt they would charge more than $17,000, and even that's a stretch.



neuroanatomist said:


> The Canon supertele hoods are also carbon fiber, and I could buy a 70-200mm f/4L for the cost of a replacement hood for my 600 II.



I did not know that. 
The 70-200f4L is at least still a few hundred dollars less than the Nikon lens hood though.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 18, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > expatinasia said:
> ...


Again, it would have to be an amazing lens to justify $19k, with or without an extender. 

800mm is pretty long, so the 600 f4L IS II gives you better close(r) range capability and you have excellent performance with th 1.4xIII. I had the same issue with the 400 f2.8L IS II, before buying the 600. With the 1.4x and 2x extenders it gives you very good focal length alternatives. It works well at 640mm, but the IQ at 800 is significantly behind the 840 you get with the 600, with which you can go to 1200. With the 400 you get f2.8, which is a very usable feature, wheras with the 800 you get same f-stops as the 600 with extenders. 

At 19k you get a 600 with a 1DX hooked on ... So, to justify that price tag, the 800 would have to be truly exceptional.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 18, 2014)

Eldar said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...


All very true, and Canon may have to use more of that stuff that Nikon said for years wasn't any good (until the 800mm), what was it called, oh yeah, fluorite - AF-S NIKKOR 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR:


> Fluorite (x2), ED glass (x2) and Nano Crystal Coat are employed, realizing high optical performance with minimal chromatic aberration


Except they forgot to update their website Glossary, LOL:


> *ED glass - an essential element of NIKKOR telephoto lenses*
> 
> Nikon developed ED (Extra-low Dispersion) glass to enable the production of lenses that offer superior sharpness and color correction by minimizing chromatic aberration.
> Put simply, chromatic aberration is a type of image and color dispersion that occurs when light rays of varying wavelengths pass through optical glass. In the past, correcting this problem for telephoto lenses required special optical elements that offer anomalous dispersion characteristics - specifically calcium fluoride crystals. However, fluorite easily cracks and is sensitive to temperature changes that can adversely affect focusing by altering the lens' refractive index.
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 18, 2014)

9VIII said:


> I guess I'm counting on Canon's comfortability as market leader to influence their pricing.



I agree...but whereas you seem to think that will result in a lower price, I'd argue that it will result in a higher price. "He who has the gold makes the rules..."


----------



## unfocused (Mar 18, 2014)

The poll needs to be amended to include an arm and a leg.


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 19, 2014)

unfocused said:


> The poll needs to be amended to include an arm and a leg.



True!

So far it seems 47.4% of people that voted think that it will be between US$ 15,000 and US$ 18,000.


----------



## Lightmaster (Mar 19, 2014)

well one thing that sucks is that canon gives only 1 year warranty, while nikon offers 5 years for the 800mm f5.6. at least in the USA.

so lets hope when canons new 800mm will cost 18000$ they will raise the warranty time too.....


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 20, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> well one thing that sucks is that canon gives only 1 year warranty, while nikon offers 5 years for the 800mm f5.6. at least in the USA.
> 
> so lets hope when canons new 800mm will cost 18000$ they will raise the warranty time too.....



I did not know that.


----------



## Hannes (Mar 24, 2014)

The majority of the market for a 800mm f5.6 isn't really going to be bothered about what it costs as long as it isn't outrageous. If the lens is better than the previous version they will upgrade to the new without a doubt. A few thousand dollar isn't here nor there for this end of the market and as a result canon will charge whatever the monkey throwing the darts comes up with.


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 25, 2014)

Hannes said:


> The majority of the market for a 800mm f5.6 isn't really going to be bothered about what it costs as long as it isn't outrageous. If the lens is better than the previous version they will upgrade to the new without a doubt. A few thousand dollar isn't here nor there for this end of the market and as a result canon will charge whatever the monkey throwing the darts comes up with.



I still think the price point is important. Of course some will buy it no matter what it costs, but those buyer numbers will surely differ - and possibly quite substantially - if it costs US$12,000, US$ 19,999 or US$ 25,000.


----------



## Vern (Mar 26, 2014)

Per my prior post on this topic, if the new 800 has an MFD <5m, built-in TC, superior IQ at 800 as compared to the 600II + 1.4XIII, IQ at 1120 = 600 + 1.4, and weighs less than 4 kg, I will purchase one even if it is priced a little north of the Nikon 800. These may be tough specs to meet, but the other series II superT's made improvements along these lines.


----------

