# How much!?



## AdamJ (Nov 4, 2011)

Canon, I take my hat off to you. $45,000 for a lens. A new benchmark. I suppose it will make new L lenses seem cheap.


----------



## PeterJ (Nov 4, 2011)

AdamJ said:


> $45,000 for a lens. A new benchmark.


I believe the special order 1200/5.6L USM will set you back well over double that so maybe not a new benchmark, but still a bit outside my price range :'(


----------



## dr croubie (Nov 4, 2011)

That's even more than the dearest Zeiss i've found so far.

Still, this is definitely aimed at hollywood and pros, these are not camera/lenses for the masses...


----------



## Tarrum (Nov 4, 2011)

It's not really aimed at your DSLR, nor entry level or the most expensive one. It's for the C300 and their next cameras.

$45k is indeed too much for most of us, but those in Hollywood who will need it will get it, or at least rent it. I don't see such a big deal in this, the beautiful primes come for $6800 though, gotta love it


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 4, 2011)

That 14.5-60 zoom would be a wondrous thing to use on a FF camera (even on my 7D, twould still be glorious!). Mayhap, in many many years, when I am old and wizened, I can come accross one in a garage sale. Until then, I shall keep on dreaming!


----------



## Flake (Nov 4, 2011)

$45,000 for a new lens? Peanuts! How about a second hand Canon prime for $45,000 yep on ebay a while ago.

http://www.petapixel.com/2010/01/06/ginormous-5200mm-canon-lens-on-ebay/

Has to be the biggest lens ever made for an SLR and makes Sigmas 200-500mm f/2.8 look tiny!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 4, 2011)

AprilForever said:


> That 14.5-60 zoom would be a wondrous thing to use on a FF camera



Not really, since the image circle covers only Super35, approximately APS-C. So, while it would work on your 7D, you'd get terrible vignetting on FF. Although the new primes will work on FF, the new zooms are effectively EF-S lenses in terms of image circle.


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 4, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> AprilForever said:
> 
> 
> > That 14.5-60 zoom would be a wondrous thing to use on a FF camera
> ...



What?!?!? They tricked me!!!! I must cancel my order now!  

The glories of only half reading rumors and not paying attention to what is read...


----------



## SlothLovesChunk (Nov 4, 2011)

I know a lot of people insist on the superiority of these PL "cinema" lenses, but the idea that they're worth a $40,000 up-charge on any of our L lenses is just ridiculous. They are trying to market these things as "4K rated"...has everyone forgotten that our DSLR's already have 4k+ sensors? I feel like I'm living in a coo coo clock! All of our lenses already ARE 4k lenses! 4k resolution is not new. It's only new to video. 
The ONLY real difference in these lenses is the focusing mechanism and manual iris. That's it. Our stills glass is beautiful...the stuff that people are shooting with their EF mount on Epic is absolutely flawless. 
If you don't mind dealing with tricky focus pulling, your L lenses are already $45,000-level lenses. Even Gale Tattersall agrees (House DP). Hollywood is an old-money kind of club. Cinema gear is extremely cost-prohibitive for truly unnecessary reasons, but a lot of industry bros love to keep it that way because it makes them feel special. Sadly, Canon's feeding into that crap with a $20,000 1080p camera and $45,000 lenses. This is silly. Apparently the word "cinema" is just a tool to inflate your prices. 
Red spanked Canon yesterday. The price and resolution of Scarlet, RAW recording, full upgradability, ef mount standard...kind of a dream camera...but the cropping on Scarlet is a borderline dealbreaker...
It seems we're all still sort of stuck in the middle. It seems like what everyone wants is a FF sensor video camera with good resolution and color space for a price we could put on ONE credit card (<5k). I don't think that's unreasonable, either. The 5DII was so popular because of that big fat sensor! That's it! It just has a look to it that you can't get any other way. 
Throw an original 5D 12mp sensor in front of an EF mount with dual Digic V and a Thunderbolt port to record raw or 2k+ res externally. Done. $3k max and it'll still be profitable.


----------



## Sunnystate (Nov 4, 2011)

Is it Canon still Japanese owned and managed corporation? 
Or maybe....
It is time to just don't care anymore.


----------



## herbert (Nov 4, 2011)

SlothLovesChunk said:


> The ONLY real difference in these lenses is the focusing mechanism and manual iris. That's it.



I was under the impression that cinema lenses exhibit no focus breathing. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breathing_(lens)

Thus when you change focus your field of view is the same. From the price I think we can assume that this is a lot harder to manufacture than optical sharpness in our well known EF still lenses.

Plus can you put a price on bokeh? Maybe Canon have tried to.


----------



## PaperTiger (Nov 4, 2011)

PL zooms in this price range are not uncommon. I think it comes down to extremely low production volume, very specific lens designs compared to your average L lens, and the fact that $45K on even a low budget film is nothing.


----------



## Axilrod (Nov 4, 2011)

Arri Master Primes are $22k+/each
http://www.abelcine.com/store/Arri-Master-Primes/

And it's not uncommon for PL zooms to be that expensive. Those are MASSIVE lenses and quite complex and produced on a much smaller scale, I don't think the price will be much of a shock for Hollywood folks. And I'm sure people will opt to rent these, they are just too expensive to own.


----------



## niccyboy (Nov 4, 2011)

Pretty sure this sold for about 120,000 second hand didnt it

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/116642-USA/Canon_2527A001_Super_Telephoto_1200mm_f_5_6L.html


----------

