# Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L For Sale



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 16, 2014)

```
<div style="float: right; margin:0 0 76px 0px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/08/canon-ef-1200mm-f5-6l-for-sale/">Tweet</a></div>
<p>A copy of the super rare Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L has come up for sale in the UK. MPB Photographic is selling the lens for £99,000.00! It’s rumored that there are only about 20 of these lenses on the planet according to B&H Photo, who had this lens for sale back in 2009.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/used-equipment/used-lenses/used-canon-fit-lenses/canon-ef-1200mm-f56-l-usm-1" target="_blank">Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6L at MPB Photographic</a></strong></p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7946922415/rare-canon-ef-1200mm-f-5-6l-usm-goes-on-sale-in-uk" target="_blank">DPR</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## davidcl0nel (Aug 16, 2014)

These kind of "news" are boring.... or am i alone with this opinion?


----------



## Lightmaster (Aug 16, 2014)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_1200mm_lens

lensrentals should buy it... 




> about 20 of these lenses on the planet according



and outside? how many more? :


----------



## dppaskewitz (Aug 16, 2014)

Dear Surapon,

Here is your chance!!!!!

Regards, DPP


----------



## slclick (Aug 16, 2014)

There's someone with deep pockets thinking this will be the ultimate chick magnet


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 16, 2014)

Pffftt..!

It's only f/5.6 - not a "serious" lens at all.

Consumer-grade crap..!


----------



## surapon (Aug 16, 2014)

dppaskewitz said:


> Dear Surapon,
> 
> Here is your chance!!!!!
> 
> Regards, DPP



Ha, Ha, Ha---Dear Friend dppaskewitz.
Well, Sorry, I will skip this one, Because I already have 600 mm + 2X = 1200 mm.---BUT, I will keep eyes on the Bigger one ,Canon EF 1,600 MM.
Yes, After my dear wife divorce me, And I will get the Strong / Beautiful Young Wife to help me as the Caddy, during my photography trip.
Ha, Ha, Ha.
Surapon


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Aug 16, 2014)

davidcl0nel said:


> or am i alone with this opinion?



Hard to say - it'll take a while to ask _everybody_...


----------



## candyman (Aug 16, 2014)

surapon said:


> dppaskewitz said:
> 
> 
> > Dear Surapon,
> ...




ha,ha,ha
I know of other (better) purpose for a beautiful young wife  
ha,ha,ha


----------



## infared (Aug 16, 2014)

Offering for sale @ $100,000 and actually sell for that price are not one in the same!
The nonsense has made a lot of headlines though.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 16, 2014)

infared said:


> Offering for sale @ $100,000 and actually sell for that price are not one in the same!
> The nonsense has made a lot of headlines though.



£99,000 is $157,000.

They have changed hands for over $100,000.


----------



## Sabaki (Aug 16, 2014)

It won't go in my Lowepro Flipside 400


----------



## DominoDude (Aug 16, 2014)

For birders, and creepy stalkers, this is The Ultimate Lens! However, I don't see it in my possession anytime on this side of the grave. Gear like this would also create problems in finding suitable tripods and heads, and you would also need to hire a substantial amount of sherpas to haul it around to the birding locations.


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 16, 2014)

Time to see if my AMEX really has "no limit"..........hold on.........adding to cart...........creating account...........confirming order...........submitting order............declined??? 

Well, I tried


----------



## infared (Aug 16, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Offering for sale @ $100,000 and actually sell for that price are not one in the same!
> ...



Really? That's quite entertaining!


----------



## infared (Aug 16, 2014)

DominoDude said:


> For birders, and creepy stalkers, this is The Ultimate Lens! However, I don't see it in my possession anytime on this side of the grave. Gear like this would also create problems in finding suitable tripods and heads, and you would also need to hire a substantial amount of sherpas to haul it around to the birding locations.



It comes with a golf caddy...it fits in the bag quite nicely. The price includes one year of salary for him.


----------



## JPAZ (Aug 16, 2014)

Just added up all the balance remaining on my MIR cards......
Darn! A little short. 
Guess I'll just have to continue to crop to get that FOV.


----------



## RGF (Aug 16, 2014)

Not sure if my wife would believe a lens could be that expensive, let alone I would consider buying it

I don't know if I could get insurance on it

And how would you travel with the lens - but if you can afford a $150,000 lens you should be able to afford a private jet. Definitely would not need to fly in coach with this baby


----------



## John Strung (Aug 16, 2014)

Maybe they will take a trade on a Ferrari? At thirty-six pounds, you might have to do a bit of weight training before you tried hand-holding it.


----------



## e17paul (Aug 16, 2014)

Lightmaster said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_1200mm_lens
> 
> lensrentals should buy it...
> 
> ...



That's a question for NASA and other space agencies.

Seriously, global demand could rise when commercial space travel becomes a reality.


----------



## Lightmaster (Aug 16, 2014)

i still think this fits better to my silver car.

http://blog.uniquephoto.com/ridiculous-lens-of-the-day-leica-apo-telyt-r-15-61600mm-lens/


----------



## Maui5150 (Aug 16, 2014)

Finally... A long tele that has decent resolution and reach and is hand holdable


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 16, 2014)

I wonder if they will "trade even" for my SX-50?


----------



## J. Scott (Aug 16, 2014)

Looking for more of a travel lens.


----------



## Bennie_CanonShooter (Aug 16, 2014)

Zeiss got one - even better - lol. (or maybe, more crazier)

f/4.0 at 1700mm for Medium Format!!!

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18230544

http://alag3.mfa.kfki.hu/astro/giantlenses/500/Carl_Zeiss_APO_Sonnar_T_D425mm_F4.0_f1700mm_09.jpg


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 16, 2014)

Bennie_CanonShooter said:


> Zeiss got one - even better - lol. (or maybe, more crazier)
> 
> f/4.0 at 1700mm for Medium Format!!!
> 
> ...



I'll see you and raise that to 5,200mm.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/reflex8002000/cat.htm


----------



## East Wind Photography (Aug 16, 2014)

I wonder how many royals were photographed with this in private locations???


----------



## DominoDude (Aug 16, 2014)

East Wind Photography said:


> I wonder how many royals were photographed with this in private locations???


I would say that for those that wasn't owned and used by known agencies, they far more likely had other kinds of targets than royalties...


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 16, 2014)

if you really want to go crazy, the Hubble telescope is 57,000mm.....

and there is one in the Canary Islands... 16,500mm at F1.6... Who says you can't get a lens that is both fast and long.....


----------



## elchido (Aug 16, 2014)

I'd rather wait for the mk II


----------



## ScottyP (Aug 17, 2014)

I wish it came in "M" mount. The mirrorless cameras are just so much less bulky.


----------



## Harry Muff (Aug 17, 2014)

I had the pleasure of having a look through one of these 1200s in '97. It was an impressive beast.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 17, 2014)

If I could somehow afford it, I would totally buy this. So much potential!


----------



## gargamel (Aug 17, 2014)

There is a couple of black ones, too, made for German customs and special forces. They found the white ones a little too conspicuous... 

gargamel


----------



## kennephoto (Aug 17, 2014)

But will it blend?


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Aug 17, 2014)

I don't know about this one y'all. There are no reviews yet... :


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 17, 2014)

Tabor Warren Photography said:


> I don't know about this one y'all. There are no reviews yet... :



Yes there are.....

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-1200mm-f-5.6-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


----------



## gerald.d (Aug 17, 2014)

With its little brothers 







Used in shooting this - SuperMoon by @Faz3 - Burj Khalifa

And also this - Burj Khalifa Pinnacle BASE Jump - 4K

Regards,

Gerald.


----------



## e17paul (Aug 17, 2014)

I now realize what a bargain I turned down recently. I was offered an Olympus OM Zuiko 1000mm f/11 at the camera repair shop when I had my OM-10 serviced. Only £1000 including original case and key. 
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/shared/zuiko/htmls/1000mm.htm

I already have the adapter...


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 17, 2014)

gerald.d said:


> With its little brothers
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Really nice work gerald, good to see the old girl getting a new lease of life. How does it compare to the 600 and 2x TC, or even 800 and 1.4TC?


----------



## mrsfotografie (Aug 17, 2014)

gerald.d said:


> With its little brothers
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Goosebumps!!!! Thanks for sharing


----------



## mrsfotografie (Aug 17, 2014)

e17paul said:


> I now realize what a bargain I turned down recently. I was offered an Olympus OM Zuiko 1000mm f/11 at the camera repair shop when I had my OM-10 serviced. Only £1000 including original case and key.
> http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/hardwares/classics/olympusom1n2/shared/zuiko/htmls/1000mm.htm
> 
> I already have the adapter...



The Samyang 650-1300 is a lot cheaper and much more versatile 

€ 329,00 in the Netherlands

http://www.syopt.com/en/camera/tmount-lenses-650-1300mm-MC-IF-f-8-16.php


----------



## danski0224 (Aug 17, 2014)

scyrene said:


> If I could somehow afford it, I would totally buy this. So much potential!



Me too


----------



## lintoni (Aug 17, 2014)

mrsfotografie said:


> e17paul said:
> 
> 
> > I now realize what a bargain I turned down recently. I was offered an Olympus OM Zuiko 1000mm f/11 at the camera repair shop when I had my OM-10 serviced. Only £1000 including original case and key.
> ...



http://www.amazon.co.uk/Opteka-650-2600mm-Definition-Telephoto-Digital/dp/B001NMR23M/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1408278374&sr=8-4&keywords=samyang+650-1300mm

The Opteka branded version of the Samyang come with a 2x teleconvertor, for those occasions when 1300mm is just, well, too short... 
£247.51 inc. P+p


----------



## mrsfotografie (Aug 17, 2014)

lintoni said:


> The Opteka branded version of the Samyang come with a 2x teleconvertor, for those occasions when 1300mm is just, well, too short...
> £247.51 inc. P+p



That makes it f/32 at the long end ??? :


----------



## robdubbleu (Aug 17, 2014)

Is it compatible with the 2x teleconverter? Anything less than 2400mm is useless to me.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 17, 2014)

robdubbleu said:


> Is it compatible with the 2x teleconverter? Anything less than 2400mm is useless to me.



It's compatible with both Canon extenders. No autofocus at 2400 f/11 though


----------



## gerald.d (Aug 17, 2014)

robdubbleu said:


> Is it compatible with the 2x teleconverter? Anything less than 2400mm is useless to me.



Yes.


----------



## LDS (Aug 17, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> if you really want to go crazy, the Hubble telescope is 57,000mm.....
> 
> and there is one in the Canary Islands... 16,500mm at F1.6... Who says you can't get a lens that is both fast and long.....



Just they aren't lenses but mirrors... AFAIK the largest lens telescopes are still the Yerkes, Lick and Paris ones, although I'm sure they won't stand your actual IQ requirements. Also minimum focusing distance could be an issue... and still they lack aperture control and AF.
The Swedish solar telescope in Canary Islands has a very different design compared to telephoto lens.
And, BTW, many large telescopes have different 'focus' positions that allows them to change focal length to allow for different types of instruments, for example IIRC high resolution spectrography requires very long focal lengths. Something alike very big extenders...


----------



## Hannes (Aug 17, 2014)

pfft, it doesn't even have IS.


----------



## Lee Jay (Aug 17, 2014)

For doing actual imagery, the 600+2x or 800+1.4x is probably a superior system - better optics, better coatings, IS. If you really need a lot of resolving power, telescopes are where it's at. Mine cost $2,400 used and is 2,800mm and f/10 or 2,000mm and f/7.


----------



## slclick (Aug 17, 2014)

Sneaker Zoom is quite a bit cheaper


----------



## Lee Jay (Aug 17, 2014)

slclick said:


> Sneaker Zoom is quite a bit cheaper



Not if you want to shoot extraterrestrial objects (the moon, other planets, etc.).


----------



## DominoDude (Aug 17, 2014)

slclick said:


> Sneaker Zoom is quite a bit cheaper



True true, but the restraining order and the electronic ankle bracelet I wear makes the sneaker zoom hard to utilize properly.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 17, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Sneaker Zoom is quite a bit cheaper
> ...



Fortunately for me, I am tall so I can get my camera closer


----------



## slclick (Aug 18, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Sneaker Zoom is quite a bit cheaper
> ...



Do you get out much?


----------



## Lee Jay (Aug 18, 2014)

slclick said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



Got out last night.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 18, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> For doing actual imagery, the 600+2x or 800+1.4x is probably a superior system - better optics, better coatings, IS. If you really need a lot of resolving power, telescopes are where it's at. Mine cost $2,400 used and is 2,800mm and f/10 or 2,000mm and f/7.



Perhaps, although the 1200 is a stop faster than the 600+2x. As for telescopes - I've no doubt you're right (and in this context they'd be the cheaper option), but I've used my 500L for planetary imaging because I don't have the spare money (or inclination) to buy a whole extra piece of kit for that. The results will be nowhere near as good as a dedicated system, but they made me happy 

Hopefully the 1200 II will be handholdable!


----------



## Lee Jay (Aug 18, 2014)

scyrene said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > For doing actual imagery, the 600+2x or 800+1.4x is probably a superior system - better optics, better coatings, IS. If you really need a lot of resolving power, telescopes are where it's at. Mine cost $2,400 used and is 2,800mm and f/10 or 2,000mm and f/7.
> ...



True, but as mentioned in the review, it's not all that great optically until f/8.



> As for telescopes - I've no doubt you're right (and in this context they'd be the cheaper option), but I've used my 500L for planetary imaging because I don't have the spare money (or inclination) to buy a whole extra piece of kit for that. The results will be nowhere near as good as a dedicated system, but they made me happy



I looked at it backwards. I wanted some serious resolving power, and even the smallest Canon supertele was just way too expensive. So I bought a much cheaper but far superior telescope instead, and gave up IS, bokeh, and AF for shear optical power. Saved over $5,000 too.


----------



## Pinchers of Peril (Aug 18, 2014)

Yeah, but how is the bokeh on this thing? And can you reverse mount it for macro?


----------



## justawriter (Aug 18, 2014)

davidcl0nel said:


> These kind of "news" are boring.... or am i alone with this opinion?


With five pages of comments, I would guess that there is a little bit of interest.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 18, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> I looked at it backwards. I wanted some serious resolving power, and even the smallest Canon supertele was just way too expensive. So I bought a much cheaper but far superior telescope instead, and gave up IS, bokeh, and AF for shear optical power. Saved over $5,000 too.



Ah fair enough. I wanted the supertele for bird work. Planets are just a sideline


----------



## jeffa4444 (Aug 21, 2014)

Will need to revalue ours then. At one time we actually had two of these.


----------

