# EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Production to Begin in Q2



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 10, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12596"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12596">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>From Singapore

</strong>A member on the clubsnap forum was at an event in Singapore this week and was told by a Canon guy at the event, that the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x wouldn’t start production until Q2 of 2013. Pricing was estimated at $16,000 (Singapore dollars), that converts out to about $13,000 USD and goes along with the $11,000 pricetag we’ve heard for a while now.</p>
<p>We don’t even have an official announcement yet, so this could be possible. I am hoping once they do announce it, that stock will be available immediately.</p>
<p><strong>Source: [<a href="http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/canon/1207372-canonsg-launch-ef-200-400-f-4l-1-4x-2.html#post8294287" target="_blank">CS</a>]</strong></p>
<p><em>thanks dolina</em></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## 1982chris911 (Jan 10, 2013)

Well for that price it should better be stellar in IQ ... otherwise the 300 f2.8 IS II + the 1.4x and 2.0x Ext III is the much better deal


----------



## expatinasia (Jan 10, 2013)

Isn't that extremely expensive? I mean you could get the 500 or 600 IS II for less than/around that.

Wow.


----------



## PeterJ (Jan 10, 2013)

expatinasia said:


> Isn't that extremely expensive? I mean you could get the 500 or 600 IS II for less than/around that.


I was thinking the same, it'll be interesting to see how it goes. It's also at a point where you could get both ends of the focal range at f/2.8 with a prime for less.


----------



## max (Jan 10, 2013)

If that's the price for the tech with the TC, aren't we better off with a 200-400mm f/4 like nikon for 7 grand?


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 10, 2013)

This lens should be under $4k. I guess there are people willing to buy it anyway, and so Canon will charge what the market will bear.


----------



## viggen61 (Jan 10, 2013)

PeterJ said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't that extremely expensive? I mean you could get the 500 or 600 IS II for less than/around that.
> ...


Not quite, and certainly not with new Canon glass... The 400 f/2.8L IS II is in the same price range.

I think this lens will be very popular, but for what I shoot, and for that money, I'm better off with a 500II or 600II...


----------



## Vikmnilu (Jan 10, 2013)

Well, it will be certainly popular, but that does not mean that will be sold ....  
I mean, I thought already that at 11000 it was way too much. Even I am thinking about upgrading some of my lenses to a 1300-1500 euros lenses and I already think that it is way too much, so imagine 10 times more...

and now the new price might be 13000 hahahah Well... if I win the lottery might be possible...

The lens seems to be amazing, a great range and relatively good aperture... but price... too much


----------



## viggen61 (Jan 10, 2013)

Lee Jay said:


> This lens should be under $4k. I guess there are people willing to buy it anyway, and so Canon will charge what the market will bear.



I don't know. It is a considerably more complex lens to manufacture than a 500mm f/4 or 600mm f/4, offers 200-400mm zoom at a constant f/4, and up to 560mm @ f/5.6 with the 1.4x switched in.

Besides, at $4k, there'd be no room for the 100-400 II!


----------



## M.ST (Jan 10, 2013)

I prefer the other big white lenses and I am not interested in such a lens.


----------



## JoeDavid (Jan 10, 2013)

viggen61 said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > This lens should be under $4k. I guess there are people willing to buy it anyway, and so Canon will charge what the market will bear.
> ...



I agree. Maybe they will over-produce it and the next round of Canon lens rebates will include a $8-10K rebate on it :'(

Or, they want to put this out so there so that when they finally offer an updated 100-400 zoom the $5K they charge for it will look like a good deal!


----------



## sanj (Jan 10, 2013)

Really? Wow! My knee jerk reaction is that its expensive...


----------



## Stone (Jan 10, 2013)

$13K?!? lmao!!!


----------



## infared (Jan 10, 2013)

Ahhhhhh....ahhhhhhh....lte me catch my breath!


----------



## Plainsman (Jan 10, 2013)

Even if I could afford one it would never be on my list. To heavy and to slow. Who the heck anyway is interested in 200 f4.

It has been rumoured there is a 400 f4 non DO in the pipeline. Now that would be a lens worth waiting for - as sharp as the 300/2.8 II but slightly lighter - by my reckoning perhaps only 2.2 Kg with excellent 560/5.6 potential (with latest 1.4XTC).


----------



## Lee Jay (Jan 10, 2013)

viggen61 said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > This lens should be under $4k. I guess there are people willing to buy it anyway, and so Canon will charge what the market will bear.
> ...



This lens has 100mm of aperture (400mm/f4). The 500/4 has 125mm and the 600/4 has 150mm. Aperture is a big deal for these lenses as costs go up in a roughly cubic fashion with aperture. This lens is less complicated than the 70-200/2.8 except for the larger aperture and the integrated teleconverter.

A 100-400L II should be the same price or a little less than the 70-200/2.8L IS II.


----------



## Michael_pfh (Jan 10, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> <div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12596\"></glusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=12596\">Tweet</a></div>
> <p><strong>From Singapore
> 
> 
> ...



That's interesting! The Canon rep that I asked during the very event wasn't able to comment on price but did tell ma about a commercial go live in S'pore in Q2...

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12127.0


----------



## hemidesign (Jan 10, 2013)

I don't know.. too much money for a zoom lens in F4 style... not good at all!
I might get the new Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS HSM.. $3600 it a great price for this kind of lens..


----------



## etg9 (Jan 10, 2013)

I'd be interested in this lens at 4-5k tops but at over 10k it's looking to be for highly paid sports pros only. I wish 3rd party would step up their game on the longer focal lengths as I feel it's where canon is ridiculous with pricing. 

400-600mm stuff is more expensive to make and I understand that. 400mm f4 @ $3500-4500ish would be great. Get me a 600mm f5.6 for 5-6k and that seems fair and good too. Maybe something cheap and long that's not an L lens would be great too.


----------



## Stone (Jan 10, 2013)

I'd love to see what kind of margins Canon makes on those great whites.


----------



## ddashti (Jan 11, 2013)

How come Canon Singapore has been "exclusively" getting all the updates for this first?


----------



## Snaxalig (Jan 11, 2013)

I'm curious to know if the 200-400/4 shown in Singapore recently was from the same pre-production batch as those test lenses that the London Olympic 2012 photogs was able to try out last August. What I mean is that the Olympic photographers apparently was very impressed with the lens' performance and capabilities already. Yet Canon chose to do the construction. Canon in Singapore is said to have shown up on the Canon EF 200-400 Experience days in January 2013, but it was when the "old" design?


----------



## preppyak (Jan 11, 2013)

etg9 said:


> I'd be interested in this lens at 4-5k tops but at over 10k it's looking to be for highly paid sports pros only. I wish 3rd party would step up their game on the longer focal lengths as I feel it's where canon is ridiculous with pricing.


But it's because the market is so small that the prices are so high. Sure, there are hobbyists with the big L tele's, but most are pro's who make their money with it. In which case, they can pay the premium (just like wedding pro's were willing to pay $3500 for the 5d3 that now costs 20% less).

I mean, the tech in the lens is pretty great; you are getting a 200mm-560mm f/4-5.6 zoom basically. And while 200mm f/4 isn't very impressive, the trade-off (variable aperture) isn't worth it, since most aren't going to be using this at 200mm anyway.


----------

