|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
$180,000 lens?
Jun 15 15 06:56 pm Link I love the description that comes with it, ha! No idea if it's a typo though- it's supposedly one of the rarest lenses in the world according to the web, so maybe that figure is right... I know I sure as hell won't be buying it! Jun 15 15 07:03 pm Link Haha! I paid half that for mine! Jun 15 15 07:32 pm Link I was at the B&H store in NYC 10 years ago and they had one on the shelf for only $110,000. There weren't many made and rumor has it the government (CIA/DOD) bought most of them. EDIT: Only a dozen or so were ever made??? 2 per year for 12 years would be two dozen? I had no idea they were that rare. B&H also notes that the Feds have a few of them, but if they have 3 of 12, it would be 25% of total production?? From B&H listing: "Built-to-order by Canon from 1993 to 2005, each lens was hand-crafted at the rate of about 2-per-year and a delivery time of about 18 months. Only a dozen-or-so were ever made. Who bought them? National Geographic magazine and Sports Illustrated are known to own a couple, the Feds probably have a few squirreled away somewhere, and a few well-heeled photo enthusiasts." Jun 15 15 07:38 pm Link If you are okay to loose 400 mm and you can have that range for under 10 k .. like in this 300-800 sigma 5.6  Brian Keith Moody Photo wrote: pics ! Jun 15 15 07:39 pm Link HHPhoto wrote: It's generally thought there are around 20 of them. If the production rate reported is true, the most that there could be is 64: 2 per year, starting in 1984. (Apparently it takes that long to make a flourite crystal big enough.) Jun 15 15 07:42 pm Link 180 large ...and it's used A decent condo in Miami or a camera lens ? decisions, decisions Jun 15 15 07:47 pm Link If you have the extra cash, you could get a Carl Zeiss 1700mm f4  I do not think the price or buyer was ever disclosed publicly. Jun 15 15 08:01 pm Link Interesting review from a time when B&H had one listed for $120,000. See link for more information about this lens. Interesting stuff. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi … eview.aspx The original price was about $90,000. That makes the current listing twice the original cost. (As per the post above where someone (I believe them) bought theirs for half the price. According the review linked above, there are rumored to be as few as 20, but more certainly less than a 100 copies of this lens made. Jun 15 15 08:01 pm Link Do they make an adapter so it will fit a Nikon body...... Jun 15 15 08:10 pm Link Kev Lawson wrote: What? No camera strap? Jun 15 15 08:16 pm Link Solas wrote: Another option might be the Nikkor/Canon 800mm f/5.6 with a 1.4x tele giving you an effective 1120mm f/8 (I think the 1.4x tele is compatible with that anyway). The Canon lens is about $13,000 and the Nikon is about $18,000. Jun 15 15 08:56 pm Link Nothing against Canon, but Canon isn't an optic's company, that is why you see so many Canon's using retrofited Nikon lenses...... Just Buy Nikon to begin with and save the headache....... http://www.petapixel.com/assets/uploads … 0_mini.jpg http://petapixel.com/2015/01/09/nikon-1 … -distance/ Jun 15 15 09:17 pm Link Warren Leimbach wrote: Nope ...no typo. Flim Flopwell reviewed it and says it is a nice Pocket Lens to carry around all day! Jun 15 15 09:43 pm Link Nakrani Studios wrote: I use my old Nikkor film lenses on my Canon with an adapter. It's no problem. Jun 16 15 01:11 am Link I am sure Walmart sells that $180,000 lens for much less! Jun 16 15 05:51 am Link for that price it better be 2.8  Jun 16 15 06:18 am Link DOUGLASFOTOS wrote: I'm sure that with other reviews he has given in the past, he probably never saw that lens either. Jun 16 15 08:54 am Link Take a look at the accessories. $600 for a LensCoat. And the biggest thing....... the lens is USED. Jun 16 15 09:10 am Link Vector One Photography wrote: Here's one for $6.38 and it's BRAND NEW! Jun 16 15 10:17 am Link Warren Leimbach wrote: No typo! Jun 16 15 11:33 am Link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0E-nZOlY_k $180,000 +$15,985.74 tax and $121.01 shipping = $196,106.75 DAFUQ I guess the ends justifies the means! Jun 17 15 05:55 pm Link Michael Alestra wrote: EXACTLY! Jun 17 15 05:56 pm Link HHPhoto wrote: Glad to see at least SOME camera equipment appreciates in value. Jun 17 15 07:04 pm Link dear Santa, I have been really good this year, therefore gimmie this lens! lol... Jun 17 15 08:20 pm Link The Sigmonster 200-500 f2.8 is only $25,000' and it comes with a dedicated 2x teleconverter, so 400-1000 f5.6 for a fraction of the cost of a dedicated 1200 f5.6. Jun 17 15 09:06 pm Link Nikon made a 1200-1700 5.6 -8.0 IF memory serves me correctly ... back in the late 90's ... NOBODY would take my inquiry about it seriously Finally I was told something like $65,000.00 paid in full up front and wait TWO YEARS for them to make it Decided not to get it ...... Jun 17 15 09:48 pm Link Michael Alestra wrote: If this lens was f2.8 it would be larger and more expensive. Jun 18 15 04:26 am Link Lol "pack mule not included" Jun 18 15 04:57 am Link Sigh Jun 18 15 07:17 am Link Michael Alestra wrote: you did read the specs? pack mule not included. Jun 18 15 08:22 am Link Photos by Stan wrote: Why in the hell would it take so long to make this lens? They should have a dedicated team for this build or at least 1-3 on hand for sale! Jun 18 15 08:44 am Link Jerry Nemeth wrote: im fully aware of that but im just saying for that price, it better be f2.8 Jun 18 15 09:54 am Link 
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica You're all outta luck - I see it comes with 'FREE expedited shipping'. I'm ordering it right now.  I also like how two people posted 'reviews'. Jun 18 15 10:00 am Link
Photographer Posts: 4288 Amundsen-Scott - permanent station of the US, Unclaimed Sector, Antarctica Gene Cannon wrote: Yeah, but when you checkout, you have to stand behind someone wearing their pajamas. Jun 18 15 10:03 am Link No self respecting portrait shooter would be caught without one. Ask Ken Rockwell. Works particularly well on crop sensor cameras, although admittedly, your studio does need to be a bit deeper than most. I AM surprised it doesnt include standard two way radios for communicating with your subjects. A steal at under $200K Jun 18 15 11:29 am Link Pfff... If you can wait a few weeks (or months), you can save yourself about $179,350 and get the new Nikon P900. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/control … ;A=details That'll give you 2000mm optical and you can even use it to shoot your kid's birthday at 24mm. Seems like a no brainer. It's f/6.5 at the long end, but it's still 67% longer than that bulky ole Canon beast. Jun 19 15 10:33 pm Link Warren Leimbach wrote: The lens cover is $599. Maybe that's the price in Japanese Yen? Jun 20 15 10:52 am Link Michael Alestra wrote: Hear, Hear! Jun 21 15 02:56 am Link Photos by Stan wrote: Yep, thats the Nikon 'Baseball' lens. A lens specifically designed to capture certain players from a press box at a specific baseball field. And everybody thought Nikon only recently started to target niche markets... Jun 21 15 04:21 am Link |
