Name and price this lens

[Sask2005]

Seen at a local sports game - please name and estimate the purchase price of this lens fitted to the Canon camera. :barb

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nzphotopro1/284542358/

[AntoineD]

Seen at a local sports game - please name and estimate the purchase price of this lens fitted to the Canon camera. :barb

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nzphotopro1/284542358/

looks like a 300 f2.8 to me, but I'm not a canonist :)

[pathfinder]

Too big for a 300 f2.8.

I'd guess a 400 f2.8 Not long enough for a 500 f4.

[AntoineD]

Too big for a 300 f2.8.

I'd guess a 400 f2.8 Not long enough for a 500 f4.

Sure (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=154&modelid=7317)?

Well, why not, but 400's pretty big, too… at least we know this is a big lens :D

[ziggy53]

I'm guessing the EF 400mm, f4DO, with ET-120 lens hood. (The hood is all we can see, and it's the same hood as the EF 300mm, f2.8L-IS, so I'm mostly trying to be different. Only the lens hoods ET-120 and ET-160 appear to have this color scheme.) I'm guessing the photographer is of small stature.

http://www.samys.com/products/canon/canoc448301_x190.jpg

If so, that lens is around $5300 USD.

The lens Pathfinder mentioned is around $6600, and the one Antoine mentioned is around $3900.

What do we win if we're right? :wink

Bruce, are you stalking Catto again?

ziggy53

[claudermilk]

Too big for a 300 f2.8.

I'd guess a 400 f2.8 Not long enough for a 500 f4.

That's kind of what I'm thinking. I've only played with the 300/2.8IS personally & that hood looks about the same, but the lens seems a bit too long for the 300.

[Andy]

:nah looks like a Canon 200 f/1.8 to me :thumb
and the price? About $4K pristine, mabye $4.5K

[AntoineD]

:nah looks like a Canon 200 f/1.8 to me :thumb

nice piece of gear, indeed :)

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/ef/l_product/ef_200_18l_usm.jpg

[gluwater]

Bruce, are you stalking Catto again?

ziggy53
:lol3:lol3

[Catto]

Bruce, are you stalking Catto again?

Nah, that's Marty, he's a local freelance sports photographer. But a good one! (And no, he's not that tall. Sorry Marty!)

I'm not going to rule it out, but I only know of two 200mm f/1.8 lenses in Wellington; so unless he's borrowed one of those - which is possible - I'm thinking it would be either the 300 or 400 mentioned above.

That being the case, I'm not going to speculate on cost; but you can usually find NZ prices on Canon gear at http://www.progear.co.nz/...
R

p.s. you could have just asked him! He was, after all, standing right there when you took the picture...

[Art Scott]

you could have just asked him! He was, after all, standing right there when you took the picture...

That was my thought....Why didn't you just ask him??

I am shy quite person in public...but still I can go ask another photog what he is shooting and why.....most I have run into really like to talk about their gear, especially when your gear is not as "pro" as far as they are concerned.......

[Sask2005]

Stalking who - no - Wellington is so small we just end up at the same events all the time.

One extremely good photography I met once told me to imamate the people with the best cameras, look at their photos and learn from their expertise. However a us$5K lens is a little out of my budget right now. Shame.

Actually I think Robert Catto's photograpy is great and some of his shots are incredible. :clap

[Catto]

...I'm thinking it would be either the 300 or 400 mentioned above.

Actually, looking more closely, see how much white tube space there is between his hand and the tripod / monopod mount of the lens? I'm going to say this is the 300/2.8 - with a 1.4x or 2x teleconverter on it. Anyone like to second that nomination?
R

[Sask2005]

Because the guy was busy, running up and down the field and I didn't want to interupt his work.

[pathfinder]

Because the diameter of the 400 f2.8 IS is 6.4 inches, and the diameter of the 400 f4 DO and the 300 f2.8 IS are both 5 inches, I still favor the 400 f2.8 IS L:thumb

That is a very large lens hood.

Bigger than the 300f2.8 and the 400 f4 DO, I believe (which use the same lens hood as Ziggy said.)

[Bodwick]

Stalking who - no - Wellington is so small we just end up at the same events all the time.

One extremely good photography I met once told me to imamate the people with the best cameras, look at their photos and learn from their expertise. However a us$5K lens is a little out of my budget right now. Shame.

Actually I think Robert Catto's photograpy is great and some of his shots are incredible. :clap




I've had a 200mm 1.8 for a few years now and it's a great lens. I don't recognise the tripod ring connection as that of the 200. A 1.4 or 2 seems to be fitted.

No more production so your looking second hand.

I'm with you on 'Catto's' photography....

I'm also struggling to keep a whole host of joke's and comments to myself...

:barb
Bod.

[ziggy53]

...

Actually I think Robert Catto's photograpy is great and some of his shots are incredible. :clap




Good to hear it and I quite agree.:thumb

ziggy53