Why are there so few decent value modern tele primes for Canon users?

[MotoAero]

Is it just me or do other Canon users on here feel a little hard done by when it comes to the range of long telephoto primes available to them without spending more than two or even three grand? Canon's affordable tele primes stop at 400mm. I have the Canon 400 L F5.6 telephoto lens and it is one of my favouring lenses.....a total keeper. It's worth noting though that both the 400 L F5.6 and the 300mm L F4 are two of the oldest lenses in Canon's line up and the 300 for me was just no up to the mark. The 400 doesn't even have OS. As I shoot aviation and motorsport (mostly motorbike racing) I often need something longer than 400mm and that's where I have an issue. Above 400mm, Canon's line up of tele lenses moves in to the exotic and scarily priced fast aperture L Pro lenses all of which cost North of five grand. I simply cannot afford the sort of money they are asking. There are loads of long zooms covering the 150-600mm range and they are all under £2k; Sigma alone have THREE lenses in that space and I own the baby of the group, the 150-600 C. However, my issue with all of those lenses is that they are heavy, handle poorly at full extension (they never seem very balanced) and have relatively slow maximum apertures at 600mm. Surely Sigma could make a 500mm F5.6 for under £2k? I'd even take a 600mm F6.3 prime over their superzooms in the hope that it would be sharper and handle better and be a little lighter. Am I singing this tune alone or does anyone else share my frustration?

 

[RichardC27]

I don't think any camera manufacturer does cheap telephoto primes, it's not just Canon.

Basically you get what you pay for, and high quality big telephoto prime lenses are expensive. Sigma do make a 500mm f4 prime but I believe it's around £5k. I dont think losing a single stop of light from that lens would get it under £2k, at least not with acceptable image quality.

With the Sigma 600mm zoom lenses, the slow max aperture is to keep costs and size to a manageable range. Imagine the size, weight and cost of a 600mm f4 zoom lens, it would be totally unusable. I'm actually quite tempted by the 150-600mm C lens for motorsport work

My only frustration is that I cannot afford to buy any of the nice big L series primes! Sigma do a 120-300mm f2.8 zoom lens that seems very good, and that can be had for under £2k second hand.

 

[Caerus]

Not enough market demand for it to make a production run with all its associated costs that are probably very considerable there days.

 

[hashcake]

You have to think about production costs for lenses.
There use to be a video on youtube Showing a Canon lens being produced that would give you a good insight into this.
If the likes of Canon produced lenses around 150-600 chances are they would L lenses with a metal case making it even heavier than your Sigma and they would also be a lot more expensive.
As for their prime long focal length L lenses, again production costs and probably smaller batches comes into play.

 

[ukaskew]

Er, does any manufacturer make these lenses you speak of? The situation doesn't seem any different over at Nikon, or Sony, or Olympus, or Panasonic.

The market is niche as it is, so zoom lenses fill the cheaper end of the market and the pros and wealthy hobbyists have the ultra expensive primes at their disposal. If there was a market Sigma would have found a way to fill it.

 

[MatBin]

Agreed but it's not just long fast primes. Canon and the independants used to make pretty decent affordable lenses in the "old" days of film photography but these days it seems to be a rarity to find a modestly priced good lens (unless we look af EF-S type) and we are forced into buying L series.
To get round your issue maybe an extender would work for you on your current lenses.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I think our expectations of quality have changed quite a bit since the days of cheaper fixed primes. I've started occasionally using a Sigma 600mm f8 Mirror lens I was gifted some years back, but TBH I would lose much quality by comparison if I cropped from the 105mm end of my walk-about zoom. The images it creates can have a certain charm, but there is such a profound lack of detail and contrast in the images that at first I though I must have failed to focus. This was not a notably 'bad' lens when sold originally.

It's likely that, as said, the cost of doing a decent long lens is too high for a budget market to bear, even if it has a modest max aperture.

 

[Unlocker]

Probably the only lens that suits the ideas would be the Nikon 500mm f5.6 PF

It's £3,699 and won't work on your camera, but it might be the only thing available to you.

Rumours are there is a 600m f5.6 on the way as well but I'd budget at least £5k for that too.

 

[sirch]

Olympus, or Panasonic.

Of course the equivalent to 600mm FF is 300mm on MFT, Olympus do a 300mm f4 which can be had on the grey market for well under £2000. I have also used my Canon 100-300 with an adapter on my Olympus EM5ii giving 600mm.

It's an awful lot cheaper to buy a smaller camera than a bigger lens

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

It's an awful lot cheaper to buy a smaller camera than a bigger lens

...and ever so much better for your spine as well!

 

[ukaskew]

I do wonder why the Sigma 100-300mm f4 never came back, it was a nice compromise between speed and size and seemed popular in its day.

 

[gcgraphs]

I do wonder why the Sigma 100-300mm f4 never came back, it was a nice compromise between speed and size and seemed popular in its day.

Agree, it was a great lens for the money. Still got one kicking about somewhere!

GC

 

[MotoAero]

Probably the only lens that suits the ideas would be the Nikon 500mm f5.6 PF

It's £3,699 and won't work on your camera, but it might be the only thing available to you.

Rumours are there is a 600m f5.6 on the way as well but I'd budget at least £5k for that too.

If I wasn't so heavily invested in Canon glass and camera bodies I'd go Nikon now as I think they have a better range of enthusiast glass. The Olympus OM-D E-M1X would get a look in too for the reasons mentioned above although the smaller sensor doesn't thrill me. People make many valid points above but I guess my frustration is that taking Sigma for example, they effectively have THREE 600mm F6.3 tele lenses but they all happen to be zooms. Most people buying them want them for the 600mm end and that's where my 150-600 spends 90% of its time. So why not make a 600mm F6.3 prime? Simpler, lighter, potentially sharper (but admittedly physically longer) than the zooms. I can live with the slower max aperture if it keeps the cost and filter size down. In this day and age they could probably even make it "extend" like a zoom in to its operating length to keep the stored length down without losing any image quality. Maybe I've just invented the collapsible long tele lens?

 

[MotoAero]

Agreed but it's not just long fast primes. Canon and the independants used to make pretty decent affordable lenses in the "old" days of film photography but these days it seems to be a rarity to find a modestly priced good lens (unless we look af EF-S type) and we are forced into buying L series.
To get round your issue maybe an extender would work for you on your current lenses.

Funnily enough I'm just waiting for a Canon 1.4x MkIII to be delivered!

 

[Unlocker]

Maybe I've just invented the collapsible long tele lens?

There is another option I forgot about and that's the Pentax 560mm f5.6 and IIRC there was a patent around before it was released that it might have been an extendable lens due to it's minimal design, so you might not have thought of it first!

 

[MotoAero]

There is another option I forgot about and that's the Pentax 560mm f5.6 and IIRC there was a patent around before it was released that it might have been an extendable lens due to it's minimal design, so you might not have thought of it first!

I am sure I haven't invented it too, well certainly not the principle anyway ;-). The Canon EF-M 11-22mm f4-5.6 IS STM M-Mount Lens is a "retractable" design. You have to extend it before you can use it. I had one for a while before I gave up on the M system and I wish I had a pound for very time I tried to use it without extending it.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I will just say my 400mm 5.6L is quite useful even outside the presumed wildlife field. Sharpness is exemplary and it doesn't matter it was made quite a while ago. No IS may be slightly annoying but normally its either on tripod (landscapes) or using a very high shutter speed. Long MFD is a bigger complaint actually.

There is 100-400 II IS which is supposed to be just as sharp. I can't justify 2.5x price tag at the moment for what it is used but will be an option for some.

For one off image there is 1.4X TC.

I am sure it will work just as well and in fact better with the SONY. In body IS and all that...

And then there are Sigma zooms up to xxx-600mm. They are quite decent actually and a fraction of canon big L cost. Still they offer too little benefit over 400mm for me to have all the extra bulk that wouldn't fit in my regular bag. I had 600L and that was just a hassle to get it out anywhere.