You are obviously talking about the price……..
2 Likes
No, there is no price.
No, but estimates are saying $10/12,000.
Makes you realise how cheap Naim is. Mind you, they don’t make very good lenses.
2 Likes
I think like the more expensive Naim boxes, it will be heavy. Maybe you will be getting a lots of grams for your money?
1 Like
With almost any lens surely what you hope for is less weight for your money?
When I see cross sections of lenses I am often surprised at how complex they look & can therefore see why some are so expensive.
However, when a lot of similar lengths lenses cost in the £3/4,000 region, even allowing for the wider aperture, I fail to see why the vast cost difference despite the extra engineering involved. I suppose it’s a case of a smaller buyers market to cover development & manufacturing costs plus the assumption that a lot of buyers will be corporates with bigger wallets ( & tax offsets) than the average buyer, so the manufacturer charges what they feel they can get away with?
I also suspect that, as with so many things, the law of diminishing returns applies. Small improvements cost a lot.
2 Likes
Heavy, horribly expensive and, to be honest, not such an enticing focal range, even after using the tele converter. The f2.8 is impressive, but to get that 1 or 2 stop advantage has its drawbacks.
I know its not the same, but it is possible to make up for the lack of a really fast f number by using a higher ISO - and modern mirrorless cameras can certainly give you that. Of course, focussing ability is hampered in low light
2 Likes
I would post, but I’m still trying to figure out how to take a picture of my camera with my camera. It’s a very meta problem. 
4 Likes
I make a distinction between slow to acquire focus and slow to track a focused subject. Understanding these differences has helped me optimise my Canon set up.
Hope you can make it work for you. The EF 100-400 L should still be banging glass.
1 Like
Have to say I didn’t find the focus slow with the EF100-400, it could just struggle to make and keep focus when tracking fast planes on occasion, particularly at a distance in challenging light.
But I do have a tremendously high keeper rate, despite pushing things by nature of what I like doing. I just have the occasional frustration, which seems to be caused by older ef zoom lens tech on an R vs newer rf tech on the same body.
I don’t have the same issues on my ef 300mm 2.8 but that has fewer challenges thrown at it and I suspect, being a bright prime, it doesn’t have to work so hard.
Now, I’m probably being hard on the ef 100-400 here(!), it is a terrific lens, just read a few similar notes here and there that suggested that the 100-500 being made for the R series just has a better, more consistent rate of sticky comms. with the body in these situations. Judging by tomorrow’s forecast it looks like I will be testing this out…
2 Likes
Looking forward to seeing your results, so no pressure from me 
1 Like
Very neat and clever little machine, OM-1 Mark II, M4/3. Steep learning curve after 35 years with Minolta/Sony but quite impressive.
7 Likes
Did a quick try out of the beast (no extenders) on my other two bodies (7D2 & 5D4) and had no issues.
Back onto the R5.2 using the EF-EOS R Control Ring adaptor….Hmmm. Something odd in the settings perhaps? …..
Cooking dinner now, so will have another go tomorrow.
I’m beginning to feel a complete “factory reset” coming on!
1 Like
Very, very nice 
2 Likes
Hey ! What’re ya doin’ with MY Peak Design strap ??
It does have a nice look about it. 
1 Like
Ah. I don’t know. I have just have the straight EF to R adapter.
Got the straight-thru one as well, also a 3rd party (Meike) “drop in filter” adaptor to play with.
Many things to keep up the interest in retirement 
1 Like
In which case I would try that one instead, and see if you think there are improvements in AF speed etc.