Unleashing the beast
 

I found this link on my travels

http://blogs.reuters.com/2007/07/18/...ing-the-beast/

Probably the largest Nikkor there is!

That is some 'BEAST'.
It must carry quite a price-tag too!!

It used to be about the same price (give or take the odd thousand) as the Canon 1200mm F5.6 years ago but I haven't seen it quoted recently. Definitely a case of 'if you have to ask, you can't afford it!'

And it was ''converted' to fit a Canon body!?!

According to my book by Peter Braczko the lens weights 16Kg and was made to special order from October 1993. It is a P lens and hence will matrix meter with modern cameras.

There is a catadioptric (mirror) lens which requires several people to carry:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...lex/2000mm.htm

It does look to be more compact but it weighs 17.5 Kg and hence is heavier. It was made from 1968 and has a 2000mm focal length and a fixed F11 aperture. A special tripod adaptor adds an extra 7.5Kg.

I dig this photo out every now and again... usually when people are going on about Canon's 1200/5.6 ;)

Still, they all pale into insignificance compared to that Zeiss 1700mm f4 creation that appeared last year.

There's obviously more money in American sports photography than there is in British dragonfly snapping!


Hope he remembered to pack some film :)

More pictures of the beast....

http://hobday.net/fm/n1200-1700/sn200015/

Great pic Andy. No wonder these guys can get such fantastic images at events like the golf championships. Subject isolated by a super diffused background.

Nice link in post #8 Foxy. A good collection of views of the MONSTER.

Mike. Flange to sensor/film plane is less with Canon so Nikkor lenses could be converted to fit. I am sure I read on DPR where a guy frustrated that Nikon had not produced a full frame camera had a couple of his Nikkors modified to Canon fit and bought a 5D.

Don

pressumably those lenses come with free BUPA membership to sort out Photographers bad backs after carrying around such heavy weights! lol