What is the fastest full frame mount telephoto prime?
85mm 1.4 and canons 85mm 1.2
Sigma has a 100mm 1.8 but its a crop.
Anything over 85mm and under 2.8?
(Older canon at 100mm 2.0 i think...)
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
200mm F2. Canon and Nikon each make one.
Then there is the 300mm F2.8 and 400mm F2.8
1.2 is the fastest on your list.
Interesting question. As the telephoto lenses get larger, the speed of the lens decreases. To make an extremely fast super telephoto would be next to impossible due to the size requirements of the glass. The faster the telephoto lens, the larger the glass elements need to be. Canon makes a 1200 mm f/5.6 lens that costs around $100,000.00 USD. Leica makes a f/5.6 1600mm lens but that's about a 2 million USD piece of glass. The largest and most ridiculous SLR lens made, and there is more than one of them, is a 5200mm f/14 monster made by Canon. I don't know if they would still make one but it a bargain at half a million USD.
TriX
Loc: Raleigh, NC
Gene51 wrote:
200mm F2. Canon and Nikon each make one.
Then there is the 300mm F2.8 and 400mm F2.8
Yep, and the Canon EF 135 f2...
crazydaddio wrote:
What is the fastest full frame mount telephoto prime?
85mm 1.4 and canons 85mm 1.2
Sigma has a 100mm 1.8 but its a crop.
Anything over 85mm and under 2.8?
(Older canon at 100mm 2.0 i think...)
Nikon has made 300mm f2, Canon has made 200mm f1.8, Nikon 105mm 1.4 .......
TriX
Loc: Raleigh, NC
imagemeister wrote:
Nikon has made 300mm f2.......
And a Canon EF PE 300mm f1.8 for photofinishes of horse races. According to Wiki, they only made 4.
crazydaddio wrote:
What is the fastest full frame mount telephoto prime?
85mm 1.4 and canons 85mm 1.2
Sigma has a 100mm 1.8 but its a crop.
Anything over 85mm and under 2.8?
(Older canon at 100mm 2.0 i think...)
I will let the others tell you about particular lenses, but there is one practical reason for long lenses to be slower--the greater the magnification, the less the depth of field at a given f-stop. So f5.6 on a long lens has less depth of field than f5.6 on a short lens. If the DOF is so shallow that typical uses for telephoto are impossible, then the lens is useless or very limited. F8, or even f11on very long lenses, is fast enough, while maintaining focus for the whole subject.
An exception would be distant subjects such as stars or ships at sea (a typical use for telephoto)--depth of field is good even at large apertures when the subject is far away, so a large aperture could be great for astrophotography and distant landscapes with no foreground, etc. But most distant objects can be shot at f5.6 or larger in daylight with fast shutters. The reasons for larger apertures are very few. (Even action at a great distance is frozen at moderate speeds--moving jets, etc.) A starry night sky can be shot with wide angle or normal lenses with fast apertures.
Charles 46277 wrote:
I will let the others tell you about particular lenses, but there is one practical reason for long lenses to be slower--the greater the magnification, the less the depth of field at a given f-stop. So f5.6 on a long lens has less depth of field than f5.6 on a short lens. If the DOF is so shallow that typical uses for telephoto are impossible, then the lens is useless or very limited. F8, or even f11on very long lenses, is fast enough, while maintaining focus for the whole subject.
An exception would be distant subjects such as stars or ships at sea (a typical use for telephoto)--depth of field is good even at large apertures when the subject is far away, so a large aperture could be great for astrophotography and distant landscapes with no foreground, etc. But most distant objects can be shot at f5.6 or larger in daylight with fast shutters. The reasons for larger apertures are very few. (Even action at a great distance is frozen at moderate speeds--moving jets, etc.) A starry night sky can be shot with wide angle or normal lenses with fast apertures.
I will let the others tell you about particular le... (
show quote)
Sounds good to me...
The Canon 5200mm lens has a minimum focus of 400 feet.
rmorrison1116 wrote:
Sounds good to me...
The Canon 5200mm lens has a minimum focus of 400 feet.
It needs several hundred extension tubes :)
crazydaddio wrote:
What is the fastest full frame mount telephoto prime?
85mm 1.4 and canons 85mm 1.2
Sigma has a 100mm 1.8 but its a crop.
Anything over 85mm and under 2.8?
(Older canon at 100mm 2.0 i think...)
It's a simple matter to go on the various manufacturer's web sites and see for yourself what's available!
crazydaddio wrote:
What is the fastest full frame mount telephoto prime?
85mm 1.4 and canons 85mm 1.2
Sigma has a 100mm 1.8 but its a crop.
Anything over 85mm and under 2.8?
(Older canon at 100mm 2.0 i think...)
Sigma also has a full frame 135mm F1.8 that is a beautiful lens.
But if you want the ultimate it would be the Sigma 500mm F2.8. Oh and its also a 200-500mm F2.8 ZOOM.
crazydaddio wrote:
What is the fastest full frame mount telephoto prime?
85mm 1.4 and canons 85mm 1.2
Sigma has a 100mm 1.8 but its a crop.
Anything over 85mm and under 2.8?
(Older canon at 100mm 2.0 i think...)
Canon made both a 200 f1.8 and a 50mm f1.0 and both are fully Auto Focus with any EOS camera. And both can be readily bought used but they aren't cheap. Both are amazing lenses for what they were made for!
SS
BHC
Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA
The aperture (not the largest element) of a 1200mm f/5.6 lens is almost 8.5” in diameter. Consider the aperture mounting tabs and the housing; how big is the lens? The Canon version is 32.9" long, 8.9" in diameter and weighs 36.37lbs.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
rmorrison1116 wrote:
Sounds good to me...
The Canon 5200mm lens has a minimum focus of 400 feet.
Is that a macro at 400 ft?
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.