«

dj_nme wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Something to drool over?
>>
>> Canon 9.3-800mm image-stabilised f/1.7-f/4.0 lens....
>>
>> http://www.expandore.com/product/add...UPER86IIxs.htm
>>
>> David
>
> You do realise that this isn't an EOS mount lens, I hope?
> It's video camera lens (for something like the Canon XL H1 HD), so it
> probably can only cover a 2/3" CCD at best.

Yes, I've seen them in use and the results from same. At the Australian
Formula 1 Grand Prix, as it happens, although I guess they are a fairly
common sports lens.

Cheers,
David

David J Taylor wrote:
> Something to drool over?
>
> Canon 9.3-800mm image-stabilised f/1.7-f/4.0 lens....
>
> http://www.expandore.com/product/add...UPER86IIxs.htm

Dang! Looks like I'll have to beef up both the mono and tripods.....

--
John McWilliams

vern wrote:
>
>> Something to drool over?
>>
>> Canon 9.3-800mm image-stabilised f/1.7-f/4.0 lens....
>>
>> http://www.expandore.com/product/add...UPER86IIxs.htm
>
> No thanks. I already have that much zoom range and aperture (well, f/2.0 -
> f/2.4) *with* IS on my P&S cameras with only 2.5 lbs. of glass for less than
> $300, vs. 51.8 lbs for $xxx,xxx?. of non-diffraction limited overpriced DSLR
> crap. Can anyone find a price on that piece of ****? I sure can't.

That is a P&S lens: diffraction limited at 2MP HD video, 9.6 x 5.4 mm
(16:9) 1920x1080. That's what the setup you describe costs if it were
usable at 2MP.

David J Taylor <david-> wrote:
>Something to drool over?
>
>Canon 9.3-800mm image-stabilised f/1.7-f/4.0 lens....
>
> http://www.expandore.com/product/add...UPER86IIxs.htm

But keep in mind that it's designed for 2MP images. I suspect that it
lacks some sharpnes with a 20MP image. It's also not very portable.
No autofocus. No aperture.

--
Ray Fischer

elmer_goldsteine <egoldsteine@go****yourdslrs.org> wrote:
>On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 16:59:31 GMT, "David J Taylor"
><david-> wrote:
>
>>Something to drool over?
>>
>>Canon 9.3-800mm image-stabilised f/1.7-f/4.0 lens....
>>
>> http://www.expandore.com/product/add...UPER86IIxs.htm
>>
>>David
>
>No thanks. I already have that much zoom range and aperture (well, f/2.0 -
>f/2.4) *with* IS on my P&S cameras with only 2.5 lbs. of glass for less than

But you're that spamming asshole who keeps lying his ass off.

--
Ray Fischer

> vern wrote:
>>
>>> Something to drool over?
>>>
>>> Canon 9.3-800mm image-stabilised f/1.7-f/4.0 lens....
>>>
>>> http://www.expandore.com/product/add...UPER86IIxs.htm
>>
>> No thanks. I already have that much zoom range and aperture (well,
>> f/2.0 - f/2.4) *with* IS on my P&S cameras with only 2.5 lbs. of glass
>> for less than $300, vs. 51.8 lbs for $xxx,xxx?. of non-diffraction
>> limited overpriced DSLR crap.
>> Can anyone find a price on that piece of ****? I sure can't.

Someone said about $150,000. And this one doesn't even go to 1248mm. But
I'm sure yours does, and at 6MP too.

> That is a P&S lens: diffraction limited at 2MP HD video, 9.6 x 5.4 mm
> (16:9) 1920x1080. That's what the setup you describe costs if it were
> usable at 2MP.