![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Well, Mistress, do you know why Nikon used to make the Nikonos 5 in both orange and green bodies?
|
Quote:
|
I once heard another salesman tell a customer that certain types of fish were attracted to the orange one. I had just started at the time and so I asked the guy about it once the customer left. He started laughing and said he just made that up to get the customer to make up his mind.
I believe the white lens-thing is the truth, though. |
Quote:
|
I guess that asking why Canon paints its long lenses white is akin to asking which oil is better, dyno or synthetic.
Read below: White/black finish of Canon telephoto lenses Istvan Sandor, Feb 04, 2007; 02:12 a.m. Hi, I would be curious to know how many of you would welcome if the currently white Canon lenses were available in black. Do you think it would be a good idea if they were available in both colors ? My guess is that many would welcome this and it would not mean a serious extra costs (production, logistics) for Canon. Do you think that the white finish has any technical advantage (protection from overheating under direct sunlight?) or it just serves pure marketing purposes. Yes, it is undoubtedly impressive to see the huge amount of white lenses at sports and other kind of events (advantage for Canon only) but I personally still strongly dislike the white color and it is - I think - also a disadvantage at both candids and in nature. OK, you can always put black stockings on the white lenses (as I do) but it looks a little stupid on these precious equipment. (however, for me it is still better than leaving it white). Also, for those who also not in favour of the white color, how do you go around it? Answers Johnson D., Feb 04, 2007; 02:47 a.m. When I feel like being particularly fashionable I just put on a pair of red socks or a nice Hawaiian shirt. As far as lens color goes, I couldn't care less. It has absolutely zero impact on my lens purchasing decisions. Delwyn Ching, Feb 04, 2007; 03:39 a.m. The white color according to Canon is to offer some heat protection from the sunlight. Who cares about the white color, but it does looks cool, the lens are great. Some of Konica-Minolta's (now Sony) telephoto lenses are white. Your best bet to get around it is to spray paint it black with Krylon or Rust Oleum; or you could use several boxes of sharpie pens. Geoff Francis, Feb 04, 2007; 05:36 a.m. If I were sitting at a sporting event all day in the summer sun I would definitely want a white lens to reduce heat build up. As it is I don't do that and mostly do travel phootgraphy and would prefer to be inconspicous. I doubt the 70-200 f4 L needs to be white, and I might have considered buying it if it were available in stealth black. . Savvas Sidiropoulos, Feb 04, 2007; 06:35 a.m. First of all, let me clear out one important thing: Ferraris should always be RED. Now that we have this out of the way (ha ha) the white L color is something like the Ferrari red. Perhaps the long telephoto lenses would benefit by the white color during whole day summer sessions in the open (the field), however the L white color became a status symbol, so it was used on other "large" L lenses. For them, it is a marketing thing. Thank god, some of the smaller L lenses remain black. Now, on to the color black issue. If you go to Canon telling them: I don't like white L Lenses, it is like going to Ferrari telling them, I like your cars, but why don't they come in Green or White? It is true that Ferrari has produced different colors, but in Europe, Ferraris are Red and Lamborginis are yellow. Period... Bob King, Feb 04, 2007; 07:08 a.m. If Canon changed from white to black for their telephoto L's it would be like buying a BMW without the badges. Cheers, Bob Ujwal Bhattarai, Feb 04, 2007; 07:37 a.m. how about camouflage military colors ? Surely white lens looks sexy- sth feminine. and most men like chicks. but its not just consmetic.white serves a purpose. it prevents the lens from heating in the sun. black lenses get really hot in the sun! but white is flashy if you plan on being discrete. its not anywhere near ideal if you shoot candids and nature (esp. birds). if i were canon, i would paint all my lenses in Green Camouflage colors. or maybe 18% gray! that would be useful. Not black which absorbs heat, but not flashy white as well. i believe most photographers who dont like to be flashy would like "military colours" on their lenses. just my humble opinion. :) Ujwal www.ujwal.com.np Ben Hutcherson, Feb 04, 2007; 10:00 a.m. Canon's original reason for painting the lenses white was to reduce expansion of the fluorite element and keep the focus point from changing too much. Then along came the 400 2.8L, which had no fluorite element but was painted white anyway. I think that the 400mm is probably the point at which the white paint went from being functional to marketing. John White, Feb 04, 2007; 10:38 a.m. Back to the original poster, I think it takes a little getting used to being the object of attention with these white lenses. As for the color itself, white or black doesn't bother most of us. Maybe someone knows the answer to why did Canon switch the color from black on the Canon 80-200mm f/2.8L to white on the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L? Someone mentioned the fluorite elements but I'll have to look up both of these lenses to see if they share the same optical design. Steve Dunn, Feb 04, 2007; 12:14 p.m. I doubt the 70-200 f4 L needs to be white As one of the later responses points out, the original reason for the "white" lenses was because fluorite is more sensitive to heat than traditional optical glasses are. Both 70-200/4 lenses use fluorite, so they do need to be white. To answer another question, neither of the 70-200/2.8 lenses use fluorite. They're "white" for the same reason some of the other big L lenses are "white": marketing. I wasn't following this stuff back when Canon first started making "white" lenses but I'd imagine that Canon liked how their lenses stood out from the crowd and decided to make more of their big lenses stand out the same way. Big lenses would still attract attention if they were black. Heck, the 100-300/4.5-5.6 USM I used to own attracted attention, and it's smaller than my 70-200/2.8L IS USM. Imagine if Canon only used the "white" finish on lenses with fluorite elements. Instead of people asking this question every few weeks, people would instead be asking "Why are lenses A, B, and C white but lenses X, Y, and Z are black?" every few weeks. John MacPherson, Feb 04, 2007; 12:22 p.m. The reason why people are looking at you is not to do with your using large white Canon lenses but because you've got pantyhose on them :-) Geoff Francis, Feb 04, 2007; 05:16 p.m. "I doubt the 70-200 f4 L needs to be white" The flourite is one issue, bit the real issue is whether you are out in the sun all day enough for it to heat up. The 70-200 f4, while using flourite, does not seem to me to be the type of lens that would sit all day on a tripod in the hot sun at a sporting event. It is more of a carry around lens and as such I can't imagine it getting very hot. Ben Hutcherson, Feb 04, 2007; 08:02 p.m. To add to what I said earlier, there were a few exceptions to the fluorite lens and white barrel rule. Canon's first fluorite lens was the 300mm 2.8 SSC Fluorite. It had a black barrel with a green stripe around the front to designate it as a fluorite lens. It was also not internal focusing, which made it a bit unwieldy to use. Canon's experience with lens may have been what lead them to paint most of their later fluorite element lenses white. Also, the FD 80-200 f4L had a fluorite element and was painted black. I'm not quite sure why Canon elected to paint this one black, as it came along well after all of the older great white L teles. Yakim Peled , Feb 05, 2007; 10:07 a.m. >> I would be curious to know how many of you would welcome if the currently white Canon lenses were available in black. I'd love to have a black option. >> Do you think that the white finish has any technical advantage (protection from overheating under direct sunlight?) or it just serves pure marketing purposes. I think that the main reason for the colour is for marketing purposes. It is easy to think so when you see Canon's adds. Happy shooting, Yakim. Jon Austin, Feb 05, 2007; 05:21 p.m. The only white lenses that sometimes bother me are the 1.4x and 2x extenders, when mounted in conjunction with a 135/2, 180 or 200/2.8 prime lens. The black/white/black combination (or black/white/silver with some bodies!) is just so gauche. If you wish to read more, here is the link: http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Jnn6 So I think that both Mistress and Dee8go are right. A happy ending. :D |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
|
I felt down right embarassed for the one fellow that had the black lens. How passe'!
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website