$75000 lens

Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 24/09/2012 18:55, Alfred Molon wrote:
Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?


Nikkor 1200-1700mm maybe?

--
audentes fortuna iuvat

Alfred Molon wrote:

Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...l-L-Lenses.jsp

--
sid
RLU 300284
2

In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:
Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?

There was a Carl Zeiss Oberkochen f/5.6 / 1000mm Mirotar lens breifly
avialable by special order for the Hasselblad; perhaps that fell in
this price range. This lens was going for $45,000 on e-bay:

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/0...mm-mirror.html

Perhaps it fetched $75,000 new. If I am doing the math correctly, a
full frame camera screwed onto the end of this lens, from three quarters
of a mile away, could photograph a 6ft tall person such that their height
took up one third of the (landscape) image. The latter was my crude guess
as to what sort of margin you would need if you were trying to keep a
celebrity in-frame and wait for her to strike a usable pose.

--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

"sid" wrote in message .. .

Alfred Molon wrote:

Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...l-L-Lenses.jsp

++++++
No, that’s a $120,000 lens.
Ron
++++++

--
sid
RLU 300284
2

In article m,
Ron wrote:
"sid" wrote in message .. .

Alfred Molon wrote:

Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...l-L-Lenses.jsp

++++++
No, that’s a $120,000 lens.

Used, right?

--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

On 2012-09-24 12:05:26 -0700, sid said:

Alfred Molon wrote:

Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...l-L-Lenses.jsp

Somehow i don't think that particular "papa-ratsy" is going to backpack
that puppy through the woods.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 12:54:42 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2012-09-24 12:05:26 -0700, sid said:

Alfred Molon wrote:

Supposedly Kate Middleton was photographed with a $75000 lens. Does
anybody know what kind of lens is that?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/find/n...l-L-Lenses.jsp

Somehow i don't think that particular "papa-ratsy" is going to backpack
that puppy through the woods.


If you're famous or notorious this might be a good
time to start trembling.
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/...e-game-cameras

Jumbo lenses are just not necessary.

http://www.webtechgeek.com/wp/images/mini-drones.jpg


And if a large $120000 lens takes a photo of
something miles away, it has to take in all the
thermal gradients, dust, mist etc.

In article ,
Peter Jason wrote:

If you're famous or notorious this might be a good
time to start trembling.
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/...e-game-cameras

Jumbo lenses are just not necessary.

I expect to see news items about people in the US treating these
quadrotors like skeet. If they are privately owned, and hovering
over someone else's property, the owners will have no legal recourse.
The shooting down of government-owned drones would be more
interesting from a legal point of view. People have gotten in trouble
for removing tracking devices from their cars and throwing them in
the trash.

--
Please reply to: | "We establish no religion in this country, we
pciszek at panix dot com | command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor
Autoreply is disabled | will we ever. Church and state are, and must
| remain, separate." --Ronald Reagan, 10/26/1984

In article , Paul Ciszek says...
People have gotten in trouble
for removing tracking devices from their cars and throwing them in
the trash.

Unbelievable =:-O
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site