World’s Most Expensive Lens: $2 million Leica APO-Telyt-R 1600mm

[Octane (Humayun)]

http://www.slrlounge.com/worlds-most...telyt-r-1600mm

I'll take two, thanks; one for each eye.

H

[Omaroo (Chris Malikoff)]

Yep - saw that doing the rounds the other day. It's actually the world's most expensive publicly-available lens - i.e. not some billion-dollar optic for NASA or defense. Some sheiks have way too much money. LOL

[Vegeta (Ibrahim)]

WOA!!!, That thing's a Montser O.o

[AstralTraveller (David)]

It's only f/5.6. Couldn't they make something decent???

[Octane (Humayun)]

David,

That was my first thought, too; f/2.8, or death.

H

[Nico13 (Ken)]

That's a biggie alright, saw this one some time back though and it rates right up there at 256 Kg.
Keep in mind the camera hanging on the back is a Hasselblad

The design of the ZEISS Apo Sonnar T* 4/1700 required new lens assembly techniques and quality assurance methods never before applied in photo lens production – even by Carl Zeiss’ normally high standards. The finished lens weighs a staggering 256 kg (564 lbs.), placing unique demands on the focusing mechanisms. To address this issue, Carl Zeiss developed a totally new way of operating a telephoto lens, including servo controlled aiming and focusing systems like those used in large telescopes and similar instruments for astronomical scientists.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2006/10/1/zeiss1700f4

[troypiggo (Troy)]

pffft. At f/5.6 you'd lose autofocus if you added a tele-extender to it.

[strongmanmike (Michael)]

Originally Posted by Nico13

That's a biggie alright, saw this one some time back though and it rates right up there at 256 Kg.
Keep in mind the camera hanging on the back is a Hasselblad

The design of the ZEISS Apo Sonnar T* 4/1700 required new lens assembly techniques and quality assurance methods never before applied in photo lens production – even by Carl Zeiss’ normally high standards. The finished lens weighs a staggering 256 kg (564 lbs.), placing unique demands on the focusing mechanisms. To address this issue, Carl Zeiss developed a totally new way of operating a telephoto lens, including servo controlled aiming and focusing systems like those used in large telescopes and similar instruments for astronomical scientists.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2006/10/1/zeiss1700f4

Ah Yeh, now we're talking! A 17" F4 APO = awesome.... vs 11" F5.6 bah! ...imagine the tripod

Mike

[gregbradley]

He could have gotten Tony Hallas's AP205 for $100K! It'd probably be better than the Leica anyway.

Greg.

[AstralTraveller (David)]

Originally Posted by gregbradley

He could have gotten Tony Hallas's AP205 for $100K! It'd probably be better than the Leica anyway.

Greg.

Perhaps the sheik got a 'special' price.

[FlashDrive (Poppy)]

Originally Posted by Octane

I'll take two, thanks; one for each eye.

H

Onyah H ....

[Barrykgerdes]

I had large zoom lens on my Image orthicon TV camera that would have cost about $10000 in the 1960's. That would have been the equivalent of around $250000 in today's money. Still a long way from $2M though.

Of course I did not pay that but Channel 9 probably did. I gave it to Channel 10 for their museum about 20 years ago.

Barry

[Dennis]

Love the built in x1 finder in the handle.

Cheers

Dennis

[Davi5678 (Dave)]

I want to see the 'Mercedes' tripod!

[Terry B]

It works out as a 285mm (11.2") diameter APO refractor lens. An equivalent scope would be much cheaper. I think I'd rather the 11" refractor.

[clive milne]

Being that a simple 12" paraboloid (with coma corrector) would provide essentially the same (or better) performance with a lot less hassle, this strikes me as just an exercise in stroking an over indulgent ego via brand image elitism.

[Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)]

Originally Posted by AstralTraveller

It's only f/5.6. Couldn't they make something decent???

Well...precisely.
Couldn't even get the AF to work at f5.6!!

[Miaplacidus (Brian)]

I think I'll just rest my camera on the INSIDE OF THE DEW SHIELD OF A 2 MILLION DOLLAR LENS!!!!!

Sheesh...

[alocky (Andrew lockwood)]

Considering the most likely use of this lens will be wildlife photography, I'm glad the individual invested in photographic equipment. He could have easily spent the same dollars on an auto-ranging, wind compensating sight for a rifle so he could murder the things instead.
I wonder if he'll sell it cheap when he gets bored with it?
Cheers,
Andrew

[lacad01 (Adam)]

Holy smoke! Expensive bit of glass, wouldn't want to drop it