GL Optics/Canon 70 200mm T3.1

[Dave Blackham]

I am interested in GL Optics new Canon rehoused lens. Its a 70 200 T3.1, has any one been able to test the lens yet ?

Canon 70-200 F2.8 Lens body;
114mm diameter front ring size;
6063 alumium rehouse Lens body;
0.8 madule gears;
stainless steel PL mount;
New designed focus/Zoom/aperture system;
Lens weight 3.7 KG, will come with lens support tool and flight case(total weight 6.9KG);

I believe its about 6,000 USD

 

[Matt Ryan]

Looks great. I've been interested in their lenses as well. They all look like really great housings and they somehow get an iris ring on canon lenses which blows my mind.

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Seems a bit to good to be true... Hope I am wrong.

They have a few interesting lenses. Anyone able to vouch for the team behind the company?

 

[Dave Blackham]

I have mailed GL to ask more about the lens and if any extenders are available for it. I will post more If I hear back.

 

[Domenic Barbero]

this thing looks amazing. I love my 70-200. Does that include the price of the lens or if you send in your own lens?

 

[Bob Gundu]

this thing looks amazing. I love my 70-200. Does that include the price of the lens or if you send in your own lens?

Includes lens and $150 for shipping.

 

[Daniel Murphy]

I've been in contact with the gentleman through email as I write, he seems to know his stuff- If you search GL Optics on Google there's a Vimeo video where he describes an 85 1.4 Zeiss prime he converted for a tech interview.

Here's the deal: GL provides a Canon 70-200 2.8L non-IS and does re-housing conversion. Lens also available in EF version though he told me better go with PL then purchase PL to EF adapter for maximum compatibility. He's in China and ships via TNT secured. If you own lens and ship to him cost is $5K plus China import duties if he's stuck with fee.

Very intriguing, this warrants additional research but from early indications I'm interested.

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

Lens weight 3.7kg. HEAVY

 

[George A.]

Why so much?!

The housing should be made of aluminum.
The original lens is 1.3 or 1.4kg

There's almost a 2.5kg difference.

 

[Bob Gundu]

The Ruby lens is made from the Nikon 14-24mm lens and it's around $10K. You forgot to add the labour costs.

http://www.abelcine.com/store/Focus-Optics-Ruby-14-24mm-T2.8-Zoom/

Why so much?!

The housing should be made of aluminum.
The original lens is 1.3 or 1.4kg

There's almost a 2.5kg difference.

 

[Siva Kollipara]

Don't know about 70-200mm.
But his Tokina 11-16mm to PL conversion is perfect and happy user.
A pleasant transaction

 

[George A.]

Bob,

I was referring to the weight.
George

The Ruby lens is made from the Nikon 14-24mm lens and it's around $10K. You forgot to add the labour costs.

http://www.abelcine.com/store/Focus-Optics-Ruby-14-24mm-T2.8-Zoom/

 

[Peter.G]

+1 interested...anyone test it yet???

 

[Tehben Dean]

I emailed them and asked and he said he is tackling the 24-70 II next.

 

[Bob Gundu]

Bob,

I was referring to the weight.
George

Oh... Ooops.

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Don't know about 70-200mm.
But his Tokina 11-16mm to PL conversion is perfect and happy user.
A pleasant transaction

It seems to be a more ambitious conversion than Duclos .... Check out the focus scale?

Ps love to see them do the Tokina 35mm f/2.8 Macro

 

[Dave Blackham]

It seems to be a more ambitious conversion than Duclos .... Check out the focus scale?

Ps love to see them do the Tokina 35mm f/2.8 Macro

We have both Duclos and GL 11 16mm, both are fine lenses. There is certainly more metal in the GL lens conversion.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I hope there is no lead in these conversions. .

 

[Patrick Wieland]

I wonder what the chance of this lens holding focus through zoom?

I also wonder how does a lens like this hold value? If I invest in GL Optics lenses am I throwing money away compared to buying a more name brand lens?

 

[Lenny Manfred]

One issue to consider is that the Canon 70-200/2.8 Version 1 was not very good wide open. The new version 2 is much, much better. If he rehoused version 2 i would be much more interested. But better even would be the Sigma 50-150/2.8, Version 1. Great wide open, way more usefull a range.