vuilang wrote:
WoW.... $2300
How in the world would someone who is starting out photograhy able to afford this pricetag? $1000+ is already pushing them at the edges.
Not a product aimed at people just starting out at photography. Aimed at working professionals.
rscheffler wrote:
The previous 24-70 was released 10 years ago. In that time the value of the Yen against the USD has doubled. Also, during the mid 2000s Canon seemed to be very aggressive with their lens prices, beating out Nikon by considerable margins at times. It's a guess, but possible they sacrificed margins in an attempt to attract the booming growth in advanced amateurs coming to digital SLRs by offering a comprehensive selection of lenses at 'good' prices to lock them into the Canon system. That all seemed to change around 2008 when the price hikes started.
It seems to me the new 24-70 is targeted at the next 10 years where sensor resolution will certainly continue to climb ever higher, therefore a new line of higher resolving, but (maybe) more expensive to manufacture lens are required.
But how many need 24MP, 36MP, etc.? It's possible Canon anticipates a participation drop off in the upgrade game. If volume will be lower, then prices will go up to compensate. Those who really need/want the apparent increase in performance will pay for it, just like there are those who bought the then outrageously priced 800L. Little did we realize that the 800L was just a precursor to what would soon become the norm from Canon's pricing strategy.
So, if the new 24-70 is too rich, there's always the 24-105. Just bump the ISO one stop higher. ...Show more →
That^^^ make alot sense.. I do appreciate ur answer.. so i guess it's a bargain for all current lense model.
Indeed, MTF charts are for internet bloggers to fuss over, and little else.
The realities of practical photography revolve around lens price/field performance/handling/robustness.
A very high price means the lens is a no-go for many photographers, therefore all other lens characteristics, even if they are all superlative, mean squat.
SchnellerGT wrote:
So I will be able to buy 2x Tamron 24-70 2.8VC lenses (+change) for the price of this? And it costs $400 more than the Nikon offering?
CANON: YOU ...!
Hey man. I don't think what you wrote is acceptable on a civilized forum like FM. I just reported you,
"language - replacing U by V doesn't make it acceptable!".
vuilang wrote:
WoW.... $2300
How in the world would someone who is starting out photograhy able to afford this pricetag? $1000+ is already pushing them at the edges.
The more i'm thinking about these new prices, the more i see how dumb protographers are (myself included and sorry if it's offending to you). Keep spending more and more money into new gears while our price for the Gig isnt increase at same rate or anywhere near it. Do you charge B&G double when you upgrade from v1 to V2? I realize i'm exxagerating but let step out the box and think about it. Why cant it be a slight increase from previous version? Their lense making process surely doesnt cost double....Show more →
It's not going to be $2300 in stores (well, maybe at first release it will because of demand). It'll probably be around $1900 looking at Canon's other lens MSRP's compared to what they go for new on places like Amazon.
WTF as dear as the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II! Ah well unless Tamron shoots themselves in the head with absurd pricing, I guess I'll be giving the Canon a miss unless it drops $500 or is stupendously good.
Also can't believe the prices for the new non L primes, not that they interest me in the least.
Canon really does want to make this a rich person's hobby again.
That is literally the funniest thing I've seen all month and I've seen some VERY funny things lately.
At those prices the lens better be damned near perfect optically... and by perfect I mean they better put Zeiss to shame.
Totally agree!
The 24-70 II sure is pricey, but if it is as good as the charts imply I will definitely get one (and sell 24-70 I).
But the primes? At $800 a pop? I have no idea who would want those. Too much for anybody with a crop camera. And whoever gets a full frame is likely to get a big zoom or a f/1.4 prime.
Canon is certainly out of his mind. How can you expect a 600D or 1000D user to pay 800 for a limited, slow prime lens? For that kind of price, I'd rather get a 17-40L or something used.
deepbluejh wrote:
To be perfectly fair, I do expect the 24-70 to be stupendously good and eventually settle into a street price of about $1800 over the long term.
I can't wait long term and shouldn't have to. Anyway I won't panic until I see street price and how good it really is compared to Tamron.
