sivrajbm wrote:
I haven't tried the Tammy, yet. I've had a stellar 24-70L v1, (after several duds) a several years now. I may pick up the new version when they drop the price.
My 24-70 2.8 version 1 is very good as well. For what I need a normal 2.8 zoom it is more than adequate for my purposes. The only downside is the weight for travel. For my next trip I may pick up something like the 28-75 tammy but otherwise the version 1 is more than good enough.
I find it very interesting that a company like Apple can introduce a new product to replace an old one while keeping the price point the same while Canon jacks up the price whenever a new product is released. A price increase of 15% would be tolerable and justifiable but the recent releases of the 24 1.4, 70-200 2.8, and 24-70 2.8II leaves me cold.
twistedlim wrote:
My 24-70 2.8 version 1 is very good as well. For what I need a normal 2.8 zoom it is more than adequate for my purposes. The only downside is the weight for travel. For my next trip I may pick up something like the 28-75 tammy but otherwise the version 1 is more than good enough.
I find it very interesting that a company like Apple can introduce a new product to replace an old one while keeping the price point the same while Canon jacks up the price whenever a new product is released. A price increase of 15% would be tolerable and justifiable but the recent releases of the 24 1.4, 70-200 2.8, and 24-70 2.8II leaves me cold. ...Show more →
If I didn't work for Canon and get good deals, I would more than likely own the Tamron right now. Some of the prices are just insane, although in some cases the lens performance is so good you soon forget the price.
The Tammy is awesome for the price. The canon is stunning but not worth the early adopter fee right now. I assume the canon will settle somewhere below 2k in the not too distant future which makes it a decent value unless you need/want IS. I find it funny canon adds IS to their new primes but neglects it in their zoom. I had been hoping tamron would include their lens in winter rebates but no luck. Since IS was a deal breaker for me I picked one up and couldn't be happier.
I hear a lot of folks talking about the price of this lens "settling down." Is it likely that Canon will lower the price? I guess I could see it going down 5 or 10%, but that doesn't constitute much of a drop. I have one available locally for $2k. Will probably pick it up, as I don't see anything better.
twistedlim wrote:
My 24-70 2.8 version 1 is very good as well. For what I need a normal 2.8 zoom it is more than adequate for my purposes. The only downside is the weight for travel. For my next trip I may pick up something like the 28-75 tammy but otherwise the version 1 is more than good enough.
I find it very interesting that a company like Apple can introduce a new product to replace an old one while keeping the price point the same while Canon jacks up the price whenever a new product is released. A price increase of 15% would be tolerable and justifiable but the recent releases of the 24 1.4, 70-200 2.8, and 24-70 2.8II leaves me cold. ...Show more →
price to make optics doesn't go down much over time, not like it does to improve chips and electronics
dlodi wrote:
I hear a lot of folks talking about the price of this lens "settling down." Is it likely that Canon will lower the price? I guess I could see it going down 5 or 10%, but that doesn't constitute much of a drop. I have one available locally for $2k. Will probably pick it up, as I don't see anything better.
Pretty much all newly released lenses start out at list. Soon there will be a few deals here and there, as we saw a few weeks ago on this one. Then over time the lower prices begin to be available frequently and those who can watch and wait a bit will not have to pay list or close to it.
mmsean wrote:
How's that lens Pixel? Worth the cash?
I haven't got around to even opening the box yet. Was more excited about my new subwoofer and apart from that it's been too stinking hot to think about photography this last week and more to come. Maybe Sunday, nearly 2 weeks after I got the lens I'll open it.
PS One ray of sunshine, is the Yen is dropping and quite fast. Ozzy dollar is back over 91 Yen, from about 80 a month or two ago. New Japanese government is committed to devaluing the Yen and it's over due. It's been killing them.
For everyone that is dogging the price on the new 24-70, Get one before you knock it. It is on par with the 70-200 2.8 IS II and as sharp as the 24 1.4L II at 24 mm. I agree it is pricey but they did delivery one heck of a sharp lens this go round.
swingthis1 wrote:
For everyone that is dogging the price on the new 24-70, Get one before you knock it. It is on par with the 70-200 2.8 IS II and as sharp as the 24 1.4L II at 24 mm. I agree it is pricey but they did delivery one heck of a sharp lens this go round.
+1.
It's exceptional and worth every penny, to me. It's the same as the 5d3 to me: on paper it's nearly the same as the last one but actually it's way more. I literally couldn't be happier with it. It'll focus where the last one wouldn't too.
It was in my Amazon gold box a week and a half ago... I could of had it with the gold box discount, 3% amazon cash back with my CC and the instant 2% they were doing for around $1900 shipped to my door. Crazy!
Any sort of "deal" on a newly released camera or lens is more or less an acknowledgement that it's overpriced. If you can wait 6 months you'll be able to pick a new one up for $1899.
Seems like the same pricing games are being played with this lens as was played with the 5DIII.
Well, you should not complain about that 2K. Here in Romania, the 24-70 2.8L II is the equivalent of 3500$ / 2600 Euros. So, 2K USD is quite a bargain if you ask me.
I have the 24-70 I, and i could sell that for about 1100 USD. I'm preety sure that the new lens's performance does not justify the huge price difference. I tested one and yeah, it's about 150g lighter, it feels nicer in the hand and it's much sharper at 2.8 compared to my lens, but at least for now, it's hard to justify the price, especially when I also have in my bag the 24 1.4L II and 50 1.2L in the same FL range.
adimage wrote:
Well, you should not complain about that 2K. Here in Romania, the 24-70 2.8L II is the equivalent of 3500$ / 2600 Euros. So, 2K USD is quite a bargain if you ask me.
I have the 24-70 I, and i could sell that for about 1100 USD. I'm preety sure that the new lens's performance does not justify the huge price difference. I tested one and yeah, it's about 150g lighter, it feels nicer in the hand and it's much sharper at 2.8 compared to my lens, but at least for now, it's hard to justify the price, especially when I also have in my bag the 24 1.4L II and 50 1.2L in the same FL range. ...Show more →
Understand. For many people right now, the business justification is hard given the price difference. I wouldn't be surprised if it drops significantly over the next 2 years, as the 70-200 II did
I struggled to some extend to justify it, but there was one wedding when I really needed the more accurate focussing and the V1 lens just didn't cut it, so I took the plunge. My V1 lens was particularly poor though - at 2.8 it was significantly unsharp. I know there's way better copies out there. Would my customers notice? Doubtful. Do I notice? Definitely.
With customers in mind, I would probably still be shooting with 5d classic cameras . I think that most of the times it's us who notice all these small things like bokeh quality, sharpness, bla bla. Customers care more about how they look, not about the technical qualities of the photos (not that a photo taken with a 24-70 version 1 would be a bad one by any means).
