mt-m wrote:
Sorry, no disrespect to your friend intended, but this just doesn't make much sense. The announced price of the 300 2.8L IS was over $6,000. Yet is never sold anywhere near that, even on the day it first hit the shelves. The announced price of the 70-200 2.8L IS was $3000! We know what it sells for.
Canon has changed their policies so that their announced prices are much closer to street prices than in days past. I think they even officially made an announcement a while back saying as much. One needs only to look at the Canon's announced prices for their recent releases to see that they are indeed much closer to the actual street price.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Can anyone imagine what prices Canon would charge for replacements of the superteles in coming years. I think it's important when you are under the pump from your rival to offer such competitive pricing.
Price gouging at it's worst - but they'll find people crazy enough to pay $6K
I think this is an important point. If you look at the current Canon super-tele line up, it's from 1999. With Nikon announcing the D3 and finally adding VR to all of their super-teles, they have caught up, but at a considerable price premium vs. Canon. That leaves Canon a lot of room to set prices once they update their current lenses, which have been seemingly immune from price increases as far back as I can remember. Considering the new 800, and to a lesser degree the 200 f/2, I think we'll probably see such an update in the next year or two with prices much closer to the Nikon equivalents.
PrecisionPhoto wrote:
I predicted a 1Dn III month ago, next prediction; November 08 when it comes out
Haha... that's not such a risky guess since it would be pretty much in line with the seemingly typical 18 month 1D (non-s) product cycle.
gene A. wrote:
Talked to an old friend who owns a local camera store today. He had just received price sheets on the new products. No new cameras were listed except for the new rebel. The 200mm F2 has a dealer net of $5300.00 so its definitely going to retail for alot more than Nikons version.
The other very interesting bit of info he passed along was the Canon rep told him that there will probably be a program where present owners of the 1DmkIII will be permitted to turn in there cameras toward a new 1DmkIIIN. When there will be a MKIIIN wasn't clear. He also speculated that Canon may not ever come out with a new version of the 5D as it cuts into 1-series camera sales, although that was just his own opinion.
Edited by gene A. on Jan 30, 2008 at 06:43 PM GMT...Show more →
All of that sounds like hogwash to me.
1) The replacement for the 5D is due at the end of the year.
2) Free trade-ups to a revised 1D Mark III? Never in a million years.
3) 200/2 IS at those prices? No chance.
cwphoto wrote:
2) Free trade-ups to a revised 1D Mark III? Never in a million years.
If Canon would really see it necessary to replace 1D3 with an updated camera, they could make swap offers to pros, like "return your existing 1D3 camera to us and get two new 1Dx cameras at the price of one". That wouldn't immediately improve Canon's bottom line but wouldn't cause any major harm to it either.
bcaslis wrote:
Umm, no. The 200 f2 VR is $4000, the 300 f2.8 VR is $4500.
What's with the "Umm, no"? Did you do an eye roll as well?
BTW, prices vary by retailer. Uniquephoto.com (my main supplier) sells the 200 for $3,799 and 300 for $4,499. So maybe it's not *almost* $1000 less. The point is, it's still significantly less expensive.
I would truly hope that these things would settle down to around $4500 at the most. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to price these things so close to the price of a 400mm F2.8. When you factor in what Nikon sells there lens for as well as how this one stacks up monetarily against the 300 F2.8, the 400 F2.8 and other large primes, 5-6K seems way off.
If the lens doesn't come down in price, I think it would be better to find a nice version of the old lens and then get insurance on it for when it finally does die. I suppose that the insurance company might replace it with the new lens. I need to ask my agent about that.
I haven't seen any other prices. Mike, I think you are dreaming for the $4k after introduction.
We'll see, Brian. Easy to wait since I don't have the money or the need right now (indoor sports and dance dried up). Mine is just a guess based on the relative prices of the other Canon super teles and Nikon's current price for the 200/2 VR. Anyway, I prefer my dream to your nightmare
I'm sure Canon saw what people were paying for 200mm F1.8 lenses and said to themselves, if there willing to pay $4,000-$5,000 for a used lens then they would certainly be willing to pay even more for a new version with available service, and image stabilization.
Given that you can get Nikons best autofocus in an $1800 body. The fact that the D3 has an ambient metering system thats more sophisticated than anything Canon produces and now a really good 14-24mm zoom which would replace several of the lenses I'm now using and I have to tell you the dark side is looking very appealing
