the big difference of this lens is on the wide end, 15 instead of the normal 18 or 17 which zooms normally start at for the crop. this is the 24mm equv for the crop, i dont think there is any other lense out there that have this range. i am not sure if this is canons attempt of 24-105f4L for the crop but it should have been a constant f2.8 in that case.. i can see 15-85 f4 for about 800 or f2.8 for about 1k, i hope this msrp is not indicative of what this will sell for i can see this selling well for about $500-600 i am curious to see how many people will end up owning this lens.
catfriend wrote:
If one owns the 17-55 2.8 (as I do), you might gain some range, but you lose the 2.8 constant aperture, and that's not a tradeoff worth making.
Hah, now crop users also have their 24-70L vs 24-105L dilemma
Yohan Pamudji wrote:
$800... oof! For a 3.5-5.6 zoom? Yikes.
Especially for an EF-S lens, which is indisputably less versatile than EF with regard to body compatibility.
I don't know any equivalent in terms of wide angle zoom starting at 15, either the range is wider but limited (11-16, 12-24) or starts higher (17-70 or18)
For once I see canon launching something different and I can just congratulate them for that!!
Regarding the price, well according to what I just said, you can call it a market opportunity.
Daan B wrote:
Hah, now crop users also have their 24-70L vs 24-105L dilemma
Unfortunately that isn't quite true. We have a 28-90 2.8 vs. 24-135 3.5-5.6 dilemma. Do I give up some key wide angle coverage and still shell out 1K, or do I spend only slightly less for the extra coverage without any speed?
Even assuming the IQ is better than the 17-85, I just don't get a variable aperature lens at this price point. Sure, it's an interesting lens, but I don't see many people paying that much for essentially two degrees on the wide end. You could buy a 10-22 for this price. Even if you are buying a DSLR for the first time, you could take one of the other kit lenses, and still have more left over for a true wide angle and a tele-photo.
Well, I'm just a dumb beginner who with an interest in landscape and close-ups and that is probably about all I will ever be. To me the 15-85 is very appealing. I am looking for an upgrade from my kit lens. I will always do more shooting while backpacking and hiking than from the side of the road so I want just a few quality zooms to cover my full range rather than a trunk full of L primes. I have really looked at the 24-105 but it is just not wide enough. That would leave me needing to add a 10-22 later. The 15-85 will cover my wide need and thus will save me from buying another lens. So, I will wait to see what the reviews say (any idea when) and where the street price ends up (best guess?) and then make a decision.
If I recall, when the 17-55 F/2.8 was first announced at $1200, everybody had a fit. I believe the threads here were following the same discussion about a way overpriced non "L" EFS lens. It turned out that Canon did deliver on that lens. People found out pretty quick that it was a pretty sweet lens. This lens is kind of following the same path so far
If it falls short, everybody will know pretty quick around here, that is for sure.
kakomu wrote:
That's the MSRP. No lens made by canon is sold for MSRP.
The MSRP and the street price are one in the same. In fact you can pre order these lenses (100/2.8 IS, 15-85, 18-135) for the MSRP posted on the Canon website--this includes the 17+24 TS-E, 5DII and the 7D.
M Vers wrote:
The MSRP and the street price are one in the same. In fact you can pre order these lenses (100/2.8 IS, 15-85, 18-135) for the MSRP posted on the Canon website--this includes the 17+24 TS-E, 5DII and the 7D.
The street price will almost always drop like a rock. Look at all the other EF-S street and MSRP prices. What makes you think this will be any different? Same goes for most other EF lenses. The 28-135 is listed at $690 MSRP and I bought mine new for $300.
kakomu wrote:
The street price will almost always drop like a rock. Look at all the other EF-S street and MSRP prices. What makes you think this will be any different? Same goes for most other EF lenses. The 28-135 is listed at $690 MSRP and I bought mine new for $300.
It will almost certainly drop, but the question is how much, how fast? The 5DII and TS-E's have been out for how long now? Have we seen a drop in MSRP/street price yet? So given that piece of recent fact what makes YOU think this will be any different?
M Vers wrote:
It will almost certainly drop, but the question is how much, how fast? The 5DII and TS-E's have been out for how long now? Have we seen a drop in MSRP/street price yet? So given that piece of recent fact what makes YOU think this will be any different?
Because the supply of 5DII cameras and TS-E lenses have been restricted to a trickle. They're also rather exotic in comparison to general purpose/consumer equipment. Finally, Canon practically floods the market with anything crop sensor related. You aren't going to find the (artificially created) shortages of any Rebel or EF-S lens that you'd find with the 5D2.
kakomu wrote:
The street price will almost always drop like a rock. Look at all the other EF-S street and MSRP prices. What makes you think this will be any different? Same goes for most other EF lenses. The 28-135 is listed at $690 MSRP and I bought mine new for $300.
Canon is putting this lens up with the 10-22 and the 17-55. Certainly wouldn't say that those prices have dropped like a rock the last few years.
For the life of me I can't see anyone paying this price for that lens. I do think the 5000 shooters said yea thats a great range, and maybe we don't need 2.8, but that price considering the economy and how little money people have right npow just doesn't add up.
Maybe $600 would be much better, but not $800. I actually still have my version 1 of the kit lens, and If I shoot at F8 which is the sweet spot for focus for my particular lens, its not too bad.But it lacks a lot compared to my 100 Macro at least in sharpness. I kept saying months ago that Canon needed a better lens in this range.Sigma has a few, Tamron has the 17-50, which someone said is coming out with IS ? That would be ideal, but does it cost $800, maybe it will now that Canon put that price on this lens, who knows !
briangg wrote:
Canon is putting this lens up with the 10-22 and the 17-55. Certainly wouldn't say that those prices have dropped like a rock the last few years.
kakomu wrote:
They're both sold for less than MSRP.
The 17-55 is listed on Canon website for 1179.00 MSRP, it retails a B&H for 1030.00. This lens was release in 2006, that's three years of being on the market and the price "dropped like a rock" $149.00--more like a drop in the bucket, wouldn't you say?
M Vers wrote:
The 17-55 is listed on Canon website for 1179.00 MSRP, it retails a B&H for 1030.00. This lens was release in 2006, that's three years of being on the market and the price "dropped like a rock" $149.00--more like a drop in the bucket, wouldn't you say?
It's a drop, nonetheless, for a constant aperture lens that is purported to have optics that are just as good as an L-series lens. What does that say for a slow, variable aperture lens that fits along side the 17-85? Probably means that even if it pre-sells for $800, it's not going to stay there for very long. The point (that no one has refuted) is that EF-S lenses drop in price. Less so for higher quality lenses, but they drop nonetheless. Lesser quality lenses drop by a greater amount.
