akclimber wrote:
To those posters telling us to stop whining, well, shouldn't we, as Canon's customers, let the company know we're disappointed? Hell, forums like this ar great market research for them. Why shouldn't we voice our opinions? Would you rather have us just "shut up and take it like men" when instead we can try to influence Canon?
I wasn't really one of the ones telling people not to whine, more that I am not surprised with the pricing. I expected similar pricing to the 24-105. Regardless, I am not a wealthy man and purchasing a lens like this takes a commitment that I won't take until after thousands of copies are out there and reviews are in.
Still, do you think whining on a board will make any difference to Canon? Really? What's going to send a message to canon is sales. If it sells, that's what canon cares about, not if people are happy about the price or not.
coffeeshakes wrote:
I wasn't really one of the ones telling people not to whine, more that I am not surprised with the pricing. I expected similar pricing to the 24-105. Regardless, I am not a wealthy man and purchasing a lens like this takes a commitment that I won't take until after thousands of copies are out there and reviews are in.
Still, do you think whining on a board will make any difference to Canon? Really? What's going to send a message to canon is sales. If it sells, that's what canon cares about, not if people are happy about the price or not.
Oh, I agree that sales will ultimately let Canon know whether their pricing decision was wise but voicing our concerns can't hurt. And I really don't think voicing concerns is "whining." I guess the whole "stop whining" attitude just pissed me off
dcmiller wrote:
Oh no, you can't compare lens price strategy to body price strategy. Over time, the price and quality of Canon lenses will rise in real dollars. The retail price of the new lenses will come down as soon as retailers have unsold inventory. I wouldn't be surprised, if over the last ten years, Canon has -never- lowered a wholesale price of a lens.
One of the advantages of using a rebate strategy (apart from the less than 100% claim rate) is that the end user price can be lowered without altering the wholesale price, if that is indeed an issue. Also, assuming the wholesale price remains constant, the price of lenses in real dollars will actually fall by the rate of inflation every year. After a few years at the same price, rebates are no longer necissary because the price in real dollars has dropped significantly. Three years at 3% is a little over $100 off from $1250.
Do you have some insider knowledge that would be relevant?
Yes, Nikon received a price premium for being the professionals choice, and the cool camera to have for armatures. That market position is long gone, but they've been able to at least maintain prices due to market growth.
Making an OBJECTIVE comparison to Canon, it's not even close. Canon has better prices, more lenses, more new lenses, better time to market, better photodo rating, more lenses with IS, more/better tilt lenses, and probably more stuff I'm not remembering.
Oh, and Nikon sells mostly 35mm lenses yet does not sell a 35mm digital camera. That's darn wierd.
Edited by dcmiller on Aug 24, 2006 at 09:16 AM GMT
While this does seem a bit high, I think it important to note that these "street prices" are usually more indicative of what you see in local shops. By the spring, Dpreview, RG, FM, all of these sites with review will have a listed "Street Price" that is usually $1-200 more than what BH or Adorama are charging. This is always the case. I can't tell you how many times I was doing research for a newer Canon product and the "Street Price" was always a bit high. I would guess that you won't be waiting long for this to become a $1000 lens. And at 1K it will really be more of an option versus the 70-200 no IS. I currently have 70-200 no IS, and don't think I would trade in this direction, however, I really don't think it will hold a $1250 value long. Just my .02
Very interesting
Sony, which began selling its ``alpha DSLR-A100'' on July 21, had a 21.6 percent share in the month and a 19 percent share in the three weeks to Aug. 20, compared with the Tokyo-based company's target for 10 percent of the global market this year, according to data compiled by BCN.
Canon's market share fell to 33.3 percent in July from 51.6 percent in the previous month. Nikon's dropped to 27.4 percent, from 32.6 percent.
fourfa wrote:
get ready for a flood of 70-200/4 on the B&S. good time to buy.
I love the 760g weight. It'll be interesting to see a 70-300IS vs 70-200/4IS shootout, as this new one could well be the ultimate travel tele zoom. I have a 70-200/2.8IS (I guess 70-200IS is no longer a unique description) and as we all know the weight is backbreaking.
I agree with Andy-
i used to have the 2.8 IS, and after going tele-less for about a year, i got a Drainpipe... only to find that i really don't like carrying "bigger" and "heavier" lenses as much anymore.... so i got a 135L and love every second of it.
But i'd really like the new 70-200/4L IS for a lightweight do-it-all telezoom for travel and walkaround purposes. MUCH easier to carry than the 2.8, and with stuff like DIGIC II, just bump the ISO.
I already have the 70-200L /2.8 non-IS that I use for sports shooting. I might just add this new 70-200L / 4 IS to my collection for a more convenient traveling set up. It's suppose to arrive it Nov? I'm buying this lense as a Christmas present to myself
About the price thing...It is obviously a valid issue for some people. Maybe other people have experienced a scenario like this...
I buy a new Canon product on it's immediate release- then within a few months it's reduced in price, or there's a cashback on it...but because I've shown loyalty and bought early, it's not applicable to me. That seems pretty unfair to me. Why should the loyal customer, who buys early, be penalised?
After buying 2 5D's I felt like a total mug watching the price spiral down from £2500 to under £1800 within just a few months. The cashback then added insult to injury. £1400 is a lot of money, and It's not the best way for Canon to engender trust in their pricing policy.
I love my Canon kit, I just don't respect the way they move the goalposts on price. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but it seems kinda immoral to me that you hurt the wallets of the people who support you the most. I'd kinda respect them more if they just set a lower, and fairer price in the first place.
I think I'll wait a while before spending my money this time.
Jeff wrote:
Never in a million years would I have thought that all the people 'requesting' IS on the 70-200/4L would get what they wanted!
Maybe someone is listening...
Oh, I bet their market research is good. I bet the do check out forums like this, and I have been vocally whining for a 70-200/4 IS for a while. It seemed like a no-brainner, and I can't believe it took so long. What I was mentioning though is that they don't pay attention to people saying "this lens costs too much". For that all they need to is pay attention to the numbers.
