I surely hope this Belgian page is right about the 100-400/4. And with this price I will order it without blinking an eye.
Is it possible, or does Canon have a history, bringing stuff on the market with a minimal margin just to get a good market share and then increase the price? At this price the Nikon 200-400/4 looks massive expensive.
In The Netherlands we just had a price correction of about +10% to get the price leveled with the Belgian prices. This price would be very surprising.
Geoff Costello wrote:
I'd be surprised if Canon:
1) Didn't upgrade the AF system, especially in the 1 series.
2) Reduced from AF 45 points in the 1 series (its so hard to explain why less is more!)
But this still leaves a lot such as:
1) More cross type sensors / more senstive sensors for appatures of f5.6 and f8
2) Smarter / faster AF tracking
3) More dynamic optiions where some of the points are treated as hidden and used for tracking or depth of field management etc.
4) Different arrangement of AF points (e.g. on the 1Ds Mark III they could (shock horror) cover more of the frame!...Show more →
I can not agree more. More crosses would be a big +. Put in 11 out of 45 and I'll be quiet for a while.
Peterdenh wrote:
I surely hope this Belgian page is right about the 100-400/4. And with this price I will order it without blinking an eye.
Is it possible, or does Canon have a history, bringing stuff on the market with a minimal margin just to get a good market share and then increase the price? At this price the Nikon 200-400/4 looks massive expensive.
In The Netherlands we just had a price correction of about +10% to get the price leveled with the Belgian prices. This price would be very surprising.
P
I too would order one right away at that price, but I strongly doubt such a low introduction price. I they really do, I hope for a low intro price on the 1D3 too
Peter, I fully agree, although the 1Ds3 may just be too expensive for me.
Another rumour for the 1D3 is 12MP with an in camera 1.3 cropfactor for 10MP files. That sounds interesting to a current 20D shooter. That is in fact a 1D2N with 10MP files and a 12MP fulframe camera for those real wide angle shots with my 17-40. That might just be the camera for me.
Just keep in mind that we have different update tresholds. You already live in 1-series heaven, I still have to enter that realm!
Doodles wrote:
Another rumour for the 1D3 is 12MP with an in camera 1.3 cropfactor for 10MP files. That sounds interesting to a current 20D shooter. That is in fact a 1D2N with 10MP files and a 12MP fulframe camera for those real wide angle shots with my 17-40. That might just be the camera for me.!
Don't believe that rumour... the 1.255 crop factor actually means that a FF sensor has to be about 16mp (something like 15.7mp to be more precise) to get a 10mp crop (the joys of area vs dimentions)... Now that would be nice
I've been doing a lot of thinking about my next camera, and if there is a 5D upgrade in the next few months I might go that route, especially if it gets (dare I say it?) weatherproofing. Not a deal-breaker, but it would be nice. It would probably come in at 16 mp's or so, which should be plenty for high-res landscapes. Coming from the Mk2N, I want a camera that has more resolution capability and not so much blinding speed. Don't really need 8.5 fps to catch the slam-bang action in a landscape... Anyway, I'm really interested to see if there is an upgrage in the near future for the 5D. Might be a bit soon for that.
Or, if the rumored Ds3 comes out and the Ds2 comes down a little, heck, I could probably live with the crummy old obsolete Ds2.
Aww come on Canon, just release some specs, so we have something to argue about!
I am hoping the 40D will be announced soon, or atleast some specs. About the 100-400L F/4 rumor, well it would be nice, but then it would make me feel a bit bad, because I just bought the "old" one half a year ago.
Geoff Costello wrote:
Don't believe that rumour... the 1.255 crop factor actually means that a FF sensor has to be about 16mp (something like 15.7mp to be more precise) to get a 10mp crop (the joys of area vs dimentions)... Now that would be nice
Indeed. Now this could be a consideration, but not hands down. If the 1D gets a feature like this, the 1DS might get it as well. Then the frame rate in the crop mode will be the factor for me. It it is 8.5 for the 1D3 and 6 for the 1DS3 with the higher res, then I'd probably go for the 1DS3 and have my good ol' 1D2 as a backup and the rarish 8.5fps photo ops.
A few more days and we might know it all, but the longer I think the more I want to know how the next top model will look like.
Sam_S wrote:
About the 100-400L F/4 rumor, well it would be nice, but then it would make me feel a bit bad, because I just bought the "old" one half a year ago.
Sam,
Trust me Sam, if they bring out a 100-400mm f/4 it will cost twice as much as what you paid for your existing one. Still feel bad?
python2000 wrote:
I wonder why Americans don't have any good Belgian jokes. I bet the Dutch do. I'm just trying to figure out a response to this website when the truth is exposed. Of course it would be in good taste. :-)
In the US, we have Arkansas. Unless one is from Arkansas in which case the jokes are about Alabama. Unless one is from Alabama in which case they might be about Mississippi. Or West Virginia. Or New York.....
Bottom line - we have 50 states, all of which can be used in a joke.
10DFT wrote:
In the US, we have Arkansas. Unless one is from Arkansas in which case the jokes are about Alabama. Unless one is from Alabama in which case they might be about Mississippi. Or West Virginia. Or New York.....
Bottom line - we have 50 states, all of which can be used in a joke.
Did you hear the one about the guy from Cleveland?
Winston Churchill is claimed to have said something like this about his political opponent: " I don't know anyone who would be more modest, and anyone who would have more reason to be modest". You can apply that to almost anyone.
I am guessing if a 100-400/4 lens will exist, the quoted price of 2498 EUR has the order of numbers scrambled. At 4298 EUR it would still be cheap compared to Nikon 200-400 VR, so the next guess is 8249 EUR.
Koivulehto wrote:
I am guessing if a 100-400/4 lens will exist, the quoted price of 2498 EUR has the order of numbers scrambled. At 4298 EUR it would still be cheap compared to Nikon 200-400 VR, so the next guess is 8249 EUR.
Thought of that too. I think E 4298 would be a fair price for this lens.
The price is only the 3rd part of the story. First it has to be real and 2nd it has to be sharp. At least as sharp as the Nikon 200-400/4.
I would not be that surprised to find that the pricing on the 100-400 F4 is correct (assuming it exists at all). Ultimately, people buy higher-end cameras for the totality of the system, not just a particular body. By placing what will be a hugely popular lens at this price point Canon pretty much ensures that no one that has one is going to switch systems and that a lot of Nikon users will be buying Canon. Both mean more body and lens sales for Canon, and in many cases, they are going to be pretty significant purchases.
For most people 2500 Euros is still a chunk of change but it is certainly more affordable than 6000 Euros. Assuming about a one to one conversion - dollar to euro (our European friends are getting screwed once again) I am one of the people that would consider $2500 for a lens but can't see ever spending $6K unless it is after a lottery win. In fact, I would be buying more than one lens as I would sell off the 70-200 2.8 IS and pick up the 100-400 and the 70-200 F4 IS for travel. After buying, selling, trading etc. I am much less likely to switch which means I am much more likely to buy more things from Canon. The point is that Canon may have figured out that they don't have to grab all of your money at once.
- Cleveland is that big city to the north where people actually have to pay to park their cars downtown. I tend to avoid it.