Pretty impressive line up imho, with a number of surprises.
70-300 kind of odd one out, but the more I think about it the more I see a role.
It sort of mixes the 70-300 DO and 70-300usm as a light travel tele.
If the IQ is good they'll sell a ton of them (not to me, but that's another matter).
The Great Whites are out of my league, but perhaps I can get an original 300/2.8IS at better price in the near future.
8-15 looks interesting too.
Gotta keep focus though, still en route for a 24L2 first and foremost and perhaps a TSE
thedigitalbean wrote:
The fourth post in this thread....
Canon's not going anywhere, but if they are eliminating their non-L EF lineup, they are leaving a hole for others to fill. One can only assume that: (1) they think they will make more money this way, or (2) they will eventually update some of their non-L EF lenses.
You've got to admit though, that this was not the lens release for which the masses were hoping.
ScooberJake wrote:
While I realize that the super-teles are important to a lot of wildlife and sports folks, there is nothing here for portrait, wedding, and landscape photogs.
.
Canon have already updated the
14/2,8
16-35/2,8
24/1,4
24 TS-E
50/1,2
85/1,2
70-200/4
70-200/2,8
200/2
A few of those lenses must be of interest for portrait, wedding & landscape shooters
Another thing to consider when looking at Canon's new teles compared to Nikon's is weight. The Nikkor 400/2.8 VR weighs in at just over 10lbs while the Canon 400/2.8 IS II is at 8.6lbs. The Nikkor 300/2.8 VR II weighs in at 6.4lbs while the Canon 300/2.8 IS II weighs in at 5.2lbs.
From an average consumer perspective i think this is a disappointing move from Canon. It certainly offers little for most of us to cheer about - the implicit eradication of the EF line is obviously leading to a clear separation of their product lines into Amateur and Pro, with a large gulf to cross if you want to make the transition from one to the other - Feel like you have outgrown your Rebel / 60D and want to upgrade to FF? Well that will soon cost you a new camera plus a full set of lenses...
I wonder if the long term plan might also include making EF-S cameras incompatible with EF-L lenses.
dolina wrote:
James I would think that after all those records you've sold you would be more inclined towards newer gear.
Now then, to answer your question. I expect Canon to support the 500 I for at least 5 years and at most 10.
I keep telling people the music thing just wasn't working out - had to go into photography
What was the price of the 200 f/2 when it first came out? How much has it dropped in price? However, Canon didn't need to clear out stock inventory of the older version of that lens. I would think that within a year the price of these new lenses will drop in price to become more competitive with Nikon.
James Taylor wrote:
What was the price of the 200 f/2 when it first came out? How much has it dropped in price? However, Canon didn't need to clear out stock inventory of the older version of that lens. I would think that within a year the price of these new lenses will drop in price to become more competitive with Nikon.
The introductory price of the 200 f/2 was $6000. It has fallen and stabilized at $5300. Canon has put a $500 rebate on this lens the last few times (and is the only super telephoto they have rebated) making it available on some occasions for $4800.
The 800 f/5.6 had an introductory price of $12000. It is now widely available around $10,800 and is stable at that price, that is a 10% drop.
I think about 6-12 months after release, one can expect these new lenses to be available for at least 10% less than introductory prices. Whether Canon has any additional rebates on top of that is anyone's guess.
James Taylor wrote:
I keep telling people the music thing just wasn't working out - had to go into photography
What was the price of the 200 f/2 when it first came out? How much has it dropped in price? However, Canon didn't need to clear out stock inventory of the older version of that lens. I would think that within a year the price of these new lenses will drop in price to become more competitive with Nikon.
Canon's MSRP was $6k and went down to $4,600 in 2009 then went up again. Then down again then up again. It's like a roller coaster of death!
I expect the super teles to bottom out and match Nikon's street price by the 2012 Olympics in London.
Hmmm you guys may be right. Doing a bit more research and it appears 'inner focusing' doesn't necessarily mean 'non-extending'. I found a similar description for the 15-85--"Inner focusing system with USM"
EDIT: The 17-85 also reads: "Inner focusing system, with focusing cam"
thedigitalbean wrote:
I think about 6-12 months after release, one can expect these new lenses to be available for at least 10% less than introductory prices. Whether Canon has any additional rebates on top of that is anyone's guess.
Here is a price comparison between Canon's MSRP to Nikkor's equivalent street price. I expect prices to improve as we get closer to the 2012 Olympics.
EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ $7,000
AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II Lens $5,899.95
Current Canon 300's $4,499.00
EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM @ $11,000
AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR Autofocus Lens $8,899.95
Current Canon 400's $7,190.00
EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM @ $?
AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4G ED VR II Autofocus Lens $8,499.00
Current Canon 500's $6,140.00
EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM @ $?
AF-S Nikkor 600mm f/4G ED VR Autofocus Lens $10,299.95
Current Canon 600's $8,050.00
EXTENDER EF 2x III @ $500
AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E III $499.95
Current Canon 2x's $309.00
Grantland wrote: funny how two smart people think so different. i have only once bought a new lens (50 1.8) and once a camera body (7d).
i only buy used. 400 2.8 IS, 300 2.8 IS, 200 1.8, 85 1.2II, etc. 1d4, 1d3, 1d2s, etc.
used has worked well for me. knock on wood.
I think it more or less my lack of trust and a 1 yr warranty that keeps me from buying used. I like the extra sense of security I get buying a new lens knowing I have it covered for a bit of time. I'll still likely never buy a used lens that sells new at or under 3K, even though I considered the 500/4 IS while it was around 5.5K, but anything above is free game.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
Canon have already updated the
14/2,8
16-35/2,8
24/1,4
24 TS-E
50/1,2
85/1,2
70-200/4
70-200/2,8
200/2
A few of those lenses must be of interest for portrait, wedding & landscape shooters
I believe I said there is nothing HERE (as in the lenses announced today) for portrait, wedding, and landscape shooters. But you do make a good point, some of the lenses important to us who don't use the super-teles have been updated recently.
However, by all accounts the last generation super-teles were all fantastic. What is the point in updating them? Especially when Canon's deficiencies at the wide end are well known. My dream lens (and that of a lot of other folks) is the Nikon 14-24, which Canon has not answered. What about a 24-70 with IS (which again, Nikon has)? Would be a bread and butter lens for so many working photogs. 17-40, 35L, 50 1.4, or 135L would all make sense as well. Yes Canon gave use TS lenses last year, but again exotic (in both price and utility). Unless I am mistaken, there has been only one mainstream lens update over these last two years.
I don't expect that Canon must cater to my every need. I'm just surprised. Seems to me that they are skipping over mainstream needs to provide exotic options. But of course I don't look at the profit margins, sales figures, etc.
thedigitalbean wrote:
I think you guys are completely missing the point. The release of these new lenses does absolutely nothing to the thousands upon thousands of current superb telephotos with IS already out there. If anything, these lenses will get cheaper on the used market as those with the budgets upgrade.
Canon will always have these lenses (great supertelephotos with IS) available on the used market at great prices available to those who cannot afford the newest. However if you insist on buying new, then yea, you're going to have to pay for it.
I don't know about used lenses getting cheaper. With the alternative a used 300 in the upper $3ks or a new one at $7k seems like there is a good chance that used lenses hold or increase in value. I'm holding on to mine as an investment till we see how this plays out.
funny how two smart people think so different. i have only once bought a new lens (50 1.8) and once a camera body (7d).