I'm seriously wondering if I shouldn't just go out and buy the consumer Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM while they are still available new - looks like a serious bargain looking to what the "L" future might hold pricewise.
RobertLynn wrote:
directly from rob g. I take back what I said about the 70-300.
The Extender EF 1.4x III and Extender EF 2x III are to ship in December 2010 at an expected street price of US$500 in the U.S.
.
And are being advertised for pre-order in the UK for (exchange rate equivalent of) 850 USD!!! However, if it only loses one stop and allows autofocus and turns my 100-400mm L into 800mm autofocus (or even if it turns my 70-200 Mk 2 into a 400mm F4 so I can sell the 100-400L) it might be worth it.
Niall
Aug 28, 2010 at 05:07 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
nrferguson wrote:
And are being advertised for pre-order in the UK for (exchange rate equivalent of) 850 USD!!! However, if it only loses one stop and allows autofocus and turns my 100-400mm L into 800mm autofocus (or even if it turns my 70-200 Mk 2 into a 400mm F4 so I can sell the 100-400L) it might be worth it.
Niall
Of course it doesn't do that
Aug 28, 2010 at 05:13 AM
Jonathan Huynh Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
It seems to me that Canon has once again shot themselves in the foot, and given thousands of DSLR shooters yet another good reason to switch to Nikon. The one big advantage Canon had (go to any national park that features wildlife and you'll see what I mean) was their long lens pricing vis-a-vis Nikon's. Now, Canon no longer has that advantage, (quite the opposite, actually). I am not a Nikon fanboy -- I own and use a 5D, 20D, and lots of Canon lenses and accessories. I also own and use a D300S and some Nikon long glass -- and I prefer Canon. But I've borrowed some of the newest Nikon long glass and it is amazing. And now it's cheaper!
IF the new long lenses perform better than any other equivalent focal length lens ever manufactured by any company, shouldn't we expect them to cost more than any other equivalent focal length lens ever manufactured by any company?
khurram1 wrote:
I paid $3200 at CPS prices for the 70-200 f2.8L IS lens (2001/2002?? time frame). so the new replacement at $2400 didn't seem as bad. But then in Canada we tended to get a lot more screwed over on pricing then we currently do. We still are getting screwed - just not as hard anymore
I totally agree on the price erosion. There are now wedding photographers willing to do photo AND video under $1000, whereas, I wouldn't even consider doing photos only at that price - not worth my time. I recently was at a wedding of an acquaintence, who had asked me to shoot the wedding, but I politely declined, without even discussing price. They ended up getting someone to shoot the wedding for $300 (a six hour east indian wedding), where the photographer simply provided the photos on DVD only!!!...Show more →
But the Canadian dollar was 67 cents US or so in 2002. So your price of CAD $3200 then would actually be about CAD $2000 in in terms of today's exchange rate.
Speaking of exchange rates, isn't the yen at all-time highs, at least against the US dollar? And might not that have something to do with the pricing of these new products? Might we not see an upward adjustment of Nikon products, and perhaps other Canon products, to follow suit?
Wow, it looks like I'll have to stick with my 300mm f/4L IS. It's unlikely that I'll ever be able to afford a 300mm f/2.8 IS II. Yikes! Oh well, I do like my f/4L.
Nill Toulme wrote:
Speaking of exchange rates, isn't the yen at all-time highs, at least against the US dollar? And might not that have something to do with the pricing of these new products? Might we not see an upward adjustment of Nikon products, and perhaps other Canon products, to follow suit?
Nill
I've been waiting for someone to say that. The dollar is very weak against the yen. Ergo, parts coming from Japan are likely to be more expensive.
Further to my last post, coincidentally I just spotted the latest edition of the UK's "Amateur Photographer" magazine which is testing the Tamron SP 70-300 f4-5.6 Di VC USD which they say has a SRP of £430.
They say "The optical performance of the Tamron lens is excellent and within hailing distance of monofocal standards .... a highly corrected lens of top performance"
For £430
Sounds good!
When the new Canon L 70-300 costs several times as much!
As our US friends might say "WTF"
Am editing this to say that our Nikon colleagues are enjoying plenty of "Schadenfreude" at our expense:
Daniel Heineck wrote:
I've been waiting for someone to say that. The dollar is very weak against the yen. Ergo, parts coming from Japan are likely to be more expensive.
There have been upward adjustments on lens prices coming out of Japan and it is not just Canon and Nikon. Even the latest version of the Sigma 70-200 is retailing for about $1700 here in the US, compared to $2150 and $2300 respectively for the comparable Nikon and Canon latest releases. The old Sigma70-200 for Nikon and Canon sells for $800. The Tokina 16-28 F2.8 was announced with a MSRP in the ballpark with Nikon's 14-24 and Canon's 16-35 II.
Frankly, as a person who shoots with both Nikon and Canon, neither side should be laughing at the other in terms of lens pricing: They can both be expensive make that extremely expensive.
15Bit wrote:
I agree - Canon obviously have a plan, and they know their sales much better than we do. It is their decision whether we like it or not. I just think its a little disappointing, thats all. In the case of the latest 70-300mm replacement it looks like a greedy profit grabbing exercise too. There is nothing customer-driven about that decision - if the new 70-300mm L really is 3x better than the EF it would sell on its merits and they could maintain both products on the books.
well, it looks like the 70-300 IS non-L is back
not canceled
It also occurs to me that these current wide aperture L's are perhaps too special even for many who can afford them, and actually offer reduced performance in day to day situations than the EF counterparts. i.e. a 50mm f/1.2 is an amazing thing to have for f/1.2, but for the majority of pictures many people take its extra weight and the issue of stop-down focus shift make it less useful than the 1.4 variant. I wonder how many 50L and 85L owners also own the EF counterpart. Perhaps in these cases Canon will double up the L range and offer a 1.4L (1.8L for the 85mm) with pro quality build and a price tag lying somewhere between the current model and the esoteric L....Show more →
i don't even think the 50 1.2 is as sharp as the 50 1.8 stopped down
it would be nice if they simply popped a ring usm into the 50 1.4 as is
