That doesn't look promising for people of modest means who are trying to get into higher quality dSLR photography these days.
Fortunately, there are still very decent lenses and cameras available for less than $1,000 apiece.
It's amazing how expensive the Canon EF stuff has gotten, and how cheap some formerly-insanely-expensive stuff is, now that it's out of fashion. Buying RZ67 lenses for $200-400/ea. that normally are $2000-$4000/ea. list price is just crazy. That's just one example, there's plenty more.
I would be concerned about this if there were something that I actually wanted to buy from Canon. Sadly Canon seems to be lagging Nikon more and more these days in new product offerings that I would be interested in (like an update to the 5D mk II or an updated wide angle "L" zoom).
We might also consider "thanking" the forces in motion that are continuing to make the dollar worth less and less every day. Canon is a business, after all. Not only do falling exchange rates and increasing inflation mean that they have to charge more in order to maintain their margins, they also have to deal with the rising costs of production. The prices of various raw materials have increased due to both the same falling exchange rates as well as less supply and more demand. The price for transporting and shipping their products has also gone up. There's only one way for a business to offset increasing costs (without sacrificing quality) and that's to raise prices.
On the bright side, look at it this way - if you hold off until the next round of Canon rebates you will probably be able to buy a 70-200 IS II for around $2000 - $2100. The MkI lens sold for around $1650. Market/economic conditions aside, is the IS II a $400-$500 better lens than the IS I? I say "yes", hands down. It's faster, sharper, has a fluorite element, and a better stabilizer. It's widely praised for its image quality, drawing comparisons to the 135 F2L. I'd say that is easily worth $500 more than its predecessor.
Checked a few prices this morning: the big US pricing leaders show 800L and 500L at $12,349 and $6,700 respectively. Should we expect a major price jump tomorrow for those two lenses as well ?
Allen's camera still has the 70-200/2.8 II for $2269.99. Just got off the phone with the owner and his policy is not to jump his current stock price when Canon increases its prices for new orders. At the moment he has about two dozen in stock.
PetKal wrote:
Checked a few prices this morning: the big US pricing leaders show 800L and 500L at $12,349 and $6,700 respectively. Should we expect a major price jump tomorrow for those two lenses as well ?
aaaha .. Hope the 500 goes to $7000. I'm still thinking of selling mine since my trips will dry up soon due to personal reasons and I'll probably be able to use a 200 f/2 more often for outdoor portraits and get a 100-400 for birds.
Canongarcon wrote:
Enough of this leftist tripe. Canon has to have a healthy profit margin to survive and it has not been the best year for Canon either. As people stated in this thread, a lot of the reasons is the exchange rate and other prices rising.
Canon can't be a profitable company if customers can't buy the products. The price increases are being implemented just to gouge the customers.
If you look in the news, canon had rise in rofit of 26% this year...
my biggest gripe with the prices, is that here in the UK we don't get rebates...
well, you get a small rebate on certain L lenses when you buy 5D Mk2 or 7D...
the prices in the UK are always 10-20% higher....
the problem we have is the investors, who keep demanding more and more profit, and so we pay more and more for our goods!
now the banks are gambling food prices too!
IllegalFun wrote:
If you look in the news, canon had rise in rofit of 26% this year...
my biggest gripe with the prices, is that here in the UK we don't get rebates...
well, you get a small rebate on certain L lenses when you buy 5D Mk2 or 7D...
the prices in the UK are always 10-20% higher....
the problem we have is the investors, who keep demanding more and more profit, and so we pay more and more for our goods!
now the banks are gambling food prices too!
Why is it that people who apparently have absolutely no idea of how the real world works insist on spouting pseudo-economic nonsense on a photography board?
If Canon's prices are too high for you, don't buy their stuff. But this whining/preaching gets real old, real fast.
The big names have gone up in price but there's still plenty of opportunity to beat the price increase. I was checking out canon price watch today and they have a front-page list of stores in-stock selling at pre-increase prices.
lovinglife wrote:
Just out of sheer curiousity--Wouldn't it make sense for dealers 'load up' on lenses now and then increase their profit margins later, as the price goes up?
As I posted in another thread on the same topic:
Most legit retailers won't raise prices on existing inventory but:
Canon does not offer price protection. If a retailer orders a lens the day before the prices increase and Canon ships it the day after, the retailer pays the higher price.
On at least one prior occasion, Canon USA simply sat on unfilled orders until the price increase took effect obliging retailers to increase prices on a wider range of items.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
I'm sure both Helen and Henry can confirm it's just coincidence that it has looked like this about 500 times
If Adorama and B&H pay Canon USA the same price for a product it stands to reason both will exhibit similar retail prices.
Ben Horne wrote:
Actually, Canon has a different sort of relationship with the big places like B&H. These places will sell for cost, which Canon is not a big fan of.
If you're suggesting we're charging the same amount for a lens as we pay Canon USA, you are mistaken. Canon USA is fully aware of how much we charge and I am certain if they were uncomfortable, they'd tell us. The Canon USA people I've met are anything but shy.
Companies who set MAP prices do so precisely to protect smaller retailers. If everyone has to advertise lens XXX for $##, shoppers who may not be aware that $## is higher than the real selling price may be more inclined not to comparison shop.
I attended a round table discussion of MAP prices a few years ago. All the smaller store owners loved MAP and actually wanted higher MAP values so they could advertise the same prices as the "big guys" and often get those prices. I, on the other hand, am not a fan of MAP. It's not because I fear competition but because explaining MAP and why we show one price and sell for another to relative newbies is daunting and often makes it seem we're doing something somehow unsavory when nothing could be further from the truth.
Henry, So what happens with Canon rebates. I just took delivery of a 70-200 f2.8 II from B&H yesterday, now if the rumored rebate of $200 is announced on Sunday, it looks like I have to ship the lens back to you guys for you to then just ship another one back to me for the rebate. Seems crazy.
robsonj wrote:
Henry, So what happens with Canon rebates. I just took delivery of a 70-200 f2.8 II from B&H yesterday, now if the rumored rebate of $200 is announced on Sunday, it looks like I have to ship the lens back to you guys for you to then just ship another one back to me for the rebate. Seems crazy.
Send me an email with your B&H order number and a reminder of the topic (I have a sieve-like brain).
