PetKal wrote: StillFingerz wrote: PetKal wrote:
Jerry, that info on the 200-400 trunk missing is someone\'s joke most probably.
I am 99.99% confident the trunk will be supplied, whatever good it does.
A major Canadian retailer have apparently sold three of them yesterday.....to the same buyer.
Now, I reckon that is either Robert trying to dry up the initial Canadian lens allotment, or Roland \"Netexpress\" making sure he\'s got the 200-400 review monopoly on FM.
Sure hope so Peter you need another case for your collection, without the case your working museum would be quite incomplete
Jerry, every and each new Canon long lens acquired adds to the pile of accessory detritus such as lens trunks, front dust caps and stock tripod mount feet.
Now, they are also including a trunk strap and a smaller monopod foot on the side.
Has anybody ever sent a memo to Canon about those feet ? One of the first things 99% of long lens users do is either replace the stock foot with an aftermarket QR foot, or bolt a QR plate to the stock foot.
Creating a deliverable/product that serves all users is mostly impossible, complexity of design, often very little \'actual user\' feedback or listened to feedback all lend to feed the third party market. If indeed 99% of tele users actually remove the stock foot then Canon is either stuck in the past; not willing to change, doesn\'t listen to the majority preferring to cater to the non-foot-changers, or simply don\'t want to play the foot/plate game due to profit motives, letting 3rd parties fight it out. I\'m guessing profits are the end reason.
Why not include a tripod collar/foot for selected L tele lenses, 100L, 70-200 f4L, etc., yes some use them and some don\'t, much like the big glass...is it for user convenience or purely profit driven; the latter me thinks in this case.
Stupidity, bad or old designs are often the breeding grounds for dis-staisfaction, when enough voices be heard the 3rd party product is born...and many benefit. Monopolies rarely innovate with any speed and usually resort to silly and/or gimmicky gifts to boost sales, competition on the other hand is leaner and can be of much higher quality/usability; at least for accessories...the little stuff
all lend to feed the third party market. If indeed 99% of tele users actually remove the stock foot then Canon is either stuck in the past; not willing to change, doesn\'t listen to the majority preferring to cater to the non-foot-changers, or simply don\'t want to play the foot/plate game due to profit motives, letting 3rd parties fight it out. I\'m guessing profits are the end reason. 