Re: Official Thread: Canon EF 200-400 with 1.4x Tele built in
M Vers wrote: bipock wrote:
Are you suggesting that a 400 5.6L, which currently runs $1200 new, would balloon to $2500 for adding nothing more than IS? Why would anyone pay that much for it? We\'d all be better going to the 100-400.
Even if the 100-400 is replaced by an MKII version it will probably cost somewhere around $2500, the same would most likely apply to a 400/5.6 IS. Just look at how much the 70-300L costs for example.
bipock an example would be the price difference between the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM ($2,374) & the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM ($1,376).
To be honest I would have be more excited with the 400/5.6 IS ($2,175-2,300) than the 200-400mm IS.
What I just like about it is the integrated TC.
Feb 07, 2011 at 02:22 PM
Previous versions of dolina's message #9293980 « Canon 200-400mm f/4L IS announced »
