Re: Official Thread: Canon EF 200-400 with 1.4x Tele built in
dolina wrote:
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).
You cant have weather or dust resistance with the push pull pump design of the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS ($1,614).
To be honest I would have be more excited with the EF 400mm f/5.6L IS ($2,175-2,300) than the 200-400mm IS.
What I just like about it is the integrated TC.
Biggest improvement in the 70-200 was the optics and IS. We\'re assuming better optics. Still can\'t see it being that much more.
Same with the 100-400.
I found it to be funny that within a year of release, the 70-200 had rebate money on it. That suggests to me that Canon wasn\'t seeing the sales numbers they anticipated, much in the way vehicles have rebates. Seems to me logic would be price it right off the bat and go from there. I still don\'t think their pricing matrix is correct hence, come spring, the 70-200 will have rebate money again. I also think they will be disappointed with their sales figures on the new teles and this lens, assuming pricing is where people are suggesting ($7k and up). The demand is there, the supply is there, but the pricing is so far above the heads of alot of their targeted consumers that they aren\'t getting the return. I\'d love to have a 70-200/200-400 combo and would sell every lens I have nove to get it - but not at $10k in cost. In real life, non-pixelpeeping photography, the gain isn\'t there.
Just my opinion.
Feb 07, 2011 at 02:47 PM
Previous versions of bipock's message #9294063 « Canon 200-400mm f/4L IS announced »
