Canon's business plan, as of late, seems to be: add a "I", charge $1000 more, then just do as if it's actually worth that muchAlthough I am a Canon fan(atic?) I have to admit that the above statement is unfortunately correct
Do you know that as a fact or is this just your opinion?
Although I think this question is addressed to NormanBates let me mention:
24-70 II: I understand that it will be better than version I but that better? They even increased the price of version I ...
300 f/2.8L IS II, 400 f/2.8L IS II, 500 f/4L IS II, 600 f/4L IS II: They are lighter and maybe a little better that their already very goof predecessors but the increase in price is huge!
5D Mark III: better in AF, fps and in noise (a little) but ... that better ? huge price increase...
28 2.8 IS, 24 2.8 IS prices are a joke. Let me add that in the (very) good old days my 28 2.8 costed around 100$ and my 24mm 2.8 costed around 190 euros (both new). However Canon may price these two new IS lenses as much as they like. I am not interested
(I cannot say the same for some of the previous items I mentioned