>People spend that much on 5Dmk3 + 24-105mm f/4, I guess some studio
>photographers would spend that much on a top of the line normal lens.
I totally agree with that.
>II. The lens would get cheaper in a couple of years
No, they never do. The opposite is on Zeiss, they rise in years. For example: http://geizhals.at/de/?phist=369893&age=9999]
>That could have a cascade effect, as in how expensive & good the 85mm f/1.8
>upgrade would have to be.
The 85mm 1.8 needs no update, this is one hell of a lense. And if you need more
light, there is an unbeatable lense available (85L 1.2).
>[I'm assuming Canon would want to upgrade the 85mm f/1.8 to compete with
>Sigma's 85mm f/1.4 eventually.]
I don't think so. Canon has really done great lenses for the 85mm range.
>I might be wrong, but I have some hope this would do some good to future upgrades.
There are a lot of Zeiss distagon/planar-lenses out there for ages, rangin from 1000-2500
Euro. There is no impact on canon because they don't compete... manual lenses with
perfect optics are another class than AF-lenses, I guess most of em are sold to videomaker.