November 28, 2014, 03:00:29 PM

Author Topic: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]  (Read 10840 times)

ewg963

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2013, 07:42:00 AM »
5D Mark III, 5D Mark II, 24-105mm 70-200mm 2.8 Non IS, 100-400mm 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 580EX II, 600EX-RT

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2013, 07:42:00 AM »

Ellen Schmidtee

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 441
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #31 on: December 21, 2013, 08:40:10 AM »
I wouldn't be the least surprised by a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS USM. It might have lower IQ than the IS-less' lens, as I think some people would be willing to compromise on price & IQ to get IS for the hand-hold-ability.

As for another 24-70mm, I'm not so sure. If it's f/4 IS-less, how would it compete with the cheap 24-105mm f/4 IS USM? What else could it be?

These comments surprise me, if only because the Tamron 24-70 VC offers exactly what you say people are looking for at a price that already seriously undercuts the Canon non IS version.  I don't personally think that a new version is worth more than the original price point of the 24-70LII unless it offers something more than just IS, particularly if that comes at the cost of higher weight and slightly compromised optics.

Exactly - Tamron is taking sales away from Canon, so I expect Canon to release a lens to compete with it.

dufflover

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • OH YEAH!
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #32 on: December 21, 2013, 08:50:46 AM »
Kudos for Tamron for forcing Canon's hand (ok so I don't have proof of that, but makes sense to me) to possibly produce a final product 24-70 IS, although it would not be a lens I personally would buy due to primarily being crop telephoto user, and the price. Anything that looks like Canon is taking other brands more seriously even though it will always have the die hard L-only snobs. On that note I predict $2700-3000 debut price, if it's as sharp as the current model.
Hurry up Canon and do something with your sensors! :P

TWI by Dustin Abbott

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1653
    • View Profile
    • dustinabbott.net
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #33 on: December 21, 2013, 12:51:33 PM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake. 
6D x 2 | EOS-M w/22mm f/2 + 18-55 STM + EF Adapter| Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC | 35mm f/2 IS | 40mm f/2.8 | 100L | 135L | 70-300L -----OLD SCHOOL----- SMC Takumar 28mm f/3.5, Super Takumar 35mm f/3.5, SMC Takumar 55mm f/1.8, Helios 44-2 and 44-4, Super Takumar 150mm f/4

optikus

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #34 on: December 21, 2013, 01:01:54 PM »
Hello from Germany,

it is fact - third party sources bring more and more lenses in a quality and with specifications, that canon has to answer. And what we saw last time in the "L" lineup is an answer. I expect, perhaps together with the rumored 1Dx-successor perhaps with high megapixel sensor that there will come more in top level area for the clientel using those equipments, perhaps with a wider spreaded typology of "L"-segment lenses and a separate lineup more for consumer purposes also in full format area. I think there will be some thinking of the future of APS-C system, we see the problems and volumes of small sensor systems in the last months and the intensive discussion on lower price 35mm-bodies - 2014 can bring some surprises.

If there will be a top level 24-80 IS then it will find it's market. No bodxy expects a 200-400 to be a mass product, but canon needs products in its lineup to demonstrate it's "No. 1"-status, and what might to this better as a prime/zoom-series competing e.g. with Zeiss Distagon 1,4/55 and the other announced products of that series? Price allone is not the objective, I think.

Jörg
EOS 1Ds, D60, 10D, 30D*, 400D, var. manual lenses, Zeiss and other german manufacturers and some EF/EFs ... *: 30D with extended IR-range for astrophotography

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5126
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #35 on: December 21, 2013, 01:26:49 PM »
I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.

Early adopters aren't naive - everybody buying smartphones, computers, cameras knows that they loose value very fast, but some people want to have it right now for whatever reason. The lenses are simply adapting to the rest of the product world.

The non-L primes were overpriced and Canon seems to have admitted this if the rumors are correct, but why should Canon throw away money for L lenses? The only consequence of people getting more cautious is that the lens "early adopters premium" will be lifted faster, but many will never buy 3rd party lenses and very few will switch to Nikon so it's still win-win for Canon.

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3241
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #36 on: December 21, 2013, 02:06:35 PM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake.

You came to the wrong conclusion.

Your conclusion should have been this: I care more for how much I can sell my lens for than the photographs I create with it.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #36 on: December 21, 2013, 02:06:35 PM »

optikus

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #37 on: December 21, 2013, 02:48:34 PM »
Hi,

I think it is important to have two things in mind:

For a professional the akquisition of equipment is a commercial calculation: what is the effect I have on my productivity and the quality of my results = the chance for having good prices for my images when akquiring what equipment - and how long does it last to compensate the invest by the inproved income. If the effect to be expected e.g. for low light shooting is good then the pricing for a special lens as the 2,8 IS will be one is secondary. And that's one side of beeing No. 1 to have such equipment in the program.

For consumer or prosumer the individual estimation in what can a new lens or body bring for the individual feeling os more important in combination what happens at home when communicating the intention to buy such expensive parts. There is a wide variety of possible tolerances and that's why you have the different product lines for private buyers.

If - as we see with the STM-Lenses and other good products in the EF-S / EF-M lineup you have secondary effects as a small equipment for the pro or video shooting in the semi professional segment then this may be inmportant to - but I think that's not the motor driving the development this moment. The increasing risk for canon that the buyer expects third party products to be as good or better than the own ones are more critical. And the pricing canon has in the prosumer and consumer area is relative high, to high as I think. The advantages to buy canon compared to sigma/tamron and how ever the brands are is not so significant that the user pays the higher canon price.

And the had serious quality problems in the past - that is in the media and therefore present in the public.

Jörg
EOS 1Ds, D60, 10D, 30D*, 400D, var. manual lenses, Zeiss and other german manufacturers and some EF/EFs ... *: 30D with extended IR-range for astrophotography

TWI by Dustin Abbott

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1653
    • View Profile
    • dustinabbott.net
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #38 on: December 21, 2013, 04:43:22 PM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake.

You came to the wrong conclusion.

Your conclusion should have been this: I care more for how much I can sell my lens for than the photographs I create with it.

Wow, that is a pretty huge generalization with absolutely no merit to discussion at hand.  You've never sold a lens to invest in something else that fits a need or to upgrade to a newer/better product?  You don't care about your gear holding value?  If the answer to both of those questions is no, then we certainly are different.
 
I categorically reject your final assessment.  I believe my work speaks for itself.
6D x 2 | EOS-M w/22mm f/2 + 18-55 STM + EF Adapter| Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 | Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC | 35mm f/2 IS | 40mm f/2.8 | 100L | 135L | 70-300L -----OLD SCHOOL----- SMC Takumar 28mm f/3.5, Super Takumar 35mm f/3.5, SMC Takumar 55mm f/1.8, Helios 44-2 and 44-4, Super Takumar 150mm f/4

duydaniel

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 343
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #39 on: December 22, 2013, 09:35:39 PM »

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

It shows their overpriced policy backfired and supply was over demand making the lens drop in value

Random Orbits

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1393
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #40 on: December 22, 2013, 09:59:53 PM »

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

It shows their overpriced policy backfired and supply was over demand making the lens drop in value

Probably not.  More like a variation of first degree price discrimination.  Canon has a price that it willing to sell at for a profit.  Anything they get above that is gravy.  Early adopters are willing to pay more, and Canon is turning that willingness into additional profit.

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3241
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #41 on: December 23, 2013, 11:21:08 PM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake.

You came to the wrong conclusion.

Your conclusion should have been this: I care more for how much I can sell my lens for than the photographs I create with it.

Wow, that is a pretty huge generalization with absolutely no merit to discussion at hand.  You've never sold a lens to invest in something else that fits a need or to upgrade to a newer/better product?  You don't care about your gear holding value?  If the answer to both of those questions is no, then we certainly are different.

No and no.

I don't buy lenses to invest, I buy lenses to take photographs with.

cellomaster27

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 180
  • Capture the moment!
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #42 on: December 24, 2013, 02:11:57 AM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake.

You came to the wrong conclusion.

Your conclusion should have been this: I care more for how much I can sell my lens for than the photographs I create with it.

Wow, that is a pretty huge generalization with absolutely no merit to discussion at hand.  You've never sold a lens to invest in something else that fits a need or to upgrade to a newer/better product?  You don't care about your gear holding value?  If the answer to both of those questions is no, then we certainly are different.

No and no.

I don't buy lenses to invest, I buy lenses to take photographs with.

I'm gonna have to say... that most of us does not want to pay a premium.  Especially seeing the trends of canon's recent pricing/marketing.  Just wait a bit for the price to come down.  Of course, you are probably gonna keep your purchases but it is disheartening when the price goes down so much in a short time. (not the case for all lenses obviously)
But then, you do buy lenses primarily to take photographs with, I hope.  I have to say that most people don't take photos to make money with in the first place.  Most are hobbyists, amateurs, and enthusiasts like me and it wouldn't be smart to invest in glass.  Most things depreciate over a short time, especially electronics.. Unless you're talking about instruments like a cello.  Good wood appreciates over time that's taken care of!  :D 
Hey, if you could get a lens for a better price and for taking photos, bang!  You're happy.  I think all arguments are valid considering that they aren't taken to extremes. 
100D, EOS M, EF-M 18-55mm f3.5-5.6, EF-S 18-55mm IS STM f3.5-5.6, EF 28mm f1.8 USM, EF-S 10-22mm f3.5-4.5 USM, EF 40mm f2.8 STM, EF 85mm f.18 USM, EF-S 55-250mm f4-5.6 IS, 430 EX II, kata 3n-1 22, triggers, lighting, stands, remotes, etc...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #42 on: December 24, 2013, 02:11:57 AM »

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3241
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #43 on: December 24, 2013, 03:51:19 AM »
No and no.

I don't buy lenses to invest, I buy lenses to take photographs with.

I'm gonna have to say... that most of us does not want to pay a premium.  Especially seeing the trends of canon's recent pricing/marketing.  Just wait a bit for the price to come down.

Ok, so if people don't want to pay a "new product premium", wait for it to age a bit. How hard can that be?

If on the other hand you buy it while it is new and you end up paying a bit more than if you waited, well where's the harm in that? You've bought it and used it so where's the problem?

Quote
Of course, you are probably gonna keep your purchases but it is disheartening when the price goes down so much in a short time. (not the case for all lenses obviously).

Buyer's remorse. Suck it up and learn so that you're more careful next time.

Quote
But then, you do buy lenses primarily to take photographs with, I hope.  I have to say that most people don't take photos to make money with in the first place.  Most are hobbyists, amateurs, and enthusiasts like me and it wouldn't be smart to invest in glass.

Bingo!

Quote
Most things depreciate over a short time, especially electronics..

Lenses are made more from glass and exotic crystals than they are electronics. Cameras on the other hand ...

dgatwood

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 820
  • 300D, 400D, 6D
    • View Profile
Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #44 on: December 24, 2013, 01:00:00 PM »
Just my 2 cents, but I think that Canon really needs to stop charging such ridiculous initials MSRP's for their new lens.

$2499 for 24-70II to well under $2000 in just over a year.
$1699 for 24-70 f/4 to under a $1000 street price (as cheap as $899) in less than a year.
$849 for 35mm f/2 IS to $549 in about a year.
Etc... (and don't even get started on the EOS M)

I've heard the arguments that early adopters pay the premium.  Fine, but when a clear trend emerges that new products start well above market value and reach their true value in a year or less some light bulbs start going off, and that core, important audience starts closing their wallets and waiting.  I just think it is a bad business practice.  Yes, market forces often drive the value of new goods down over time, but, in the case of the EOS and the 24-70 f/4 you are talking about near 50%.

I'm a value conscious shopper.  I personally am not inclined to buy any new Canon product within 6 months of release because I fear that my investment is going to be wasted.  Premium lenses are often exceptional at holding their value, but try telling that to someone who is trying to sell a year old 24-70 variant when new prices have dropped by $600+.

The Tamron 24-70 entered the market at a $1299 price point.  Current price is about $1049 for the Canon version, although the Nikon is still at about $1299 for some reason.  That is what I consider more like typical market forces.  One of the advantages in the past to buying a Canon over a third party was the conventional wisdom that the Canon would have a higher resale value.  But what if that advantage is removed?  I bought my Tamron for $1149 by negotiating and shopping around.  I can sell it for at least $900, possibly more.  But at worst I have lost $250.  If I had paid $2499 for the 24-70MKII and was looking at a market of, say, $1800, to sell it, I think I would be pretty ticked.

In conclusion:  if Canon does release a new 24-70mm f/2.8 IS, I think it pricing it over $2500 is a mistake.

You came to the wrong conclusion.

Your conclusion should have been this: I care more for how much I can sell my lens for than the photographs I create with it.

That's not really a fair assessment.  For those of us who aren't making money off of our gear, the tendency for the price to plummet after a year or two is a serious concern even if we have no intention of ever selling it.  When used lenses drop in price, new lenses also tend to drop in price.  As a result, when choosing whether to buy a lens, rather than asking how much extra value we'll get from owning a lens, we're forced to ask whether the extra value we'll get from owning the lens over the next few months is worth half the price of the lens.  If it isn't, we should wait a year and buy it then.

In practice, that means that it never makes sense to buy any lens until it has been on the market for at least a year or two unless you're actively making a lot of money with your lenses, and it rarely makes sense even if you are.  This makes new lenses a much tougher sell, and pretty much shuts enthusiasts out of the new lens market entirely.

If Canon stabilized the prices a bit by setting the SRP closer to the wholesale price, the used lens price would have less effect on the new lens price, so the price of new lenses wouldn't collapse as much, early adopters would pay considerably less, late adopters might pay slightly more, and early adoption would become accessible to a much broader market, which would mean that the R&D costs of designing a new lens would pay for themselves sooner, and we'd see a more rapid roll-out of new lenses.

Of course, the story is different for bodies, because they're constantly coming up with new, improved versions of those.  We expect body prices to come down whenever a replacement rears its ugly head.  But there's no good reason for that to happen with lenses when they aren't getting replaced with newer versions.  Such drops indicate that there's too much dealer markup initially, and that the prices are being artificially inflated for no good reason.

Unless, of course, Canon sets the initial MSRP ridiculously high because they can't handle the demand, in which case they need to get their act together.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Two New 24-70's Coming in 2014? [CR1]
« Reply #44 on: December 24, 2013, 01:00:00 PM »