Pricing of the New Lenses

[marekjoz]

There is already 70-200 2,8 mk2 in this price range. So next step would be 16-35 mk3 (although it's only 5 years old) at the similar price level. As the gear for pros only 135 2L seems to be too cheap yet...

[Canon-F1]

don´t take this too serious. 

canon has abandoned the DSLR for the consumer market.
maybe they will use the EF-S lenses for their mirrorless system.

we will see a few new rebel models .. until canon decides in 2014 to stop producing cheap DSLR cameras. 

canons new mirroless APS-C system will cover the mass market.

the pro sector will be occupied by >2000$ DSLR cameras and EF lenses that start at 800$


 

[dstppy]

Japanese people think $ and € are the same... wth?!

Maybe they know something we don't 

Seriously, for the price, it'll have to be good . . . and the market will determine that, which is fine.

[stabmasterasron]

damnation, I hope Canon doesn't decide to update the 24-105 f4L.  Unbelievable prices.  I don't know what Canon is thinking.
I know how these things work.  The  price usually has less to do with the cost of manufacturing the lens than it does with finding the price point that maximizes profit (profit per unit X number sold).  And once production ramps up, I find it hard to beleive this lens will be more expensive to manufacture than the mk I version. 

I find it difficult to believe that this is the best price point for this lens.  I think Canon has missed the mark.

[Z]

If anyone would like a laugh:

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-canon-ef-24-70mm-f2-8l-ii-usm-lens/p1529492

£2299.00 = $3,638.09

Of course, this is a pre-order and prices are subject to change... blah blah. The sad thing is, I doubt they'll change much.

[EchoLocation]

I was hoping to upgrade from the 24-105 and 5DC to the 24-70 2.8 II and a 5DX, but at this price, I will most likely just get the body and keep the 24-105 or possibly look at the tamron.
This puts Canon's lens pricing more in line with that of Nikon's, and dangerous territory for them when people start upgrading to the new release of FF cameras in the next year.

[funkboy]

Now, let's all calm down for a minute.  These prices are MSRP.

The MSRP of the EF-s 60mm f/2.8 macro is $750, & B&H sells it for $450 (plus there's a $40 rebate on top of that at the moment).  So if we assume that after the "new" factor wears off & a lot of the new primes get into the channel they'll be selling at about the same 40 points off MSRP as the EF-s macro, then we're looking at about  $480 for the 28mm and $510 for the 24mm.  They may be a little more than that for a while as production ramps up, but I'd be very surprised if the 24mm was more than $599 at B&H this summer.

If the new primes were f/2 or faster (or if they had done a 20mm or wider as well) I seriously would have considered one them at the prices above if the IQ was up to snuff.  As it is, between my 24-105L and my 20mm f/3.5 Voigtländer pancake I think I'll stick with what I've got in the wide prime department...

Given the price point & the target market, I really have a hard time understanding why they went with f/2.8 instead of replacing the 28mm f/1.8 USM.  Do they really think anyone wants slower primes?  Perhaps they felt that a 24mm f/2 IS USM was too close to the 24 f/1.4L & would cannibalize sales...

I imagine that there were two reasons for announcing the 24 USM at the same time:

 - unlike 28mm & 20mm, there was never a 24mm non-L USM (same goes for 35mm).

 - the 28 and 24 are so similar that they were designed from the beginning to have a very high degree of parts commonality (perhaps even some of the optical elements like the IS group), so it makes sense that they would do both at the same time to increase the economies of scale.  I think it could even be said that we got the 28 "for free" as a result of it being a very minor redesign of the new 24 (which was missing in the lineup, unlike the old 28 they dropped last month).

I would even hypothesize that this parts commonality could be the reason for the slower aperture; perhaps a 28mm f/1.8 IS USM couldn't be made as identical to, say, a 24mm f/2 IS USM as these twins are.

The upside of all this is that it's possible that they release other lenses on this new common IS USM prime "platform", like a 35mm f/2...

[candyman]

If anyone would like a laugh:

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-canon-ef-24-70mm-f2-8l-ii-usm-lens/p1529492

£2299.00 = $3,638.09

Of course, this is a pre-order and prices are subject to change... blah blah. The sad thing is, I doubt they'll change much.

Look on the bright side:  you can save 25% on a 82mm filter      (just joking)
serious: it doesn't need to get worse.....what a price 

[charleswagoner]

A question and some observations:

Aren't the official prices for Canon lenses always higher than their actual selling price? So wouldn't it be reasonable to think that the real-world pricing will be lower?

People's reactions to these announcements since yesterday have been, in my opinion, a bit too knee-jerk.  Some people are acting like this is the best Canon can do for us, as though there will be nothing else announced at later dates. But the 24mm and 28mm primes are replacing the oldest primes in Canon's lineup (they were built in 1997-98 1987-88*). That may be why Canon chose to release these first. Be patient.

Others are let down by the f/2.8 and IS on these lenses, comparing them to faster lenses of the same focal length. Again, Canon will surely announce replacements to their faster counterparts later.  After all, as of yesterday there were two different version of the 24, 28, 35, and 50mm primes.  One thing at a time people. Canon can't just start announcing stuff that's not ready.  I mean, they could I guess.  But that's not how they roll.

Me personally, I'm willing to wait it out a while, but the next time I upgrade my body I'll be closely considering Nikon.  I only shoot with a 550D and a 50mm f/1.4, so I'm not locked into the EF system. But Nikon seems to be more attentive to the needs of consumers like myself and more clear about their pricing.  Canon really needs to address the 35 and 50mm f/1.8 G primes that Nikon released recently, because they seem to have it where it counts in terms of quality for the price.

*Dates corrected by Kyle STL.

[pdirestajr]

The MSRP listed prices have nothing to do with what their actual prices will settle in at. I think we should relax a little.

For example: The EF 100mm f/2.8L has a list price at $1,700.00USD on Amazon all the time, but it sells at around $900 all day.

[michi]

Really surprised.  Finally the second version of the 24-70 which we all awaited, but no IS and way out of reach for even the enthusiastic amateur photographers in the price department.  On top of that, they release two primes which are inside of the zoom range of the new zoom, and they have the same 2.8 aperture value as the zoom.  And also a incredibly high price.  I just don't get it. Does Canon realize that right now we are in a depression and most people don't have money to throw around?  Do they realize how attractive IS would have been on the 24-70 zoom? Do they realize that most people would have preferred a new 50mm 1.4 prime rather than a 24 and 28mm?

[mkln]

don´t take this too serious. 

canon has abandoned the DSLR for the consumer market.
maybe they will use the EF-S lenses for their mirrorless system.

we will see a few new rebel models .. until canon decides in 2014 to stop producing cheap DSLR cameras. 

canons new mirroless APS-C system will cover the mass market.

the pro sector will be occupied by >2000$ DSLR cameras and EF lenses that start at 800$


 

they can't use EF-S (or EF) on a mirrorless system.

the lens-to-sensor distance for EF-S lenses is just too large for a mirrorless camera. you would need either an adaptor, or a huge camera (which would become useless)
same goes for EF.
mirrorless = new mount.

by the way since EF-S and EF require the same distance to the sensor, there would be absolutely no point in making a "EF-S only" adapter for a potential mirrorless system.



anyway, canon seems to have applied the usual +$500 rule for IS.
take price of non-IS > add $500 if you want IS > final price of newly announced lens.
then again, those prices are list prices, I guess they'll be somewhat lower after some time.
also as there is no equivalent from the competition, Canon had a bit of freedom in establishing the price.

$849 for the 24/2.8 is exactly $500 more than the current very old lens without IS.
if (a big if) they improved it optically (and the old 24 is not that bad already) then that price could be justified somehow.

[funkboy]

they can't use EF-S (or EF) on a mirrorless system.
mirrorless = new mount.

I think Pentax/Ricoh disagree with you.

[kubelik]

there is no way I am paying $800 for a max f/2.8 prime.  are you kidding me???  really, really very disappointed in this move by Canon.  I'm a big fan of IS but IS does not give you more light for AF and shallower DOF.  this is in no way equivalent to having a 28mm f/1.8 ... and yet it costs more.  that's appalling.

I've moved away from 3rd party lenses but in the future I will be waiting for Sigma to step up its game in the FF prime market because this sort of pricing behavior and marketing choice by Canon is just totally boneheaded.

all of you that know me on the forum know I'm a big fan of Canon and usually argue in favor of the company line but this ... if you can show me how the pricing on these primes makes sense, I'd be happy to hear it.

the $2300 for the 24-70, that's something I can handle better, they've been moving in that direction with the high end lenses and judging from the MTF charts, they have every reason to expect that much money will be paid for such a strong, multi-purpose performer.

[aloper]

I'm wondering with the higher prices if were going to see a general, across the board price increase in any new EF and EF L lenses...to make room at the lower end for a mirror less system? If moving forward, your average L lens is in the $1500-2500 range and standard EF lenses are now in the $800-1500 range, you now have room at the lower end, $400-800 for mirror less lenses. Given the prices for these new primes, any replacements for the current 50/85mm EF's, would easily have list prices close to or over $1000, if they keep their 1.4 apertures...

If this theory is true, you will see the same shift up in any new camera bodies as well...price the 5dMk3 around $3000-3200, the 7DMk2 at $1999-2400 and the 70D around $1200-1600. Shift the pricing up so they can introduce a mirror less camera body at around $1000 (my guess...it will be a modified GX1)...