New Lenses in January [CR1]

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Does Canon sell enough superteles to make those lenses a cash cow?

Personally, I don't know anyone who owns a supertele, but know two guys who own the new 70-200mm f/2.8 IS mkII. My bet Canon makes more money on the later than on any of the superteles, my point being that Canon might make more money on cheaper 500mm f/5.6 and 600mm f/5.6.

Only a 500/5.6 has even a chance at coming in under $5K, and a 600/5.6 would cost more than the 300/2.8.  Are those 'cheaper' enough to matter?

Personally (= hobbyist, with my current income), I would consider <$5K cheap enough to matter.

Honestly, Canon's real 'cash cow' lens is the 18-55mm Rebel/xxxD kit lens, followed closely by the 55-250mm. <snip>

As has been discussed (ad infinitum!), pricing takes expected sales volume into account with an inverse relationship.

My impression is Canon doesn't sell enough superteles for those to be cash cows, which is another way to say pretty much the same thing.

... which is why I wonder why is it that Canon is investing so much in upgrading the superteles, rather than ~20 years old primes (e.g. 35mm f/2), in face of competitors like Sigma coming out with competing lenses (e.g. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for APS-C & 35mm f/1.4 HSM for FF).

[neuroanatomist]

...I wonder why is it that Canon is investing so much in upgrading the superteles, rather than ~20 years old primes (e.g. 35mm f/2), in face of competitors like Sigma coming out with competing lenses (e.g. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for APS-C & 35mm f/1.4 HSM for FF).

One big reason is the 1D X.  By eliminating the 1.3x crop sensor from the flagship line, they (intentionally) created demand for longer supertele lenses, and it's no coincidence that they updated those lenses at the same time.

[Ellen Schmidtee]

...I wonder why is it that Canon is investing so much in upgrading the superteles, rather than ~20 years old primes (e.g. 35mm f/2), in face of competitors like Sigma coming out with competing lenses (e.g. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for APS-C & 35mm f/1.4 HSM for FF).

One big reason is the 1D X.  By eliminating the 1.3x crop sensor from the flagship line, they (intentionally) created demand for longer supertele lenses, and it's no coincidence that they updated those lenses at the same time.

I would agree, except-

1. Canon could still introduce mkII versions of wide prime lenses, e.g. 35mm, 28mm, 24mm, and 20mm.

To go at it from a different angle, I was waiting for the EF 8-15mm f/4. Due to max aperture (I like f/2.8 on the EF 15mm for band shows) and price, I decided to buy a Sigma 8mm rather than upgrade.

Now, Canon did have an FD circular fisheye, it just decided not to make an EF version. It was f/5.6, but I would have considered it anyway.

2. The updated superteles are of the same focal length & max aperture the older versions, they are significantly more expensive, and the 1DX can't focus at f/8. If I had an APS-H camera, I would first look at a 7D, then at a Nikon D800. The last thing I would do would be considering a mk2 telephoto or a 1DX.

Which is why I think the olympics at the London is a much better explanation for upgrading the superteles.




Looking around at what I and photographers I know buy, it adds up to people choosing 3rd party lenses over Canon - Sigma 85mm f/1.4, Sigma 8mm f/3.5, Sigma 12-24mm (bought the mkI, than upgraded to the mkII), Samyang 35mm f/1.4, and so on.

People see what pros use on TV, but they also see what people around them use. This has the effect of 'Canon is good at making expensive lenses the rich media organizations buy, but hobbists are better off with Sigma / Tamron / whatever'

[As side note - I see lots of Tamron 18-270 in ads in newspapers and busses, and it sells well enough for local shops to sell in kit with Canon bodies. Olympus advertises on busses as well, and had the menus translated to the local language. Canon doesn't advertise at all, and I can't remember when I've last seen a rebate for Canon in any of the local shops. There's no denying local Canon sales are good, but I think Canon lens sales are heading in the wrong direction.]

[insanitybeard]

Canon has updated the 24 and 28mm 2.8 primes- even if the price is a bit steep at present. The 24L has been revamped and is a mk.2 already and there have been hints on this site that a mk2 35L and possibly non L may be coming....

[/quote]

1. Canon could still introduce mkII versions of wide prime lenses, e.g. 35mm, 28mm, 24mm, and 20mm

[/quote]

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Canon has updated the 24 and 28mm 2.8 primes- even if the price is a bit steep at present. The 24L has been revamped and is a mk.2 already and there have been hints on this site that a mk2 35L and possibly non L may be coming....

I should have stated in advance I'm limiting my self to non-L lenses. I'm sure the L primes have a market, just like the superteles, but it does not include the average hobbist who isn't making any money off his lenses.

As for the 24mm & 28mm, I hope two swallows do make summer. The photozone review of the 28mm f/2.8 is encouraging, even though I would rather have f/2 over IS.

[HarryWintergreen]

[As side note - I see lots of Tamron 18-270 in ads in newspapers and busses, and it sells well enough for local shops to sell in kit with Canon bodies. Olympus advertises on busses as well, and had the menus translated to the local language. Canon doesn't advertise at all, and I can't remember when I've last seen a rebate for Canon in any of the local shops. There's no denying local Canon sales are good, but I think Canon lens sales are heading in the wrong direction.]

I went to Photokina this year and I was struck by the lack of enthusiasm at the Canon booth. Okay, there were the big whites but nothing to write home about. Nikon was amazing and Fuji and Olympus as well. So, I agree that Canon's PR work is a bit weird.

[jthomson]

I should have stated in advance I'm limiting my self to non-L lenses. I'm sure the L primes have a market, just like the superteles, but it does not include the average hobbist who isn't making any money off his lenses.

I don't make money from photography, but have two L lenses.  I belong to a photography club and I see lots of other members with L grade lenses.  Amateurs like me  usually have one or two in their prefered shooting ranges, the people who shoot professionally  have the whole range covered.

[Ellen Schmidtee]

I should have stated in advance I'm limiting my self to non-L lenses. I'm sure the L primes have a market, just like the superteles, but it does not include the average hobbist who isn't making any money off his lenses.

I don't make money from photography, but have two L lenses.  I belong to a photography club and I see lots of other members with L grade lenses.  Amateurs like me usually have one or two in their prefered shooting ranges, the people who shoot professionally have the whole range covered.

Exactly - Canon should have reasonably good non-L lenses (primes & zooms) for amateurs who aren't going to cover the whole range covered in L lenses.

It's not that Canon can't make a 35mm f/2 USM to compete with the Samyang 35mm f/1.4 IQ & price (which I bought, but still keep an eye for the Sigma 35mm f/1.4) or an 85mm f/1.4 to compete with the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 (which a friend bought), it just prefers to cater to a different audience. That is Canon's right, but I find it strange as my guess (for the lack of hard data) is that audience is less profitable.

[jthomson]

An interesting statistic is that canon have sold twice as many EOS lenses as Camera's.  I forget exactly where  this cames from but, they basically issued press releases when they had sold x million cameras and 2x million lenses.

This means that on average each camera has two lenses.    This means that most people who buy an SLR camera never buy another lens for it.   Most of the people who do buy additonal lenses are those who will spring for the better quality lenses. 

I think Canon has a pretty good understanding of the market and where they make their money.

[insanitybeard]

Canon has updated the 24 and 28mm 2.8 primes- even if the price is a bit steep at present. The 24L has been revamped and is a mk.2 already and there have been hints on this site that a mk2 35L and possibly non L may be coming....

I should have stated in advance I'm limiting my self to non-L lenses. I'm sure the L primes have a market, just like the superteles, but it does not include the average hobbist who isn't making any money off his lenses.

As for the 24mm & 28mm, I hope two swallows do make summer. The photozone review of the 28mm f/2.8 is encouraging, even though I would rather have f/2 over IS.

I was also interested to see the Photozone review of the 28 IS, I'm hoping they also review the 24 IS. If it performs similarly I will be tempted (after leaving it a while to see if the price drops!), the 24 will make a nice compact walkaround and slightly wider than standard lens to use on my 7D, and if it is corner to corner sharp then it will be ideal as a landscape lens.