I think $1,800 would be far too expensive for the 70-200/4. That's a 50% increase over the current EF version, which is also quite new. For typical similar lenses, Canon's been a bit higher than their EF glass, but not crazily so. The RF 70-200/2.8 released at $2700, while the EF 70-200/2.8 III was $2,099 - a price hike, but one of 28%. The 24-70/2.8's are 21% higher for the RF version.
Assuming a similar approx. 25% increase, that would put the RF 70-200/4 at around $1,600.
I still think that's a bit too high, as it's higher than any other 70-200/4 on the market, but I could see $1,500. (though I hope they surprise us and go for $1,300.
I expect the 50/1.8 to come in at around $249. Higher than that would be hard to swallow, with the EF 50/1.8 STM being available for $150, and it's not even large with the adapter. Sony's 50/1.8 is $249. Only Nikon has taken crazy pills with their 50/1.8 pricing.
Assuming a similar approx. 25% increase, that would put the RF 70-200/4 at around $1,600.
I still think that's a bit too high, as it's higher than any other 70-200/4 on the market, but I could see $1,500. (though I hope they surprise us and go for $1,300.
I expect the 50/1.8 to come in at around $249. Higher than that would be hard to swallow, with the EF 50/1.8 STM being available for $150, and it's not even large with the adapter. Sony's 50/1.8 is $249. Only Nikon has taken crazy pills with their 50/1.8 pricing.
Upvote
0