EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

[Luds34]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L IS III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

That price for the 24-105 seems surprisingly low for a new lens......interesting.

Keep in mind that it is a kit lens, and will probably be packaged for an increase of only $500 or so. It won't take long sellers will be breaking the kits and selling white box versions of the lens for a pretty good price. Canon knows this and has to keep the MRSP reasonable.

As for the 16-35, not surprised on that price, just was hoping for something a bit more reasonable.

In any case, I fully expect both lenses to perform very well optically. Canon has been hitting nothing but home runs on that front the last 5 years now.

 

[testthewest]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

How much is typically the saving if you buy camara+kit lens box versus both things seperately?

 

[sunnyVan]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

Please help. Feeling incredibly gassy right now. Stop!!

 

[Sabaki]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

I'm curious to see the mtf chart for the 16-35 and wondering if it can best the f/4.0 IS version?

 

[Buck]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L IS III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing



Where from do you take the assumption, thet the price has anyting to do with production costs?

The price will be fixed by the marketing department, differentiated by different markets. The technicians and production people will have to produce the camera for less than the selling price.

If they could produce it for 500$ less, we customers would get a 0.00$ discount and the profit would increase by 500.00$. Canon really well knows, how to price their products to get maximal profit out of them.
[/quote]


why in the world would Canon price this camera at a loss,or even at a price that is significantly lower than their margins for a similar product. The marketing department may have input as will the number crunchers in terms of pricing.
As far as pricing compared to a 5d3, you are getting some improvements, enhancements and new technology in the 5d4 and that costs money also. This may or may be offset by the exchange rate, like it or not Canon is in the business of making money for its shareholders.

 

[x-vision]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L IS III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

That price for the 24-105 seems surprisingly low for a new lens......interesting.

Yup. $1099 is just $100 more than the MSRP of the 24-70/4L.

Having two products priced so closely doesn't make sense to me - but I've been wrong before 8).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

"September 9, 2016 (for 5D4)"

that is a very nice change back to their earlier release dates, should make the fall sports, fall wedding, fall foliage shooters very happy, the whole late Nov. release stuff made it relatively less useful for many until the following spring. still misses the summer vacation stuff, but, way better than their ever later in the year releases, again, hitting the prime fall sports, wedding, foliage seasons
good plan

 

[StoneColdCoffee]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

@ Dustin Abbott

Hopefully you already have your Canon 16-35 f/2.8 Mk III ;-)

will you be comparing it against the Mk II and Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 ?
I love the Tamron but you know the issues around size, weight and no filters can be daunting, however I love the Corner sharpness and the ease at which the purple color fringing can be corrected. But $1000 vs $ 2200, that's huge, Hopefully you can answer the question in everyone's mind: Is it a lens that is $1200 BETTER than Tamron or Nikon 14-24 w/adapter. (especially for Landscape Astrophotography)

looking forward to your review

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

How much is typically the saving if you buy camara+kit lens box versus both things seperately?

In the current kit camera + 24-105mm lens, the economy is 40% over the price of the lens purchased separately.
In a recently launched model, can expect a economy modest, as about 20%.

 

[nightscape123]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

@ Dustin Abbott

Hopefully you already have your Canon 16-35 f/2.8 Mk III ;-)

will you be comparing it against the Mk II and Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 ?
I love the Tamron but you know the issues around size, weight and no filters can be daunting, however I love the Corner sharpness and the ease at which the purple color fringing can be corrected. But $1000 vs $ 2200, that's huge, Hopefully you can answer the question in everyone's mind: Is it a lens that is $1200 BETTER than Tamron or Nikon 14-24 w/adapter. (especially for Landscape Astrophotography)

looking forward to your review

This is pretty much where i'm at now. The Tamron is amazing but can't use filters and is a little heavy. Can the canon really offer $1200 in value over the Tamron? I would say that is pretty unlikely but I wait to be awed or for the price to drop. If it is too expensive then they will have no choice but to cut the price like they did for the 24/70 f/4.

 

[H. Jones]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

At a price of $2200 I think we can say pretty confidently that this lens will have similar image quality at f/2.8 to the 11-24mm at f/4. I can't imagine that they would do anything else, and the 11-24mm proves they can pull that quality off wide open. Especially since you can nab the 11-24mm for $2600.

Price still seems a bit steep to me, but I trust Canon to surprise us when it comes to lenses. They've been on a roll with great lenses.

 

[subratasenn]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

<p>Pricing for all of the new Canon gear should be leaking out this week ahead of the August 25, 2016 launch day.</p>
<p>The following are the prices floating around in USD for the new Canon lenses.</p>
<ul>
<li>Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III $2199
<ul>
<li><em>Shipping will start in October</em></li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II $1099
<ul>
<li><em>Kits should ship fairly soon after launch, retail version unknown.</em></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<p>We haven’t yet received a confirmed price in the United States on the EOS 5D Mark IV, but we think it’ll be between $3299-$3499 USD.</p>
<p>We’ve heard from one country that the ship date for the EOS 5D Mark IV would be September 9, 2016, but we haven’t been able to confirm that anywhere else.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

In India, 5D Mark IV will go on sale from the outlets on and from 8th September. This much has been confirmed to the dealers by Canon India. The retail price of 5D Mark IV will be made available on August 26th, when Canon India is holding a Press meet to showcase the new 5D.

 

[tpatana]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

In India, 5D Mark IV will go on sale from the outlets on and from 8th September. This much has been confirmed to the dealers by Canon India. The retail price of 5D Mark IV will be made available on August 26th, when Canon India is holding a Press meet to showcase the new 5D.

Interesting. Any way you can back up that info?

 

[whothafunk]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

2200 for a 16-35, holy shlt. does it come with a geisha

 

[IgotGASbadDude]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

2200 for a 16-35, holy shlt. does it come with a geisha

It comes with the word "Canon" printed on it and that's worth more than a geisha.

Incorrect. The word "Canon" is not the reason for the price of "L" lenses.

It's for the honor of having that pretty red stripe that identifies the user as being "a professional". :

 

[midluk]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

2200 for a 16-35, holy shlt. does it come with a geisha

I think GEISHA is outdated. I would recommend using FLUKA instead.

 

[hendrik-sg]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L IS III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

Where from do you take the assumption, thet the price has anyting to do with production costs?

The price will be fixed by the marketing department, differentiated by different markets. The technicians and production people will have to produce the camera for less than the selling price.

If they could produce it for 500$ less, we customers would get a 0.00$ discount and the profit would increase by 500.00$. Canon really well knows, how to price their products to get maximal profit out of them.

why in the world would Canon price this camera at a loss,or even at a price that is significantly lower than their margins for a similar product. The marketing department may have input as will the number crunchers in terms of pricing.
As far as pricing compared to a 5d3, you are getting some improvements, enhancements and new technology in the 5d4 and that costs money also. This may or may be offset by the exchange rate, like it or not Canon is in the business of making money for its shareholders.
[/quote]

This is done to kill competitors, or for partly covering the fixcosts. Container shipping for exampe: if there is over capacity on the market, you better operate a full ships than almost epty ones. Assume it costs the shipping line 1000$ to bring a box from europe to asis or from asia to europe. Most goods are trasported westbound, and eastbound there are mostly empty boxes transported (for free). if there is a (full) box to be transported eastbound, then the shipping line will accept the load for any price, because even 100$ is less loss than transporting a box for free. because there are many competing lines, the price will be below production costs.

If some companies are in danger to go bankrupt, a big player could try to kill it's competition, to be able to increase the prices and the market share, by buying the now worthless cometition. This is called dumping prices.

Our market is completely different. If canon thinks, they could not sell a product for a profitable price, they would just not produce it. A 18-55 kit lens may be a example, they just need to give a lens, if they want people buy into their system. if somebody looks at a 1300d in the store, it must produce better pictures than a phone, so it needs IS and a reasonable quality, or the customer buys no DSLR at all

 

[Loswr]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

According to the press release, $2200 for the 16-35/2.8 III and $1100 for the 24-105/4 II. At least initially, there will be no kit lens discount, the 5DIV is $3500 and the 24-105 II kit is $4600.

 

[tpatana]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

According to the press release, $2200 for the 16-35/2.8 III and $1100 for the 24-105/4 II. At least initially, there will be no kit lens discount, the 5DIV is $3500 and the 24-105 II kit is $4600.

Interesting. If that's true, probably will get the body only. Was planning to get the kit and compare against my 24-70 F4L IS, and sell the one I like less. No point buying the kit if no kit discount.

 

[Ozarker]

Re: EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III & EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USD Pricing

@ Dustin Abbott

Hopefully you already have your Canon 16-35 f/2.8 Mk III ;-)

will you be comparing it against the Mk II and Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 ?
I love the Tamron but you know the issues around size, weight and no filters can be daunting, however I love the Corner sharpness and the ease at which the purple color fringing can be corrected. But $1000 vs $ 2200, that's huge, Hopefully you can answer the question in everyone's mind: Is it a lens that is $1200 BETTER than Tamron or Nikon 14-24 w/adapter. (especially for Landscape Astrophotography)

looking forward to your review

This is pretty much where i'm at now. The Tamron is amazing but can't use filters and is a little heavy. Can the canon really offer $1200 in value over the Tamron? I would say that is pretty unlikely but I wait to be awed or for the price to drop. If it is too expensive then they will have no choice but to cut the price like they did for the 24/70 f/4.

I have the Tamron and it is a very fine lens. I like the heaviness. It is a beast. It can use filters, just not the kind that screw onto the lens. There are kits out there and can be bought for approximately the difference between the two lenses. In that neighborhood anyway. If I were a landscape shooter I think I would rather have those plate filters anyway instead of the screw on filters.

That said, if the quality and sharpness is much improved above the 16-35 f/2.8L II then I will get the III. Maybe not in the next couple of years, but I will get it.