Lens Price Increases Taking Affect
- Thread starter Isurus
- Start date
- Status
That is my guess as well. It seem to usually work that way. I was kind of surprised by the flash price hike. Almost $800 for the MT-24EX macro flash seems a bit absurd, especially since it is quite outdated technology. Nikon's far superior wireless macro flash system is significantly cheaper.
Upvote
0
F
Flake
Guest
Isurus said:
I wonder if you've used the Nikon system? Firstly of course Nikon doesn't have a competitor to the MP-e 65mm so it's sole use is for Macro, and it seems an awful lot of money to spend when you can illuminate with a conventional flash.
The other issue it has is two flash heads which both need independant battery power this is provided by very expensive non rechargeable Li specialised units, it also means the heads are much larger and weigh! This flash system absolutely cannot be used with extending lenses like the Sigma or Tamron as the focus motor will burn out. They struggle with the relatively lightweight Canon system.
I tried (& failed) to find a guide number for these units, but Nikon don't seem to quote one, several sources say it can only be used for macro, so I assume that they aren't very powerful.
Be careful what you wish for! At first sight Nikon might seem to have a better system, but when you dig a little deeper it's not all it appears to be.
I'm quite happy with the MT24-EX replacement to remain wired & high power, with conventional AA rechargeable, & the tech inside like the 580EX II (or III)
Upvote
0
I own both the MP-E 65mm and the MT-24EX, but I have used the Nikon system. I understand that Nikon has no equivalent to the MP-E, which is why I use Canon, but that has nothing to do with the flash systems.
I actually don't always connect the MT-24EX flash heads right to the lens. Instead, I often use RRS flash brackets, which I've also used with the Nikon flashes. When used with these brackets, the choice of lens really doesn't matter. While there are pros and cons to having wires, I find the lack of wires more convenient and would prefer that Canon ditch them in their revision. Given today's technology, there is no reason they couldn't pack similar power into independent flash heads that could be fired without the wires and big commander.
I actually don't always connect the MT-24EX flash heads right to the lens. Instead, I often use RRS flash brackets, which I've also used with the Nikon flashes. When used with these brackets, the choice of lens really doesn't matter. While there are pros and cons to having wires, I find the lack of wires more convenient and would prefer that Canon ditch them in their revision. Given today's technology, there is no reason they couldn't pack similar power into independent flash heads that could be fired without the wires and big commander.
Flake said:
Upvote
0
Exactly; size becomes a major issue doing that with Canon's normal flashes. I wished they'd at least offer small ones like Nikon. Regardless, I'm not moving away from the MP-E and I can deal with the MT-24EX. It does work very well after all, even if a bit inconvenient.
Upvote
0
kubelik said:
Based on past history, when the next rebates are announced the big stores (B&H, Adorama) will just increase prices again, by the amount of the rebates, so there will be no net change.
Upvote
0
Canon controls the prices of their goods. Last week everyone was selling the 300 f/4 IS for 1249 except NewEgg which took another 100 off. Now they are out of stock and everyone from Adorama to BHPhoto to Amazon are selling at exactly 1376. If you understand currency trading you'll know this is a white wash. I will take a cue from the experienced users here and wait them out. Spring to Winter I'll look for a sale with a sponsored coupon.
Upvote
0
F
Flake
Guest
StepBack said:
I can't agree that any of the Camera companies control prices, if you want to see an example of price control take a look at Apple. Take a look at Canons recommended retail prices and how far from those street prices are. In the UK we have a website called camera price buster which lists prices for gear from different suppliers, the big names are normally close to each other because they watch each others prices, but the independents are hugely varied, either over or under.
Upvote
0
Prices go up amd up. Own a L lens for 5 years, and as long as it is a popular one still inproduction, you can likely sell it for what you orginally paid.
Its not free, but it is different from a body which will decline in price a large amount over five years.
Its not free, but it is different from a body which will decline in price a large amount over five years.
Upvote
0
I wanted to get the 50mm f/1.8 and I remembered several days ago seeing the recommended retail price be $100. Now I see it has been increased by 25 dollars or so. Some day I want to get a longer tele and I've been holding off because I am just a hobbyist and I am hoping for a price drop(sounds like a hopeless dream).
Better to buy now or wait?
Better to buy now or wait?
Upvote
0
cheeseheadsaint said:
A few years back, the 50mm f/1.8 was $79. Now, the big online retailers list it at $119. Quite a jump. Used ones go for $80 and up.
Upvote
0
F
Flake
Guest
I could sell nearly every one of my lenses for more than I bought them for! Canon have been pushing prices ever since it realised that sales were relatively unaffected by the cost when it raised prices the first time because of exchange rates.
Now we see Canon looking for nearly 30% increase in profits from a world market which is in recession, there is only one way that they can realise that because it's not going to come from volume, they're going to be reaching into our pockets for it.
I have more of less all the lenses I need or want at the moment so I'm going to hold off buying and in my own small way make a little stand against the corporate machine. If everyone else did the same Canon would soon realise they've killed the golden goose.
Now we see Canon looking for nearly 30% increase in profits from a world market which is in recession, there is only one way that they can realise that because it's not going to come from volume, they're going to be reaching into our pockets for it.
I have more of less all the lenses I need or want at the moment so I'm going to hold off buying and in my own small way make a little stand against the corporate machine. If everyone else did the same Canon would soon realise they've killed the golden goose.
Upvote
0
I'm less convinced that lenses retain their resale value. I'm considering swopping my existing EF70-200 f/2.8L for the new mark 2 IS version and have been only been offered a low £410.
The problem is probably due to the very lens I'm thinking of buying. When a better lens appears, however good they are the previous version (or in the case of the 70-200, versions) must be devalued.
My non IS f/2.8 version cost £936 in November 2005, so it's dropped 56% in that time. That's despite still being in excellent condition.
The problem is probably due to the very lens I'm thinking of buying. When a better lens appears, however good they are the previous version (or in the case of the 70-200, versions) must be devalued.
My non IS f/2.8 version cost £936 in November 2005, so it's dropped 56% in that time. That's despite still being in excellent condition.
Upvote
0
motorhead said:
They hold their value pretty well, when sold on the private market, such as ebay or Craigslist. However, if you want to trade it in to a dealer, they will need to mark it up when they go to sell it, so you will get a lot less, probably 50% of its value.
Upvote
0
motorhead said:
Wow, I wish I could find one that inexpensively.
I'm debating the Mk. II version, but now I have a wife who needs convincing. I suppose I shouldn't sit on the sidelines, or I'll get priced out entirely (See: My experience with Gibson Les Pauls).
Upvote
0
- Status
