Permanent price drops

[jdramirez]

I'm curious how this will affect the secondary market. I wonder how soon people will make their market corrections. Very interesting.

 

[mo_photo]

Nice! Glad I held off on ordering the TS-E 17mm, list will be $100 less than the rebate price, street price likely even better.

$500 drop on the 24-70mm f/4L IS. More sensible price now, ouch for those that bought it at higher prices.

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

 

[Loswr]

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length. I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though). The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17. One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot. Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17. Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

 

[mo_photo]

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length. I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though). The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17. One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot. Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17. Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

Interesting, I had not heard of the Wonderpana system before. With that being said (and apologies for hijacking this thread - happy to move to a new thread if need be), I've already bought into the Lee system (foundation kit, .9 soft/hard and Big Stopper) that I have been using with the 16-35 2.8. I've wanted to do more architectural with landscapes as a secondary use so was planning on selling the 16-35. It looks like Lee has an adaptor for the 17 but hadn't yet found any threads testing the 100mm filters with it. Most of my landscapes have been at 16mm so far but if 24 gets the job done for architecture I'd be willing to compromise on that.

Based on that setup and with the option of only choosing one of the TS-E lenses, would you recommend the 17 or the 24?

Thanks as always for the insights, they're much appreciated.

 

[Loswr]

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length. I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though). The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17. One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot. Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17. Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

Interesting, I had not heard of the Wonderpana system before. With that being said (and apologies for hijacking this thread - happy to move to a new thread if need be), I've already bought into the Lee system (foundation kit, .9 soft/hard and Big Stopper) that I have been using with the 16-35 2.8. I've wanted to do more architectural with landscapes as a secondary use so was planning on selling the 16-35. It looks like Lee has an adaptor for the 17 but hadn't yet found any threads testing the 100mm filters with it. Most of my landscapes have been at 16mm so far but if 24 gets the job done for architecture I'd be willing to compromise on that.

Based on that setup and with the option of only choosing one of the TS-E lenses, would you recommend the 17 or the 24?

Thanks as always for the insights, they're much appreciated.

I have the Lee setup as well. The Lee TS-E 17mm adapter for 100mm filters restricts the movements to a bit over 6° shift before you get mechanical vignetting (both lenses shift 12°). Not sure how it would be on the 17, but with my 24 I often need 8-10° of shift for tall buildings, sometimes the max shift. The Wonderpana uses 145mm filters, and doesn't restrict movements.

As for focal length, I'd say you're best able to answer that. Set your 16-35 to ~17 and ~24mm, and see which framing would work better for your needs. From a conservative standpoint, if the 17 is too wide you can add a TC or crop, but if the 24 is too narrow..... (Yes, you can do a shift pano, but not if you need shift to correct verticals).

 

[sagittariansrock]

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length. I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though). The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17. One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot. Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17. Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

Interesting, I had not heard of the Wonderpana system before. With that being said (and apologies for hijacking this thread - happy to move to a new thread if need be), I've already bought into the Lee system (foundation kit, .9 soft/hard and Big Stopper) that I have been using with the 16-35 2.8. I've wanted to do more architectural with landscapes as a secondary use so was planning on selling the 16-35. It looks like Lee has an adaptor for the 17 but hadn't yet found any threads testing the 100mm filters with it. Most of my landscapes have been at 16mm so far but if 24 gets the job done for architecture I'd be willing to compromise on that.

Based on that setup and with the option of only choosing one of the TS-E lenses, would you recommend the 17 or the 24?

Thanks as always for the insights, they're much appreciated.

I have the Lee setup as well. The Lee TS-E 17mm adapter for 100mm filters restricts the movements to a bit over 6° shift before you get mechanical vignetting (both lenses shift 12°). Not sure how it would be on the 17, but with my 24 I often need 8-10° of shift for tall buildings, sometimes the max shift. The Wonderpana uses 145mm filters, and doesn't restrict movements.

As for focal length, I'd say you're best able to answer that. Set your 16-35 to ~17 and ~24mm, and see which framing would work better for your needs. From a conservative standpoint, if the 17 is too wide you can add a TC or crop, but if the 24 is too narrow..... (Yes, you can do a shift pano, but not if you need shift to correct verticals).

FYI, Lee makes an adapter for the 17mm TS-E (which restricts some of the movements, of course, by vignetting).
However, if you use the 17mm with the 1.4x III, it might or might not restrict the movement as much.
I am unsure on the theory here, whether the 1.4x TC causes a lens to NOT use the periphery- if that is the case, there will be less vignetting.
The best way to find out is by trying- but unfortunately, although I have both the 17mm and 1.4x III, I couldn't find the $ 90 Lee adapter in a local store to try before buying.

 

[StudentOfLight]

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length. I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though). The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17. One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot. Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17. Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

Interesting, I had not heard of the Wonderpana system before. With that being said (and apologies for hijacking this thread - happy to move to a new thread if need be), I've already bought into the Lee system (foundation kit, .9 soft/hard and Big Stopper) that I have been using with the 16-35 2.8. I've wanted to do more architectural with landscapes as a secondary use so was planning on selling the 16-35. It looks like Lee has an adaptor for the 17 but hadn't yet found any threads testing the 100mm filters with it. Most of my landscapes have been at 16mm so far but if 24 gets the job done for architecture I'd be willing to compromise on that.

Based on that setup and with the option of only choosing one of the TS-E lenses, would you recommend the 17 or the 24?

Thanks as always for the insights, they're much appreciated.

I have the Lee setup as well. The Lee TS-E 17mm adapter for 100mm filters restricts the movements to a bit over 6° shift before you get mechanical vignetting (both lenses shift 12°). Not sure how it would be on the 17, but with my 24 I often need 8-10° of shift for tall buildings, sometimes the max shift. The Wonderpana uses 145mm filters, and doesn't restrict movements.

As for focal length, I'd say you're best able to answer that. Set your 16-35 to ~17 and ~24mm, and see which framing would work better for your needs. From a conservative standpoint, if the 17 is too wide you can add a TC or crop, but if the 24 is too narrow..... (Yes, you can do a shift pano, but not if you need shift to correct verticals).

FYI, Lee makes an adapter for the 17mm TS-E (which restricts some of the movements, of course, by vignetting).
However, if you use the 17mm with the 1.4x III, it might or might not restrict the movement as much.
I am unsure on the theory here, whether the 1.4x TC causes a lens to NOT use the periphery- if that is the case, there will be less vignetting.
The best way to find out is by trying- but unfortunately, although I have both the 17mm and 1.4x III, I couldn't find the $ 90 Lee adapter in a local store to try before buying.

Of course if you use a teleconverter then you lose the desired angle-of-view of the 17mm, which defeats the purpose of having it. Better to just use the 24mm instead. Unless I misread, Neuro already has the TS-E 24mm-II.

 

[Loswr]

Of course if you use a teleconverter then you lose the desired angle-of-view of the 17mm, which defeats the purpose of having it. Better to just use the 24mm instead. Unless I misread, Neuro already has the TS-E 24mm-II.

I do , but I believe the comments were in the context of the person asking, "If you could only buy one...."

 

[canon1dxman]

I hope that they do the same in the UK!

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

I'm curious how this will affect the secondary market. I wonder how soon people will make their market corrections. Very interesting.

was wondering the same thing.good time to buy used, sucky to sell though. Gotta wonder if there will be a little less available used for a bit

 

[Stu_bert]

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length. I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though). The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17. One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot. Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17. Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

CS5 / CS6 extended versions have the ability to stack shots and "remove" differences between frames ie people. Also useful for reducing noise. Martin Evening did an article on it ages ago. Take 5-6 shots and then stack the, Believe CC has this functionality as standard. Might be a cheaper option...

 

[Stu_bert]

Nice! Glad I held off on ordering the TS-E 17mm, list will be $100 less than the rebate price, street price likely even better.

$500 drop on the 24-70mm f/4L IS. More sensible price now, ouch for those that bought it at higher prices.

You ready for that 300mm? If my 400mm wasn't that good, I can see 300 & 600mm combo

That's what I have ;D. Agonized for ages over the 600mm vs 200-400mm, but I'm hoping the 100-400mk II will fill that "gap"....

 

[Stu_bert]

I hope that they do the same in the UK!

I'd assumed this was from Japan, although local market changes are possible. Like you, hope it is EU wide

 

[pwp]

Kinda wish I held off on the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, still it was $6247 with my CPS discount so I still am ahead, just not by quite as much

I've not heard of CPS discounts on lenses.

It may depend on which part of the planet you live. No such thing in Australia as far as I'm aware.
CPS in Sydney is Gold Standard, reason enough on its own to not shoot Nikon. It's an awesome service.

But CPS discounts? Lucky you...where?

-pw

 

[Hjalmarg1]

http://www.canonpricewatch.com/blog/2014/08/breaking-news-canon-price-drop-tomorrow-on-26-lenses/

This has been a long time coming!

Now I have a problem...... GAS

 

[nonac]

The new prices are posted on the Canon USA website this morning.

 

[Loswr]

I'm curious how this will affect the secondary market. I wonder how soon people will make their market corrections. Very interesting.

was wondering the same thing.good time to buy used, sucky to sell though. Gotta wonder if there will be a little less available used for a bit

The used market, at least on CL which is where I buy, has a lag for corrections. It takes people a while to see that what matters is what buyers are willing to pay, not what the seller paid for the gear.

 

[mo_photo]

Neuro, interested to hear why you're looking at the TS-E 17mm. I've been researching the differences between the two lenses lately and in some other threads it sounded like you were pretty happy with the TS-E 24mm.

I'm very happy with my TS-E 24mm...except when I need a wider focal length. I would be using them both, depending on the focal length needed.

Other than focal length, the 24 is slightly sharper (the 17 is among the very sharpest ultrawide lenses, though). The 24 can tilt a little more than the 17. One of the biggest differences is the 24 can take front filters and the 17 cannot. Since my main TS use is architecture, I rely on a 10-stop ND to 'blur out' people from the scene, so that's one factor that kept me from getting the 17. Now, there's the Wonderpana system as a 10-stop solution for the 17...not cheap, but I need that option.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the TS-E lenses take the Canon extenders, the 1.4xIII behind the 17 gets you to 24mm with very good IQ.

Interesting, I had not heard of the Wonderpana system before. With that being said (and apologies for hijacking this thread - happy to move to a new thread if need be), I've already bought into the Lee system (foundation kit, .9 soft/hard and Big Stopper) that I have been using with the 16-35 2.8. I've wanted to do more architectural with landscapes as a secondary use so was planning on selling the 16-35. It looks like Lee has an adaptor for the 17 but hadn't yet found any threads testing the 100mm filters with it. Most of my landscapes have been at 16mm so far but if 24 gets the job done for architecture I'd be willing to compromise on that.

Based on that setup and with the option of only choosing one of the TS-E lenses, would you recommend the 17 or the 24?

Thanks as always for the insights, they're much appreciated.

I have the Lee setup as well. The Lee TS-E 17mm adapter for 100mm filters restricts the movements to a bit over 6° shift before you get mechanical vignetting (both lenses shift 12°). Not sure how it would be on the 17, but with my 24 I often need 8-10° of shift for tall buildings, sometimes the max shift. The Wonderpana uses 145mm filters, and doesn't restrict movements.

As for focal length, I'd say you're best able to answer that. Set your 16-35 to ~17 and ~24mm, and see which framing would work better for your needs. From a conservative standpoint, if the 17 is too wide you can add a TC or crop, but if the 24 is too narrow..... (Yes, you can do a shift pano, but not if you need shift to correct verticals).

Very good - thanks again for the replies and insights

 

[sagittariansrock]

CS5 / CS6 extended versions have the ability to stack shots and "remove" differences between frames ie people. Also useful for reducing noise. Martin Evening did an article on it ages ago. Take 5-6 shots and then stack the, Believe CC has this functionality as standard. Might be a cheaper option...

Depends on whether you value time more, or money...
I'd rather use a long exposure to remove people than wrestle with it in PP.
I took a shot at the grand central a few months ago, and the images are useless without PP due to subject movement (I did try to compensate for that, but I guess people in NYC just walk faster : )
I haven't got the time to PP it since, so I wish I had an ND filter that day.

 

[arbitrage]

Kinda wish I held off on the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM, still it was $6247 with my CPS discount so I still am ahead, just not by quite as much

I've not heard of CPS discounts on lenses.

It may depend on which part of the planet you live. No such thing in Australia as far as I'm aware.
CPS in Sydney is Gold Standard, reason enough on its own to not shoot Nikon. It's an awesome service.

But CPS discounts? Lucky you...where?

-pw

CPS discounts are a Canadian CPS benefit. We don't get free clean and checks but my price for the 600II and 200-400 was $10,700 and $10,200 respectively.
For the past few years even the regular selling price in Canada for the big white lenses was significantly less than in the US. Many US customers (over at FMforums) have saved thousands on big white lenses by dealing with CameraCanada.com for their purchase. And that is without a CPS discount just with lower selling prices and a good exchange rate.
However, about 2 months ago the Canadian prices were all raised significantly and became equal or more expensive than the US prices. Now with the US price drops the US prices are now much better than the Canadian ones on the big whites.
I'm not sure if the CPS discount prices have been adjusted also. I'm glad I got all my big white GAS out of the way when prices were really good in Canada.