Pricing of the New Lenses
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
there is no way I am paying $800 for a max f/2.8 prime. are you kidding me??? really, really very disappointed in this move by Canon. I'm a big fan of IS but IS does not give you more light for AF and shallower DOF. this is in no way equivalent to having a 28mm f/1.8 ... and yet it costs more. that's appalling.
I've moved away from 3rd party lenses but in the future I will be waiting for Sigma to step up its game in the FF prime market because this sort of pricing behavior and marketing choice by Canon is just totally boneheaded.
all of you that know me on the forum know I'm a big fan of Canon and usually argue in favor of the company line but this ... if you can show me how the pricing on these primes makes sense, I'd be happy to hear it.
the $2300 for the 24-70, that's something I can handle better, they've been moving in that direction with the high end lenses and judging from the MTF charts, they have every reason to expect that much money will be paid for such a strong, multi-purpose performer.
I've moved away from 3rd party lenses but in the future I will be waiting for Sigma to step up its game in the FF prime market because this sort of pricing behavior and marketing choice by Canon is just totally boneheaded.
all of you that know me on the forum know I'm a big fan of Canon and usually argue in favor of the company line but this ... if you can show me how the pricing on these primes makes sense, I'd be happy to hear it.
the $2300 for the 24-70, that's something I can handle better, they've been moving in that direction with the high end lenses and judging from the MTF charts, they have every reason to expect that much money will be paid for such a strong, multi-purpose performer.
Upvote
0
A
aloper
Guest
I'm wondering with the higher prices if were going to see a general, across the board price increase in any new EF and EF L lenses...to make room at the lower end for a mirror less system? If moving forward, your average L lens is in the $1500-2500 range and standard EF lenses are now in the $800-1500 range, you now have room at the lower end, $400-800 for mirror less lenses. Given the prices for these new primes, any replacements for the current 50/85mm EF's, would easily have list prices close to or over $1000, if they keep their 1.4 apertures...
If this theory is true, you will see the same shift up in any new camera bodies as well...price the 5dMk3 around $3000-3200, the 7DMk2 at $1999-2400 and the 70D around $1200-1600. Shift the pricing up so they can introduce a mirror less camera body at around $1000 (my guess...it will be a modified GX1)...
If this theory is true, you will see the same shift up in any new camera bodies as well...price the 5dMk3 around $3000-3200, the 7DMk2 at $1999-2400 and the 70D around $1200-1600. Shift the pricing up so they can introduce a mirror less camera body at around $1000 (my guess...it will be a modified GX1)...
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Okay, I was just teasing with the last post.
Seriously though, what went through my head when I saw these prices were:
1) Boy, I'm glad I bought a refurbished 100-400mm. It may be old, but I can't imagine what they'll charge for the next model if they ever get around to updating it.
2) I guess I'll be sticking with APS-C for awhile. The under-$2,000 price for the 5DII had me tempted, but I couldn't get past the additional investment in lenses, plus the loss of the 1.6 crop. Now, I think I'll just wait and see how they improve the 7D. That refurbished 17-55 f 2.8 with IS is starting to look like a bargain.
BTW, this isn't really true:
Amazon list prices can be pure fantasy. The true MSRP can be found on the Canon Direct Store site. They are higher than the street prices, but not by that much. 100mm 2.8 L Macro MSRP is $1,049. With rebate, $979. Street price at B&H and Adorama is $926 -- so difference of about $53.
Street price will drop, but probably not right away and not as much as we might hope. Fortunately, Canon seems to be moving to year-round rebates, which help a little...sometimes...but not much when they do their forced pricing.
Seriously though, what went through my head when I saw these prices were:
1) Boy, I'm glad I bought a refurbished 100-400mm. It may be old, but I can't imagine what they'll charge for the next model if they ever get around to updating it.
2) I guess I'll be sticking with APS-C for awhile. The under-$2,000 price for the 5DII had me tempted, but I couldn't get past the additional investment in lenses, plus the loss of the 1.6 crop. Now, I think I'll just wait and see how they improve the 7D. That refurbished 17-55 f 2.8 with IS is starting to look like a bargain.
BTW, this isn't really true:
Amazon list prices can be pure fantasy. The true MSRP can be found on the Canon Direct Store site. They are higher than the street prices, but not by that much. 100mm 2.8 L Macro MSRP is $1,049. With rebate, $979. Street price at B&H and Adorama is $926 -- so difference of about $53.
Street price will drop, but probably not right away and not as much as we might hope. Fortunately, Canon seems to be moving to year-round rebates, which help a little...sometimes...but not much when they do their forced pricing.
Upvote
0
P
p-ivo
Guest
mkln said:
yep.
This is where it makes sense for me.
The list price seems shocking at first, but we need to wait until it cools off a bit.
Than the price upgrade od few hundreds over the old 24/2.8, could easily be seen in the upgrades in
- USM motor
- hand-holding / video ability with IS
- improved optical performance as seen in recent canon upgrades of lenses
and then it is good bye my lovely 20mm f/3.5 Voigtländer pancake (600$)
[/list]
Upvote
0
p-ivo said:
why are so many people on this forum convinced that Canon lists prices far higher than they see retail for? we're talking Canon glass here, not Sigma. when the new 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II came out, Canon asked for $2499. more than a year later, if you look at the non-promotional price, it's still pretty much around $2400 ... so about a 4% reduction in price.
I don't see the 24-70 coming down much in price as it is L glass. as for the two primes, even if you dropped their price by 10% or even 15% they'd still be dramatically overpriced (by $200 or so). and I don't see Canon slashing the price on brand new lenses by that much.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
kubelik said:
Exactly. Compare the MSRP on the Canon website to the street price from B&H or Adorama. They are not that much different and during rebate times (which is pretty much year-round these days) the difference is even smaller. (due to the forced-pricing).
Also check Canon Price Watch and you can see that the trajectory of prices is not that great and can go up and down. I bought the 100 2.8 macro "L" shortly after it came out (during one of the first rebates) and paid less then than what it is going for now.
If you haven't read it yet, this is a fun read: http://www.canonpricewatch.com/canon-lenses-better-stocks/
Upvote
0
Those arguing the the street price of the new 24-70 will be significantly lower than the list price should take a closer look. At least on the L lenses that I follow this is not the case.
I have to admit that I'm probably experiencing a bigger case of sticker shock over this lens than any other announced lens to date. It has been on my wish list for some time despite misgivings about its substantial weight. Now I have to admit that any temptation I might have been feeling to take the plunge is gone. I'm still looking forward to the reviews but I can't see ever buying one.
One thing I do like is the reduction in weight. To put things in perspective for U.S. customers 145g is about .3 lbs. It's not nothing—but the lens is still a beast.
I have to admit that I'm probably experiencing a bigger case of sticker shock over this lens than any other announced lens to date. It has been on my wish list for some time despite misgivings about its substantial weight. Now I have to admit that any temptation I might have been feeling to take the plunge is gone. I'm still looking forward to the reviews but I can't see ever buying one.
One thing I do like is the reduction in weight. To put things in perspective for U.S. customers 145g is about .3 lbs. It's not nothing—but the lens is still a beast.
Upvote
0
A
aeturnum
Guest
It's worth noting that, at least according to Amazon, the 24-70 f/2.8L Mk1 also has a list price of $2300. The lens will probably come down in price to match its predecessor over time.
Upvote
0
@aeturnum
It's also worth noting that Amazon tend to exaggerate the list price of lenses (and other goods) to make their price seem better than it really is. Canon USA's list price is actually $1399.
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_24_70mm_f_2_8l_usm
It's also worth noting that Amazon tend to exaggerate the list price of lenses (and other goods) to make their price seem better than it really is. Canon USA's list price is actually $1399.
http://usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_24_70mm_f_2_8l_usm
Upvote
0
aeturnum said:
Canon is likely a better source of the MSRP than Amazon, who seems to just make those MSRP's up with what ever number is on the side of a railroad car passing by.
I worked for a company that did that. A customer was in demanding a lower price, and the salesman saw a train passing by and jotted down the number from a box car. Sale was closed!
$1399 MSRP
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_24_70mm_f_2_8l_usm
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
