richiehatch: In Ireland the RRP is €2499...! It had better be good at 3 times the price of the Sigma Art 35mm. I sold my previous Canon 35L for the Sigma and have never looked back.
actually each area is it's own separate entity, you're not subsidizing canon USA.
the problem is that the cost of distribution, corp taxes, cost of living,wages are higher in europe than it is in the USA.
that gets passed on by increased prices.
BarnET: 1799,- dollars is expensive.Until you see the UK price.
1799 pounds equals $2766,-
Uk VAT is 20% so even after detracting that1799/1.2=14991499 pounds = $2305 An additional profit margin of 506 bucks that is outrageous.
Current price for the Sigma 35mm Arthttp://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-35mm-F1-4-Lens-Canon-Black/dp/B00A35X6NU617 pounds vs 1799 pounds. That is a 3x difference
except that the lens is actually 275,000 yen (2400 euro after VAT) domestic and Canon USA is subsidizing the MSRP to keep what they feel it to be competitive.
I guess canon europe has no such qualms.
Disagree with this article. with disposible income in alot of areas at significant lows, you have simply alot of people that feel what they have is good enough.
if it's good enough, why on earth would you spend $1000 or more (including lenses, batteries, bag, camera,etc,etc) on something that you really don't need, when the car needs new tires, or the kids need clothes for school.
some of course do, that's why cameras do get sold, but for most people its completely unnecessary and in alot of cases, they don't have the luxury - there's other priorities.
complexity has nothing to do with it, it's just simply that the camera industry got hit with basically it's technology disruption, and that is cameras and lenses made small enough and of a significant high quality that they could be attached to a smartphone.
that was simply game over.
Suntan: Some people are living in denial.
As much as they don't want to acknowledge it, the reason average cameras have gone away *is* because the average snap-shooter is getting their needs met by smartphones.
when you think about it though, 35mm negative film was really good for around what .. 8x12"at iso 400 film?
nowadays any smartphone can easily replicate what we could on film without even batting an eye really.
Mssimo: Any other manufactures using plastic elements?
no, actually it could mean alot of different things.
edit: it probably is a polymer resin based structure, however the originator is acting as if it's a bad thing..
falconeyes: The lens uses anomal dispersion of an organic material as first discovered in 1870 by Christian Christiansen.
It can be a very good lens with APO characteristics.
Nevertheles and even though the material is sealed by two ordinary glass elements, I'd prefer Canon specified the expected life time of this lens. After all, organic materials are prone to decay.
your best bet would be to try and search for the canon patent on it.
you'd be suprised how many lenses have resin molded aspherics.
but that's neither here nor there, where's the source of your information that it's plastic based?
Combatmedic870: I hate to say it. But their lenses are actually a really good value.
I would hate to see what would happen if they got their AF game together and pushed to a new 14nm finfet processor.
The m series touch screens are ridiculously good.
I think canon should pay attention to the Panasonic GX8 body.
They just need a 15 f2($399), 32 f1.8($199), 50 f1.8($249) and a 15-60 2.8-4($599).
I'm a fuji shooter. I'm fearful of the beast named canon. I would like fuji to stick around.
LOL 14nm? oh please.. that would look like hell.. the wire tracing going the entire length of the chip?
Jonathan F/2: Honestly I don't see too many mirrorless shooters out in the real world. I'm guessing most of them spend their free time on the internet preaching how DSLRs are dinosaurs and dissing anything Canon/Nikon instead of actually taking photos! Lol
lmao.. pretty much..that's a full time job you know!
Astrotripper: Seeing how Canon came up with the 11-22mm and 22mm lenses, it's actually a shame EOS M is what it is.
The lens line up is extremely limited, but if Canon could offer more lenses like that, and actually release a decent body to mount them on, they would give the likes of Olympus, Panasonic and Sony a run for their money.
*rant mode on* E-M10 II might be a superior camera in every single way, but once you realize that the cheapest wide angle zoom is a plastic toyish looking collapsible that Olympus prices at $700 and doesn't even bundle a lens hood with, it kinda stops looking like a good deal. Sure, Olympus will throw discounts at you from time to time, so that you feel it's a bargain at $500. But it's really not. It's about time they did a cosmetic redesign of that and released it at a lower price point. *rant mode off*
In case you hadn't notice yet, I'm jealous of EOS M users having such an affordable (and actually good I hear) wide angle option. I want that too.
the 11-22mm EF-M which is pretty fantastic - and even holds up well to a 24Mp APS-C sensor, for $399 retail - is pretty sweet indeed.
about the only thing the EF-M has going for it, is the wonderful optics in the 22mm prime and the very nice and inexpensive UWA.
ski542002: No fframe sensor, no built-in EVF. So I get to choose between using the clip-on EVF, or an external flash. Was hoping for a top shelf competitor to the Sony A series. Canon should not be concerned over cannibalization of their DSLR line. Wish list; FFrame, 2, sd card slots, articulating screen, faaassttt primes, and on and on. Maybe in the next 10 years, but for now, will stick with my DSIII.
and how many people actually use a large flash on a mirrorless anyways?
the the sight of a 600EX on a M3 would be rather ridiculous.
tkbslc: Can you imagine what the mirrorless landscape would look like today if Canon had released an E-M5 or NEX-6 type camera back in 2012 instead of the horribly mediocre EOS M? 3 Years later and they still aren't really trying.
actually the marketshare isn't really growing at all ..,lol@30%.
W4YNE 1: I wonder if Canon will apply this procedure to their current lens range or 'L' series lenses, or whether it will just be for this and future new lenses?
I suspect the lens has to be designed with this in mind, so no, new lenses only.
brownie314: I think they are slightly over pricing the M3. It should be the same price as the Nikon J5.
NX500? no thank you.
Viva Santo Nino: DLSR is dying breed. Mirrorless is here...Well done Canon for joining the future even though you are 4 years late.
lol .. dying breed .. maybe in your wet fantasies..
however seems that every single week, canon and nikon are continuing to increase their installed base at a greater rate than all mirrorless companies shoved together and rolled around in a carpet.
dwill23: I should have added (below) that if they came out with something like my 18-135 EF-S 'vacation' lens in the "M" mount, (so even smaller than EFS) it would be fantastic. ANd I would like it a lot more.
yes! I'd certainly roll a 18-135mm as well, heck even if it was slower at the tele end just to make it smaller.
about the same as it does now? considering that still mirrorless isn't selling in vast quantities?
Sir Nick of High Point: Just an FYI for those who may not know. The reason that this lens needs BR Optic technology, as well as being so big and expensive, is because it is an SLR lens, which puts it at a disadvantage for anything less than 50mm.
The reason is due to the space behind the lens, which is required for the mirror.
If you want to shoot this focal length and don't need a an SLR, you would probably be better off picking up the EOS M3 and the 22mm f/2, which will not suffer from any of these problems. Not trying to diss this lens or step on any toes. I'm just trying to be helpful.
not the case at all ..
Digitalis32: If you read between the lines of the marketing blurb: it sounds like they have a reformulated optical cement that has a low dispersion, low enough to have a corrective effect while filling in an air space between optical elements....groundbreaking.
The downside to this approach is whenever there is a change in refractive index there will be a reflection, and this is going to add 4 more surfaces for internal reflections to propagate. I predict that this lens will have a different flare profile than the existing 35L, whether the change is for better or worse remains to be seen.
you missed the obvious sarcasm.
keeponkeepingon: The price is really strange.
You can get an M3 body for $350 USD in japan but here in the states the cheapest setup they sell is $679???? With a lens every EOS-M owner already has?
As an EOS-M afficionado who would love a chance to upgrade the price, and lack of a body only option has me a bit perplexed.
@keeponkeepingon - there is a body only option.
where are you looking at?