codethought
Active member
Just wondering...
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sony, When r u going to drop ur ridicolous lens price?
- Thread starter DanSantoso
- Start date
ab012_KM7D
Senior Member
yeah there is
Sony 18-70 SSS
Canon 17-85 IS USM
or one can be really unfair and biased
Sony 24-105 3.5-4.5 SSS
Canon 24-105 IS USM L
and thats totally ignoring all third party :
Tamron 17-50 2.8 SSS
Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 SSS
Canon 17-55 IS USM
Sigma 70-300DG SSS
Canon 70-300 IS
.....
but anyway if the 70-200 is what one bases their view of a whole system on (and there are many with valid reasons for this) then yes it is outrageous!
Just dont try to include a 17-50 2.8IS in the lineup cost comparisons as it would screw the analysis around and some perpetual trolls hate that.
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
Sony 18-70 SSS
Canon 17-85 IS USM
or one can be really unfair and biased
Sony 24-105 3.5-4.5 SSS
Canon 24-105 IS USM L
and thats totally ignoring all third party :
Tamron 17-50 2.8 SSS
Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 SSS
Canon 17-55 IS USM
Sigma 70-300DG SSS
Canon 70-300 IS
.....
but anyway if the 70-200 is what one bases their view of a whole system on (and there are many with valid reasons for this) then yes it is outrageous!
Just dont try to include a 17-50 2.8IS in the lineup cost comparisons as it would screw the analysis around and some perpetual trolls hate that.
--
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
codethought
Active member
Interesting.. when I first started looking at the Alpha vs the Canon it was the Canon (including lenses) that was always more expensive.
Perhaps Canon has lowered their prices in response to increasing competition from Nikon and (now) Sony?
Perhaps Canon has lowered their prices in response to increasing competition from Nikon and (now) Sony?
ab012_KM7D
Senior Member
hahaha
opps i guess i should have been a bit clearer in my post...
It is true for the 70-200SSM.. defintely!
but NOT true if you compare the C17-85IS and C70-300IS, nor if you compare any third party equivilants
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
opps i guess i should have been a bit clearer in my post...
It is true for the 70-200SSM.. defintely!
but NOT true if you compare the C17-85IS and C70-300IS, nor if you compare any third party equivilants
--
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
Prices from B&H:
Lens Sony Canon (rebate) Notes
====== ======= =========== =============
50/1.4 $349.95 $309.95 ($289.95) Canon is USM
75-300/4.5-5.6 $229.95 $179.95 Canon is USM & 4-5.6
70-200/4 Not avail $579.95 ($544.95) Canon is USM "White beercan"
Now I understand that the Sony will be stabilized because of SSS (the main reason I bought my KM 5D) but that shouldn't matter. SSS should not be a mechanism for Sony to overprice their lenses. Also note that the Canon lenses are USM which is equivalent to SSM on the Sony.
--
fjbyrne
Lens Sony Canon (rebate) Notes
====== ======= =========== =============
50/1.4 $349.95 $309.95 ($289.95) Canon is USM
75-300/4.5-5.6 $229.95 $179.95 Canon is USM & 4-5.6
70-200/4 Not avail $579.95 ($544.95) Canon is USM "White beercan"
Now I understand that the Sony will be stabilized because of SSS (the main reason I bought my KM 5D) but that shouldn't matter. SSS should not be a mechanism for Sony to overprice their lenses. Also note that the Canon lenses are USM which is equivalent to SSM on the Sony.
--
fjbyrne
ab012_KM7D
Senior Member
you havnt compared low end USM lenses vs Screw driven have you?
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
--
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
Yes I have and your point is? If I had use the EF-S version of the Canon 75-300 it would have been an even bigger price difference (the Canon 75-300 would drop to $159). I compared comparable Canon lenses to the Sony lenses. I also wanted to show that Canon can cost effectively offer USM. Sony can't seem to offer SSM without demanding your first born. All new Canon lenses appear to be USM.
--
fjbyrne
CM PHoto
Senior Member
Why not? And you still made your decision based on it, didn't you?
I thought we were comparing systems, not components. If you want to nit-pick winners and loosers, look at individual components. But it's the system that gets the results, not the componenets. If I am shooting in low light and need SSS/VR/IS, suddenly, the Canon is more expensive in most cases, if it is even capable. Get the Canon because the 50 f1.4 is $40 less expensive, then throw away 2 stops of low light perfornace.
My favorite lens, the 28mm f2, would cost an additional $1500+ to swap out with the Nikon equivelent (28mm f1.4) and would still cost me a stop in low-light perfomance.
But we have gone over all of this before.
chad
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
Yes I did but I stand by the fact that Sony should use SSS as a way of raising prices. I really hope Canon or Nikon comes out with body-based IS. I know this is likely not to happen but it would remove Sony's ability to overcharge.
Yes SSS is a great feature and makes the system more attractive.
You are right but I was trying to point out that Canon's lenses are not necessarily more expensive than Sony as the previous poster implied.
Only for static subjects. If your subects are moving you need FASTER shutter speed so the wider aperature is better. Also better high ISO performace is better for dynamic subjects such as indoor sports. SSS is only good where IS would be good. Neither helps you when you need a fast shutter speed to stop movement.
Maybe we have. I want Sony to make a killer system. I want buying Sony to be a no-brainer. Right now they have some weaknesses and they should be pointed out as often as necessary.
--
fjbyrne
ab012_KM7D
Senior Member
just wondering if you knew:
Firstly, the differences between different types of USM
and
the benefit of USM over screw in lower end lenses,
and
also how this differes from the benefit of USM over non-USM Canons
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
Firstly, the differences between different types of USM
and
the benefit of USM over screw in lower end lenses,
and
also how this differes from the benefit of USM over non-USM Canons
--
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
Canon's different types? I know of EF-S and USM. I guess I'm missing something?
Faster and quieter but $20 more expensive for the 75-300.
Faster and quieter according to what I have read. I guess it might be heavier (although B&H specs has them the same weight) and it costs a little bit more ($20).
--
fjbyrne
D
David Bo
Guest
ab012_KM7D
Senior Member
ok then you might need to do a bit of research (dont have the links with me)
re To get a taste of the 2nd and 3rd quesitons, here is a comment from Klaus from photozone:
"An ultrasonic motor doesn't necessarily translate to faster AF - this is design-dependent. In fact the Minolta APO HS lenses were supposed to focus pretty fast despite being screw-mount variants (driven by the camera). Several non-SWM Nikkors also focus very fast on the D200.
It is a slightly different topic in EOS (and 4/3) land where you only have in-lens AF motors - either ultrasonic or via a conventional micro-motor of some kind. "
If you look up the popphoto AF tests you will also see that the KM/a100 AF is almost always faster than the others - (note this is fully lens dependent.)
I do believe that there is significant differences (esp tracking) in the big long teles but your catergorical statement raises doubts about what you tout everyday on this forum as 'facts'.
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
re To get a taste of the 2nd and 3rd quesitons, here is a comment from Klaus from photozone:
"An ultrasonic motor doesn't necessarily translate to faster AF - this is design-dependent. In fact the Minolta APO HS lenses were supposed to focus pretty fast despite being screw-mount variants (driven by the camera). Several non-SWM Nikkors also focus very fast on the D200.
It is a slightly different topic in EOS (and 4/3) land where you only have in-lens AF motors - either ultrasonic or via a conventional micro-motor of some kind. "
If you look up the popphoto AF tests you will also see that the KM/a100 AF is almost always faster than the others - (note this is fully lens dependent.)
I do believe that there is significant differences (esp tracking) in the big long teles but your catergorical statement raises doubts about what you tout everyday on this forum as 'facts'.
--
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
ab012_KM7D
Senior Member
and Canon and Nikon can justify the premium for putting the IS/VR in lenses?
(i fully agree they can, but by your reasoning they shouldnt be able to)
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
(i fully agree they can, but by your reasoning they shouldnt be able to)
--
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
CM PHoto
Senior Member
And now there is Pentax.
Ummm, you are the previous poster. Might want to go back and reread your own posts.
Debatable, and how does this impact lens prices?
And you are doing a hell of a job.
Anything Sony has done right with their lenses?
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
No, Sony is justified for putting a premium on the BODY that has the extra functionality. Canon and Nikon charge more for IS/VR lenses because they have extra functionality.
Sony's lenses do not have the extra functionality of IS/VR and should be compared with non-IS/VR lenses from Canon/Nikon IMO.
Sony has the makings of a killer system and I want them to succeed. They need to sell as much equipment as they can so they get buy in to their system. I fear people will look at the lenses and decide that Canon or Nikon are a better deal. Do people even get the fact that SSS is a great feature? Not to mention that if you compare USM/AFS to screw drive focusing at the sales counter the Sony seems cheap in comparison.
I want competitive equipment (add SSM) with competitive prices from Sony. IMO this will assure their success.
--
fjbyrne
ab012_KM7D
Senior Member
and they did not do so in terms of direct cost to the consumer.
At the end of the day it is how much your whole body+lens lineup costs if all one cares about is price (which is what you seem to be complaining about these few months).
Solely concentrating on the (overpriced!) 70-200SSM again...
and again..
and again..
and again....
and again....
and ignoring the reversed relationship in most other ranges, especially the lower end lens lineup
(where the a100 is situated!)
is a seriously biased analysis.
ps and remember that Canon and Nikon users use third party lenses too.
--
Bernard
a100+28/2... yee~ha!~
7D+STF135... yee~ha!~
AS/SSS rocks!
lens reviews and more on dyxum.com!
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
I hope Pentax does well. More competition the better.
I meant up the branch a bit.
What is debatable about needing a faster shutter speed to stop the action? You need faster glass or higher ISO or both. Remember the old triangle of exposure?
Wider aperature usually means higher prices. You stated that the Nikon 28/1.4 would cost an additional $1500 and wouldn't perform as well as the 28/2 with SSS. I simply pointed out that is only the case for static subjects. The 28/1.2 would perform better than the 28/2 for subjects with motion.
I couldn't even find the Nikon 28/1.4 on B&H so I'm not sure if it costs $1500 total of $1500 more than the 28/2 you are talking about.
And I shouldn't be? I should just accept what I see as problems with Sony's strategy? Am I supposed to be a mindless fanboy and never criticize? Sorry but I call them like I see them.
The CZs are really nice but I think they should have been SSM.
Sony was right buying KM's assets. It gives them a great head start. I just don't want to see them waste it.
--
fjbyrne
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
You mean they make some profit off IS/VR? I would expect so but I doubt Sony is losing any money on the A100 and SSS.
I understand fully the benefit of SSS to the whole system. That is the main reason I bought a KM 5D w/AS.
Because it is the most obvious example. It is also a lens that most people would really like to own given the range and speed. And why do Sony's rebadged KM lenses cost $100 more than the KM's they replace? That must be one hell of a grip and Sony logo!
You obviously haven't read everying I have posted. I have argued that the Sony A100 makes sense in the lower end. I have been critical of Sony when it comes to those looking to move up. Right now the only moving up is to better glass and Sony is generally more expensive than the competition. And this bothers me because I'm afraid Sony is going to shoot themselves in the foot.
Yes and I don't quite get your point. The 3rd parties have better support for Canon/Nikon also - just look at their offerings. But remember that every 3rd party lens that get sold means Sony doesn't sell one. I would like to see Sony position itself so that they sell tons of equipment. I've already lived through my company getting out of the business and don't want to go through it again.
--
fjbyrne
MrScary
Veteran Member
--The Reall reason for those High Prices, is that Sony knows there be IDIOTS out there who'll buy em...You Don't have to buy sony.
MrScary (DennisR)
Swansea, Wales. UK
http://www.pbase.com/dennisr
http://community.webshots.com/user/mrscarecrow
http://digiden.photoshare.co.nz
MrScary (DennisR)
Swansea, Wales. UK
http://www.pbase.com/dennisr
http://community.webshots.com/user/mrscarecrow
http://digiden.photoshare.co.nz
Similar threads
- Question
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum