Started Jun 16, 2013 | Discussions thread
joger Veteran Member • Posts: 4,977
Re: Price comparisons

Steve Balcombe wrote:

joger wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

rwbaron wrote:

joger wrote:

I do not think that for 4 or 5 k USD such a lens would sell well knowing that there is a 6-7 k USD version with f/5.6 and 600 mm


You could be correct as none of us has a crystal ball ;-). I don't own and never shot with the 300f2.8L but I know its IQ is legendary. The current price though in the US is $6,800 which is steep. Add the 2X and you're well over $7,000 and if you also want the 1.4X you're close to $8,000

We need to be careful to compare like with like prices - it's no good comparing the street price of a well-established lens with a launch price for example. I've taken all my prices from here:


- i.e. Canon's published "Estimated Selling Price" for the US which eliminates the launch price vs street price problem.

Using this the "official" price of a 300/2.8L II plus 2x III is $7300+500, and my guestimate of $4k-$4.5k for a 500/5.6 is on the same basis. That's a huge difference to most people.

then buy a a used 300 f/2.8 (I) and a 2x II used and you are at some 4 to 5 k USD at a probably similar level of optical performance for the wish list price.

Why don't people buy this combination instead?

The 300/2.8 MkI was significantly heavier and the IQ with the 2x wasn't as high. And two stop IS would struggle to be effective enough for hand holding at 600 mm. It's the MkII which has turned this into such an attractive combination.

I guess the 4 to 5 k USD price point is already far beyond the "el cheapo-group"

If a 500 f/5.6 would not cost below 3 k USD almost nobody would buy it - I am quite certain - following the discussions here and the discussions in photo stores when you wait for the sales guy to take care of you - most people have a budget of 3 k USD and want the DSLR a flashlight and three lenses for that budget - so a 500 f/5.6 would exceed the majority of people [snip]

Of course it would, we're not talking about an everyday lens that everyone will own or even want to. But in any case your $3k figure is arbitrary nonsense. Some can spend any amount, they just have to convince themselves they want it enough, and many struggle to spend $1000. For many people the prospect of a lens for $4k which gets enticingly close to a combination costing $7800 is hugely attractive and could be the difference between affordable and impossible.

all I am saying is that people who want to buy cheaper mean cheap rather then cheaper - maybe my english is not good enough?

There are certainly people who would be interested in a 4 to 5 k SUD 500 f/5.6 lens that is close to the performance of the type II tele lenses but for a fraction of the price in a smaller and lighter package - the questions is: How big does the Canon Marketing estimate that group and the sales figures within this market? And would this group of potential buyers justify the development of such a lens?

-- hide signature --

isn’t it funny, a ship that leaks from the top
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein

 joger's gear list:joger's gear list
Leica APO-Telyt-M 135mm f/3.4 ASPH Zeiss Loxia 21mm F2.8 Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sony FE 12-24mm F4 +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow