ak1999 wrote:
I'm done with replying to fanboy like you.
You are trolling... How typical to call me a fanboy.
You change your tune to suit your biased view.
Where have I changed "my tune", oh trolling ak? (Don't troll, it is not appreciated)
Actually Nikon 70-200F4VR price is very competitive.
It is? How much more expensive is it than the equivalent Canon?
I bet if Canon release 70-200F4 IS2 replacement, it will be minimum $1995 MSRP.
If Canon would make it even sharper, it would be even more expensive to produce (tolerance). Since the 70-200mm f4 L IS USM is a relatively new lens, there will not be a new version soon.
Now to explain the obvious to you:
The Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f4 VR: $1260.
The Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f4 VR: $1400
The Nikon AF-S 17-55mm f2.8 DX:
$1540
The Nikon AF-S 24-120mm f4 VR: $1300
The Canon EF 17-40mm f4 L USM: $840
The Canon EF 70-200mm f4 L IS USM: $1350
The Canon EF 24-70mm f4 L IS USM:
$1500
The Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM: $1150
The EF 24-70mm f4 is priced pretty normal for a high quality f4 FF lens, as you can see. The newer Nikon 16-35mm VR is a lot more expensive than the older Canon counterpart, as you can see.
Take particular notice to the pricing of the very comparable Nikon AF-S 17-55mm f2.8 DX. A 25.5-82.5mm f4.2 equivalent, it is priced higher than the new Canon EF 24-70mm f4 L IS USM, which has better sealing, image stabilization and a nice macro setting/feature. The price of that new Canon is not very strange, in all respects. That you can't afford it is understandable... I can not afford many things either, does not mean I start to whine in forums about how unreasonable prices are (especially when they are not so unreasonable).
Your exchange conversion exchange excuse does not hold.
And why "does it not hold"?
It should apply to older lens lineup like 24-105.
All manufacturers try to keep the MSRP of a lens during its lifetime relatively stable, in a currency area. Sometimes price-hikes have to follow, if things get too crooked (just after the 2007/2008 financial market collapse for instance). This works that way for Canon, Sony, Nikon, and so on.
The 24-105mm f4 L IS USM has lesser optics than the 24-70mm f4 L IS USM (see the published MTF charts). The 24-70mm f4 L IS USM is a higher quality optic, and will cost a little more. The choice is longer reach vs higher IQ. Nothing curious about that, always has been that way. Higher precision elements are more expensive to fabricate.
Yes they have gone up a little (I'm as stupid as you think) but nowhere near of what new equipment premium price is asking (yes I know new items commands premium price at first, just in case you think I'm that stupid).
You do appear that stupid, in your arguments.
I'm not responding again so you can have the last word.
Thanks.
