I figure at what I paid for my 500 Vs what the new one will cost, I got a helluva deal...
I know I did on my 300 'cause mine was nearly half what the new one will cost.
FlyingPhotog Cream of the "Prop" ![]() 57,560 posts Likes: 160 Joined May 2007 Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft More info | Aug 27, 2010 13:56 | #106 I figure at what I paid for my 500 Vs what the new one will cost, I got a helluva deal... Jay
LOG IN TO REPLY |
george m w Goldmember ![]() 4,022 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2007 More info | Aug 27, 2010 14:05 | #107 I know I did on my 300 'cause mine was nearly half what the new one will cost. Jay, regards, george w
LOG IN TO REPLY |
bkdc Senior Member ![]() 888 posts Likes: 7 Joined Aug 2007 Location: NoVA More info | The MTF on the 400mm f/2.8L IS USM II has me drooling. Is there anything called perfection? This is it. 100% diffraction limited lens. RF 24-70 f/4L IS | RF 24-70 f/2.8L IS | RF 70-200 f/2.8L IS | RF 50L | RF 85L | 600EX-RT x 3
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BiPolarBear Senior Member ![]() 377 posts Joined Oct 2006 Location: The Forest City, Canada More info | Aug 27, 2010 17:36 | #109 4x4rock wrote in post #10794489 ![]() I need to send my 300 2.8 I to Canon for check up now. Ever since I've read the announcement, the lens became a dud ![]() No disagreement on lusting after the new 300. Best wide angle lens? Two steps backward. Look for the "ah-ha". - Ernst Haas
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JC4 Goldmember ![]() 2,610 posts Likes: 3 Joined Apr 2007 Location: Columbus, Ohio More info | I just went outside and pushed my old-crapy 300, for laughs, to see if it was still any good. John Caputo
LOG IN TO REPLY |
mitsu13gman Senior Member 265 posts Joined Oct 2008 Location: Portsmouth, NH More info | Amidst all of the drooling and ooh-ing and ahh-ing I have to raise the spectre of (lens) death. Mike - "EXIF stripping is bad, mmmkay?"
LOG IN TO REPLY |
malla1962 Cream of the Crop ![]() 7,714 posts Likes: 5 Joined Jul 2004 Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk More info | Aug 28, 2010 02:05 | #112 mitsu13gman wrote in post #10803144 ![]() Amidst all of the drooling and ooh-ing and ahh-ing I have to raise the spectre of (lens) death. Canon are well known for not repairing non-current-production glass. This leads to a number of questions for me: 1) How long do I have before my less than a year old 300 2.8 IS MkI becomes a paperweight due to failure? 2) So do I just dump it now, get the 70-200 IS MkII and accept that I never deserved the 300 2.8 to begin with? 3) Or do I go over to Nikon and at least enjoy the fact that they focus on backward-compatibility with older lenses? How is Nikon for repairing out-of-production hardware? Sorry, I'm just really freaking out about this. I LOVE the 300 2.8, but I can't afford to have it drop to zero value on me overnight with no warning. I'm a lucky amateur, and if that's a genuine risk, I need to make some hard decisions... I suppose there's always option 4 - save up the extra $3k+/- and upgrade, but the current glass doesn't need to be upgraded. For $3k I could (nearly) get the 35 1.4 and 85 1.2. Uggg... Just go and enjoy your 300,it will be good for servicing for a long time yet.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
george m w Goldmember ![]() 4,022 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2007 More info | Aug 28, 2010 09:02 | #113 I just went outside and pushed my old-crapy 300, for laughs, to see if it was still any good. Yep. Same here. Went to the local HS game last night. The old non-IS 300 still seems to work okay. regards, george w
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 28, 2010 09:26 | #114 mitsu13gman wrote in post #10803144 ![]() Sorry, I'm just really freaking out about this. I LOVE the 300 2.8, but I can't afford to have it drop to zero value on me overnight with no warning. I'm a lucky amateur, and if that's a genuine risk, I need to make some hard decisions... Uggg... The 200mm f/1.8, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, and 300mm f/2.8 Non-IS all still command a good price relative to their original selling price in the used market. The lens will likely not drop significantly in value for years to come. Stuff and things
LOG IN TO REPLY |
george m w Goldmember ![]() 4,022 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2007 More info | Aug 28, 2010 10:16 | #115 The 200mm f/1.8, 70-200 f/2.8 IS, and 300mm f/2.8 Non-IS all still command a good price relative to their original selling price in the used market. The lens will likely not drop significantly in value for years to come. Plus one on that. As long as the EF mount is a current mount, the $$ value will be there. When (if) the day comes that mount is phased out then the value plummets. Ask the guys that have a bunch of FD mount lenses about that. regards, george w
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Lester Wareham Moderator ![]() More info | Aug 28, 2010 11:42 | #116 The price jump in the UK is enormous, apologies if already posted by someone. My Photography Home Page
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Aug 28, 2010 13:36 | #117 Lester Wareham wrote in post #10805993 ![]() The price jump in the UK is enormous, apologies if already posted by someone. Warehouse Express lists 300mm f2.8L IS Mk1...£3594.00,,,Mk2 £7499.99 Mk1 RRP £5629 400mm f2.8L IS Mk1...£6469.00...Mk2 £11499.99 Mk1 RRP £9810 1.4X ............ Mk2....£269.00....Mk3 £549.99 Mk2 RRP £420 2X...............Mk2....£269.00....Mk3 £549.99 Mk2 RRP £420 Prsumably these will improve but a very big jump. RRPs for old models shown in red. Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Lester Wareham Moderator ![]() More info | Aug 29, 2010 09:43 | #118 hollis_f wrote in post #10806451 ![]() RRPs for old models shown in red. WEx are obviously quoting the RRP for the new items, hoping that the early adopters will pay anything to be the first to own them. I guess that we'll see prices drop to around 63% of the RRP a few months after the new ones become available. Still means the 300 2.8 Mk2 will be around £4800 - which is a lot more than the £2800 I paid for a new one two years ago. I don't know, checking the 7D prices from the same supplier it has dropped 25% on the release price accounting for the package values. Considering that bodies marketability "ages" faster than lenses.... My Photography Home Page
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Evan Idler Goldmember ![]() 1,600 posts Likes: 4 Joined May 2005 Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada More info | Aug 29, 2010 11:50 | #119 Think I could sell a Kidney for enough to cover the cost of the new 400 F/2.8L IS Mark II? Canon5DIII + Some L + Some non L + Some Sigma + Some Tamron + other stuff....
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Lester Wareham Moderator ![]() More info | Aug 29, 2010 11:53 | #120 Yeah, a kidney, definitely not my liver though, that works to hard.... My Photography Home Page
LOG IN TO REPLY |
![]() | x 1600 |
y 1600 |
Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting! |
| ||
Latest registered member is hanhasgotqi 652 guests, 188 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 |