Urgent!!!! Canon sinking fast.

Canon President Will Step Down:

http://www.bloomberg.c​om …n-as-forecast-misses.html

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1143223

Yes... They made 248 billion Yen last year, even with the tsunami and everything. They're going down. Real fast.

Sorry Tom - where is the urgency here??? Should we all start sending Pay Pal donations to float the company??

they are just replacing an old guy with another old guy. dont worry so much

What a thoroughly misleading thread title

TBH, with what has just been announced from Canon, I'm glad there's change going on up there... I mean, seriously, 24 & 28mm 2.8 IS for ~$800MSRP?

everybody already angry about the wide primes with is those will be good for video.. or low light landscapes perhaps? u dont have to buy them if u cant afford them

ROFL!!

vgrab wrote in post #13840557
everybody already angry about the wide primes with is those will be good for video.. or low light landscapes perhaps? u dont have to buy them if u cant afford them

I can afford them, I just have no need to spend my money on them because they seem pretty pointless
Besides, weren't you the one who said "WTF" about the new 24-70?

I guess that means I should actually be happy with Canon since I keep my money...

yeah i cant afford the new 24-70 i wish it was cheaper but 1000 dollars for a slightly different lens isnt worth it imo. i am curious about how big it is tho. thats what i hate about the old 24-70.. ill be keeping my money as well.

dont u think 2300 is a bit excessive for a standard zoom? 800 for a prime is pretty normal.. just look at other canon primes. and please dont be cought up in the fact that it isnt "L".. its just a red ring after all. marketing gimmick

This thread reminds me of a video. This member of congress actually thinks Guam might sink into the sea. Like Japan, with Canon on it.
http://www.wired.com …en-it-falls-into-the-sea/

S.Horton wrote in post #13840605
This thread reminds me of a video. This member of congress actually thinks Guam might sink into the sea. Like Japan, with Canon on it.
http://www.wired.com …en-it-falls-into-the-sea/

that is hilarious

worst thread evaaa but I luv it :]

vgrab wrote in post #13840603
yeah i cant afford the new 24-70 i wish it was cheaper but 1000 dollars for a slightly different lens isnt worth it imo. i am curious about how big it is tho. thats what i hate about the old 24-70.. ill be keeping my money as well.

dont u think 2300 is a bit excessive for a standard zoom? 800 for a prime is pretty normal.. just look at other canon primes. and please dont be cought up in the fact that it isnt "L".. its just a red ring after all. marketing gimmick

I'm just hoping the tamron is good.

Also, $800 for a prime is on the pricey side, and when you take into account the fact that they are rather slow primes, its just plain idiocy. I mean, look at this list (approximate prices):
Canon 28 1.8: $500
Canon 50 1.4: $370
Canon 85 1.8: $390
Canon 100 2: $475
Canon 100 2.8: $570
Canon 200 2.8: $780

The only one that even comes close is the 200. So we have a 28mm and a 24mm 2.8 that are more expensive than even a bloody 200mm 2.8 L.