Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 07 Dec 2014 (Sunday) 19:35
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-70 f/4: will it go back to full price?

 
Aressem
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,364 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 509
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 08, 2014 15:11 |  #16

the flying moose wrote in post #17320940 (external link)
If you can get $900 for a used lens that is on sale right now for $799CAN new, then more power to you.

I think you mis-interpreted what I was saying. I am holding onto the lens until it returns to MSRP of $1000+. I should have no problem selling it for $900, then, considering sales taxes here are 12% which will bring the lens to $1120. That's a savings of $220, plenty reasonable for a BNIB lens.


Ryan Mackay WEBSITE (external link) | FACEBOOK (external link) | GEAR LIST | Buy & Sell Feedback: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
the ­ flying ­ moose
Goldmember
1,639 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 08, 2014 15:25 |  #17

Aressem wrote in post #17321000 (external link)
I think you mis-interpreted what I was saying. I am holding onto the lens until it returns to MSRP of $1000+. I should have no problem selling it for $900, then, considering sales taxes here are 12% which will bring the lens to $1120. That's a savings of $220, plenty reasonable for a BNIB lens.

Well locally the store thats selling it for $799 has said that sale price will remain until all stock is sold so I don't see it jumping back up anytime soon. It's not like its a rebate or something. That sale price could remain everywhere. I'd rather take the money now then risk not selling the lens at all.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2277
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Post edited over 4 years ago by DreDaze.
     
Dec 08, 2014 15:37 |  #18

i'm not sure about Canada, but in the US it is a rebate of $200 which ends 1/3/15, so the original price is $999...this is after it was lowered from the release price...it will never be more than $999 in the US...the main problem i see is that the lens just isn't selling at a price of $999, i don't even know if it's selling much more at a price of $799


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Apricane
Senior Member
Avatar
993 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 599
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Canada's Federal Capital
     
Dec 08, 2014 15:54 |  #19

the flying moose wrote in post #17320940 (external link)
If you can get $900 for a used lens that is on sale right now for $799CAN new, then more power to you.

It's still 900 with tax accounted for (well, Ontario's HST). Unless the sale price stabilizes (which is the OP's question), then the lens would go back to being roughly $1250 with the HST in Ontario, roughly the same in Quebec. I don't know for BC, but yeah, $900 would be realistic and definitely possible to get.


Apricane IG Travel/City (external link) IG Editorial/Fashion (external link)flickr (external link)
EOS RP | 77D | M6 | TT685C - 430EX II - 270EX II
EF ∑24-105A | 70-300L | 35 f/2 IS | 40 | T45SP | 100L
EF-S 10-18 | 15-85 | 55-250 STM // EF-M 22 | 18-55

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Dec 08, 2014 15:54 as a reply to  @ Aressem's post |  #20
bannedPermanent ban

I buy a lot of used and refurbished equipment, so I have a bit of experience here. My first shopping-stop is Canon refurbished, just to check prices. Then I go shopping on POTN and Craigsllist. If I can't save 20% buying used, I'll go with the refurbished. Canon offers a 12-month warranty that is worth the 20% surcharge to me. I sent back a refurbished 60D, and two refurbished 50mm f/1.8 lenses. I got all my money back, including shipping, and Canon paid for the return postage. You just can't get that kind of protection buying used. Just to be clear, I don't count shipping or taxes in the cost of the refurbished item.

E-bay has a good buyer protection plan (racket) going with paypal. But you don't get back your original shipping costs, or the cost of shipping an item back to the seller.

Right now, your 24-70 f/4 is going for $799 US as a refurbished item. $799 - 20% is $640. In my book, only fool would pay $900 for a no-warranty lens when a 12-month warranty is available for $260 less. Even if the price does go back to $999, the refurbished price will stay $799.

Good luck with your sale.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
the ­ flying ­ moose
Goldmember
1,639 posts
Likes: 76
Joined Dec 2006
     
Dec 08, 2014 16:02 |  #21

Apricane wrote in post #17321079 (external link)
It's still 900 with tax accounted for (well, Ontario's HST). Unless the sale price stabilizes (which is the OP's question), then the lens would go back to being roughly $1250 with the HST in Ontario, roughly the same in Quebec. I don't know for BC, but yeah, $900 would be realistic and definitely possible to get.

Brand new its going for $799CAN. With the 12% sales tax that works out to just a little over $894CAN. There is no telling that if the price will go back up or not. I have been personally told by a retailer that that price will remain until all stock is sold. Its a gamble. Turn down a little less money now and sell it or hold on to it and potentially lose more money down the road or not even sell it at all.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,205 posts
Gallery: 1640 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10336
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Dec 08, 2014 19:42 |  #22

So... who's actually in the market for this lens anyways?

F4 seems pointless to me at these focal lengths. And stopping down, at all, well, there's other lenses that perform great at F8 and have IS and don't cost this.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LonelyBoy
Goldmember
1,456 posts
Gallery: 79 photos
Likes: 926
Joined Oct 2014
     
Dec 08, 2014 20:43 |  #23

It's also competing with the 24-105L as an f/4 normal zoom. Going to be hard to get much for this on the secondary market, and I doubt Canon doesn't just renew that rebate indefinitely to keep them moving.


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/127590681@N03/ (external link)
I love a like, but feedback (including CC) is even better!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sdiver2489
Goldmember
2,845 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited over 4 years ago by Sdiver2489. (3 edits in all)
     
Dec 08, 2014 20:48 as a reply to  @ MalVeauX's post |  #24

I am...The only lenses I see that are at all interesting compared to this are the 24-105's and the 24-70's F2.8

Lets see:

Canon 24-105:
-Softer corners
-Much higher CA
-Larger/heavier
-Older IS
+higher range

Sigma 24-105:
Pretty much see above although I think the CA is better but it is much heavier and larger. Oh and of course the IS would be the latest sigma has...but my experience with Sigma is not great.

Canon 24-70 F2.8 I
-Large, heavy
-No IS
+Aperture

Canon 24-70 F2.8 II
+Aperture
-Holy expensive batman
-No IS

Tamron 24-70 F2.8 IS
Probably the only one that would be tempting...aperture and IS..but its tamron. I acknowledge that the lens looks pretty good though

So...I don't understand people like you hating on this lens. What is wrong with an F4 aperture if it makes for a compact standard zoom on a full frame camera? Why is it ok to have a F4 aperture in a telephoto but not a standard zoom? The lens has better low light abilities than the 24-70 F2.8 technically for still subjects. Many people have a faster prime after all since F2.8 isn't THAT fast.

Right now the lens can be had for less than $700. For a standard zoom with constant aperture and IS that is pretty damn good. The only lens close in price is the 24-105 and that's just preference as both have their advantages.

For the cost of a Canon 24-70 F2.8 II I could get one of these, a sigma 35mm F1.4 or Canon 30mm F2 IS and a 100mm macro...


Please visit my Flickr (external link) and leave a comment!

Gear:
Canon 5D III, Canon 24-70L F4 IS, Canon 70-300L F4-F5.6 IS, Canon 100mm F2.8L IS Macro, Canon 35mm F2.0 IS, Canon 430EX II-RT, Canon 600EX II-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2277
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 08, 2014 20:54 as a reply to  @ Sdiver2489's post |  #25

it's the price...it came out at $1,500...that right there took a lot of interest away...they've cut a 1/3 of the price off, and it's getting more interest, but when the 24-105L is readily available for $600, is the 24-70mm that much better to command an extra $400?


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sdiver2489
Goldmember
2,845 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited over 4 years ago by Sdiver2489. (2 edits in all)
     
Dec 08, 2014 21:01 as a reply to  @ DreDaze's post |  #26

So are we living in 2012 that we care what price Canon released the lens at? There was hatred when Canon released the 24-70 F2.8II for $2200.

The lens price is currently $799...and as I've said three times now can be had for less than $700 new. The Canon 24-105mm can be had for just a bit under that price. So the 24-105 and the 24-70 are very close in price...it comes down to how much you value the newest IS, size, weight, range and the macro feature. Optically the 24-70 F4 is a bit better as you'd expect from a newer lens.

So again...which setup would you rather want:

24-70 F2.8 II

or

24-70 F4 IS
Sigma 35mm F1.4 or Canon 35mm F2 IS
Canon 100mm F2.8 Macro.

Is the 24-70 F2.8 II that much better to command a $1300+ price difference? May there be situations where upping the ISO one stop is just not practical? Sure...but for every other instance the IS is better than the one stop better aperture.


Please visit my Flickr (external link) and leave a comment!

Gear:
Canon 5D III, Canon 24-70L F4 IS, Canon 70-300L F4-F5.6 IS, Canon 100mm F2.8L IS Macro, Canon 35mm F2.0 IS, Canon 430EX II-RT, Canon 600EX II-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2277
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Dec 08, 2014 21:09 as a reply to  @ Sdiver2489's post |  #27

if it were me, i'd probably go with the tamron, or the 24-105L...i'd rather have the extra reach than the macro mode

if the price stays at $799, then there will probably be a lot of people that give it a shot...but it's really only been at the price for a few weeks, and only been at $1,000 for a few months

IMAGE: http://www.canonpricewatch.com/graph/04109-Canon-EF-24-70mm-f4L-IS-USM-price-graph.png
IMAGE LINK: http://www.canonpricew​atch.com …0mm-f4L-IS-USM-price.html  (external link)

Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sdiver2489
Goldmember
2,845 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Sep 2009
Post edited over 4 years ago by Sdiver2489.
     
Dec 08, 2014 21:15 |  #28

DreDaze wrote in post #17321649 (external link)
if it were me, i'd probably go with the tamron, or the 24-105L...i'd rather have the extra reach than the macro mode

if the price stays at $799, then there will probably be a lot of people that give it a shot...but it's really only been at the price for a few weeks, and only been at $1,000 for a few months
QUOTED IMAGE
IMAGE LINK: http://www.canonpricew​atch.com …0mm-f4L-IS-USM-price.html  (external link)

I have no problem with people deciding that the 24-105 is better for them because they want more reach or that they want to pay more for the tamron for the aperture. However, saying "who is actually in the market for this lens?" and calling an F4 aperture "pointless" is just over the top. The lens has a point...for some reason Canon just had unrealistic expectations of what they could sell it for. At $999 its a compelling lens, for $799 its a very interesting lens and at less than $700 its borderline a steal like the 24-105 IMO. A lotta quality glass for a very fair price.

I'm looking forward to having this lens on my 5D Mark III as a fairly compact all around lens setup. When I anticipate low light...I am thinking I am going to a Canon 35 F2 IS...unfortunately the Sigma 35mm just let me down too much in reliability. I've learned over the years that if there is a lens I can't trust...it ends up as a shelf warmer ;)


Please visit my Flickr (external link) and leave a comment!

Gear:
Canon 5D III, Canon 24-70L F4 IS, Canon 70-300L F4-F5.6 IS, Canon 100mm F2.8L IS Macro, Canon 35mm F2.0 IS, Canon 430EX II-RT, Canon 600EX II-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Dec 08, 2014 21:54 |  #29
bannedPermanent ban

The biggest problem the 24-70 f/4 has is competition. The 24-105 suffers from the same problem. Canon has to heavily discount the 24-105 in kits to move them. That is where the 24-70 f/4 is going.

Want faster zoom? 24-70 VC, 24-70 2.8L, 24-70 2.8L II, 28-75.
Want faster? Too many options to list.
Want better IQ: 24-70 VC, 24-70L II. and a bucket-load of primes.
Want more range: 24-105 x2 (Canon and Sigma), 28-135.
Want to spend less money? 28-75, 28-135, Σ24-105.
Want to do video? The 24-105 STM is due in two weeks.

The EF 24-70 f/2.8L II and the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC are unique in their class. Therefore, they command a premium price. The 24-70 f/4 IS is a mediocre lens in a sea of mediocrity. I can put this lens to shame with two cheap primes: the 35 2 and the 85 1.8. Personally, I chose to spend a bit more money to get the 35 IS and the 100 f/2. Both of which give me two stops more light, to use however I want. I have a Tamron 28-75, which at f/4 is at least the equal of the 24-70 f/4 in the center 2/3 of the frame. It also does f/2.8 (Ok, not really well) and cost me less than $300. If I need a bit more focal length, I have a 28-135 or a 70-200 2.8 OS to choose from. One is 1/4 the price of the 24-70 f/4 and has better range. The other, again, is faster, and at its best where the 24-70 f/4 is weakest. Expensive mid-range zooms like the 24-70 f/4 offer shooters like me absolutely nothing. When the 24-105 STM is released, the pool of potential buyers gets even smaller. Apparently, some folks do video with SLRs.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Aressem
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
4,364 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 509
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Dec 08, 2014 22:01 |  #30

Well. You can all stop your bickering now. Some idiot jist bought it off craigslist for $950. Yes. You read right. $150 more than retail. Bahahaha. Oh boy.... ߘ


Ryan Mackay WEBSITE (external link) | FACEBOOK (external link) | GEAR LIST | Buy & Sell Feedback: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,361 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-70 f/4: will it go back to full price?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

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!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
842 guests, 213 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.