grego Cream of the Crop  8,819 posts Likes: 2 Joined May 2005 Location: UCLA More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:09 | #16 BBrat wrote in post #2752137  anyone have a rough idea what this lens may go for? 1400.00 to start? Around the price where the orig 16-35 came out. It'll be higher at first and then settle in at about that 1300-1400 range. Go UCLA
LOG IN TO REPLY |
passwird Member 87 posts Joined Feb 2007 More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:11 | #17  Permanent banilovemycamera wrote in post #2752198 man, that's gotta suck... sounds like my luck! Can you take it back?  ordered it from amazon...
LOG IN TO REPLY |
BBrat Goldmember  1,601 posts Joined Nov 2006 Location: West of Boston, MA. USA More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:11 | #18 grego wrote in post #2752262 Around the price where the orig 16-35 came out. It'll be higher at first and then settle in at about that 1300-1400 range. thaqts what i figured, thanks Brian Gear List
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Lord_Malone Cream of the Manpanties........ Inventor Great POTN Photo Book  7,686 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2005 More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:13 | #19 grego wrote in post #2752262 Around the price where the orig 16-35 came out. It'll be higher at first and then settle in at about that 1300-1400 range. And when it does you already know who will be the first in line to get one. ~Spaceships Don't Come Equipped With Rear View Mirrors~
LOG IN TO REPLY |
CyberDyneSystems Admin (type T-2000)  More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:31 | #20 TH!EN wrote in post #2752146 anyone expect this? thats so random. Gotta agree on that, the 16-35mm is already a "new gen" L having replaced the 17-35L fairly recently... GEAR LIST
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Lord_Malone Cream of the Manpanties........ Inventor Great POTN Photo Book 7,686 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2005 More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:37 | #21 Where are the mods? Sticky this thread in the lens forum! And while you're at it, sticky the 580ex II thread in the Lighting forum! ~Spaceships Don't Come Equipped With Rear View Mirrors~
LOG IN TO REPLY |
asabet Senior Member  301 posts Joined Dec 2006 Location: Baltimore, MD (US) More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:48 | #22 Assuming the 16-35 II is a noticeable improvement, how much do you think a used 16-35 I will sell for in a few months? www.aminsabet.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ChrisBlaze Goldmember  1,801 posts Joined Oct 2006 Location: Honolulu, Hawaii More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:51 | #23 I think the price of the 16-35 just dropped, BH has it for $1339. Has it always been that price? Canon 1D Mark II N/5D Mark III/ 6D/ 7D /85mm f1.2L Mk1/ 24-70 f2.8L/ 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM/ 100mm Macro f/2.8
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Lord_Malone Cream of the Manpanties........ Inventor Great POTN Photo Book 7,686 posts Likes: 1 Joined Oct 2005 More info | Feb 21, 2007 23:52 | #24 ChrisBlaze wrote in post #2752570 I think the price of the 16-35 just dropped, BH has it for $1339. Has it always been that price? Yeah. Right around there. The original MSRP was like over $2K though. ~Spaceships Don't Come Equipped With Rear View Mirrors~
LOG IN TO REPLY |
august23 Sensitive + Shopoholic = chick?  3,126 posts Likes: 14 Joined Mar 2005 Location: Bergen County, New Jersey More info | Feb 22, 2007 00:03 | #25 This is the LAST lens I expected to see anything happen to. Of the L series, that's the last lens I could think of that needs an upgrade lol.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
StealthLude Goldmember  3,680 posts Joined Dec 2005 More info | Feb 22, 2007 00:06 | #26 asabet wrote in post #2752188 Sounds like they improved the corner sharpness, which was the main weakness of the 16-35 I from what I understand. It was, and now im sooo happy I didnt just jump on the lens since I was torn between a 17-40 and 16-35. [[Gear List]]
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Billginthekeys Billy the kid  7,359 posts Likes: 2 Joined Nov 2005 Location: Islamorada, FL More info | Feb 22, 2007 00:07 | #27 i guess they got tired of people saying the 17-40 had better image quality at half the price.... Mr. the Kid.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
grego Cream of the Crop 8,819 posts Likes: 2 Joined May 2005 Location: UCLA More info | Feb 22, 2007 00:08 | #28 Lord_Malone wrote in post #2752305 And when it does you already know who will be the first in line to get one.  If Canon can improve on of my favorite all time favorite lenses, I'm there. I'm sure you'd beat me to it, while i chase the girls!! Go UCLA
LOG IN TO REPLY |
august23 Sensitive + Shopoholic = chick? 3,126 posts Likes: 14 Joined Mar 2005 Location: Bergen County, New Jersey More info | Feb 22, 2007 00:09 | #29 I wish they would get tired of people saying they want a 17-105 2.8L IS.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
grego Cream of the Crop 8,819 posts Likes: 2 Joined May 2005 Location: UCLA More info | Feb 22, 2007 00:09 | #30 CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #2752418 Gotta agree on that, the 16-35mm is already a "new gen" L having replaced the 17-35L fairly recently... Well two of their new things are related to focusing on the pros. A pro lens and a pro body. So maybe they are just tweaking what they think they can. Definitely would have expected an IS version of the 24-70 before this though. Go UCLA
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 MWCarlsson 1099 guests, 141 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
