70-200 2.8 IS II is here

Well I cannot see any reason why it will not be over 2K USD. I am guessing a release MSRP of 2200-2399$ as per Nikon's market for the same redesign.

Steep.

OK I am on record- 2299$ pre-order a BH!

cwphoto wrote in post #9455545
Precisely.

It's not right though is it.

radiohead wrote in post #9458622
It's not right though is it.

That doesn't seem to matter.

Hey, folks, can we get beyond the silly dictionary debate now? Cwphoto isn't going to bend, and I think everybody else has developed a pretty strong opinion on the subject. Nobody's convincing anybody at this point.

I'm sorry I ever called him on it.

In other late-breaking news, B&H still doesn't have a price for us.

gkuenning wrote in post #9458666
Hey, folks, can we get beyond the silly dictionary debate now? Cwphoto isn't going to bend, and I think everybody else has developed a pretty strong opinion on the subject. Nobody's convincing anybody at this point.

I'm sorry I ever called him on it.

In other late-breaking news, B&H still doesn't have a price for us.

Because we are still in january, and the lens will be avaible on march lol =)
Give Canon some more time to produce more and more of this lens, cause photo-journalist will rush on it :P

I think the early pricing is a result of the shops knowing that Canon are not going to be able to meet demand, so they might as well capitalise on the early adopters. If a shop has placed an order for 20, they will probably only get one or two in their first batch...even though the shop has paid up front for all 20.
I don't touch "new to the market" gear any more. I'd rather leave it 3-6 months for the price to stabilise to a more realistic level and the QC on the prodution like to get a descent shake down too.

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #9459766
I think the early pricing is a result of the shops knowing that Canon are not going to be able to meet demand, so they might as well capitalise on the early adopters. If a shop has placed an order for 20, they will probably only get one or two in their first batch...even though the shop has paid up front for all 20.
I don't touch "new to the market" gear any more. I'd rather leave it 3-6 months for the price to stabilise to a more realistic level and the QC on the prodution like to get a descent shake down too.

This is my general rule too..

I admit i broke it with the 15-85, but that was for the following reasons:

1. I needed something in that focal range badly since my 28-75 met concrete death
2. It was the focal range i wanted on my APS-C camera for ages
3. There really werent any alternates that combined the range, with image stabilization and superb image quality, While we didnt know about that last bit until i got it [And I was one of the first ones to get my hands on one] I just trusted Canon would deliver a good product at that price...and bought it where i had a 45-day return policy

a few months later and its down about $80...but it took a few months to get there, so i consider it a "rental" period...i know it didnt drop in price until after my 45 days were up, overall I'm not mad, yes I paid $800 for it, still feel it was worth it [Though that $800 should have included a hood, Canon are you listening?]

KenjiS wrote in post #9459936
[Though that $800 should have included a hood, Canon are you listening?]

Imagine being a 17-55 owner (more $ and still hood-less)....


(I have not been a fan of the bags Canon gives out for L lenses, but hoods are nice/useful.)

What do I win when I turn out to be correct?

This lens will retail for $2499 at the least. Anyone want to place a wager?

me

GMCPhotographics wrote in post #9459766
I'd rather leave it 3-6 months for the price to stabilise to a more realistic level and the QC on the prodution like to get a descent shake down too.

I hear you, which is why I'm glad my sister's wedding won't be until August!

I did have to rent the Mk I for a good friend's wedding a couple of weeks back, though.

The plus side of that story: Some 1600 photos later, I can definitely see why people will bother with the F2.8 70-200s over the F4s.

The downside of that story: After shooting with it for 8-10 hours, my arms/shoulders are screaming for something lighter -- which means I might end up with a F4 IS as well.

(But I try not to think about the future drain this hobby can inflict on the pocketbook.)
:p

Here in Holland the MSRP is €2959. With the current exchange rate this makes a neat $4187...........

MDJAK wrote in post #9460202
What do I win when I turn out to be correct?
This lens will retail for $2499 at the least. Anyone want to place a wager?

I don't have money to wager -- need it for the MkII fund....

However, I am curious looking at your sig -- what do you do with the tube and MkI when you don't have a Canon body?

Also, it looks like you are fairly invested in Nikon, so why not just sell the MkI (which is unlikely to go UP in price no matter how the Mk II is priced) now?

Canon's page for this lens. No price though... http://www.usa.canon.c​om …egoryid=150&mod​elid=19092

cwphoto wrote in post #9452472
That's rubbish. Bokeh means quality, period.

If you wish to measure quantity use the term DoF.

It's butchering of meanings like this that now has everyone referring to any non-zoom lens as a prime...

If you're Australian, why are you using the term "period"?

BTW thanks for the clarification.

As for Prime lenses. I'll take the post-zoom-lens-modern-meaning of the word (any fixed lens is a prime). Even though it may be wrong.

DoF is the area in focus right?! Not the out of focus part... I guess you could say: "This photo hasn't got a lot of DOF" or "the DOF is shallow".

rix643 wrote in post #9460253
Here in Holland the MSRP is €2959. With the current exchange rate this makes a neat $4187...........

This has been discussed a lot. Basically, you can't just convert it like that. There are different pricing schemes throughout the world. Just compare a current euro price to one on the U.S. site. Basically, you guys pay more.

gkuenning wrote in post #9458666
Hey, folks, can we get beyond the silly dictionary debate now? Cwphoto isn't going to bend, and I think everybody else has developed a pretty strong opinion on the subject. Nobody's convincing anybody at this point.

I'm sorry I ever called him on it.

In other late-breaking news, B&H still doesn't have a price for us.

LOL right Cwphoto vs Radio Head = a long debate.