Nikon D800/E $3000, cheaper than I thought

On 2/9/2012 1:23 PM, John A. wrote:

Canon's first retaliatory shot is an upgrade of their 24-70mm f/2.8 full-frame
walking around lens. If you believe B&H, the price of the new lens comes in at
almost twice the price of the old one. And it doesn't even have the image
stabilization that rumors had predicted. If the price point of the 5D3 is
comparably enriched (relative to the 5D2), there's probably no way I'm going
to be able to afford one.

$2300 for an f/2.8 walker?!

It's not needed! With ISO capabilities where they are now. An f4.0
would be just perfect. For about 1/3 the cost. But neither Canon nor
Nikon are willing to release one that matches the quality of their
f2.8 stuff.

Unless you want that aperture range for more choice of DOF.

I do not understand the lack of IS on a 70mm lens likely
to be used on a 7D or 7D-pixel-sized full frame! It is
incomprehensible. And at $2300?? Absurd.

Doug McDonald

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:46:07 +0000, Bruce wrote:
: Robert Coe wrote:
: On Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:00:53 +0000, Bruce wrote:
: : The old EF 24-70mm wasn't a great lens at the wide end. Prices were
: : probably allowed to drift down to help sell the remaining production.
: : The new one might have a list price of $2300 but in time it will
: : stabilise at something more like the $1900 street price of the Nikon
: : equivalent.
:
: Well, the situation right now seems a bit bizarre. B&H (not known as a price
: gouger) is selling the old lens for $1269 and taking pre-orders for the new
: one at $2299. That's a huge differential, given that neither has IS.
:
:
: Perhaps I was slightly too polite about the superseded version. To
: put it bluntly, it is a POS, and B&H and other stores will be doing
: all they can to get rid of any unsold copies. So to compare the price
: of a pre-ordered new model with excellent optics against the price of
: an old model whose optics barely bettered those of the Sigma 24-70mm
: f/2.8 DG and which camera stores are trying to get rid of is perhaps
: not really a fair comparison.

Do you really feel that strongly about the old lens? Reviews I've read seem to
suggest that most reported problems stem from sloppy calibration at the
factory and are correctable with autofocus microadjustment by a user who knows
what he's doing. (That was the case with my EF-S 17-55 f/2.8.) Is that just a
cover-up?

IOW, is the new lens actually worth $1000 more than the old one? Enquiring
minds pretty well need to know.

Alternatively, is the Sigma worth considering?

Bob

On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 12:42:16 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:
:
: "Robert Coe" wrote:
: On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 09:10:45 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
: :
: : I figured they'd ask $3600 or so. Kiss the $8000 D3x goodbye...
: :
: : http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02...0_D800E_launch
: :
: : Why is it I find "cheaper than I thought" a poor choice of words to
: : describe the cost of these cameras?
: :
: : Perhaps "less expensive than anticipated" might have been better.
: : $3000 is certainly not "cheap".
: :
: : It is considerably cheaper than any other option with 30 MP. That
: : doesn't make it "cheap", though.
: :
: : But what does make it cheap is that when the original 5D came out, the
: : US$2995 or so would buy you 345,000 Japanese Yen. Today, US$3,000 only
: : gets you 228,000 Yen.
: :
: : So I call it as being an increadibly cheap increadibly good deal.
:
: Says the man without a collection of Canon lenses.
:
: You mean the 17-40, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24TSE II, Voightlander 40/2.0, 50/1.4,
: Stigma 70/2.8, 100/2.0, and 70-200/4.0 IS don't collectively count as "a
: collection of Canon lenses"? ROFL.

Sorry, David! For some reason I recalled you as a Nikonian. Onset of dementia,
I guess. :^|

Bob

"Robert Coe" wrote:

Do you really feel that strongly about the old lens?

I've not found either the 24-70/2.8 or the 24-105/4.0 IS attractive enough
to buy, and have been pretty irritated.

Reviews I've read seem to
suggest that most reported problems stem from sloppy calibration at the
factory and are correctable with autofocus microadjustment by a user who
knows
what he's doing. (That was the case with my EF-S 17-55 f/2.8.) Is that
just a
cover-up?

My take is that it's at least as good as the cheap primes (24/2.8 and
35/2.0) but not as good as the expensive ones, so it's not a complete dog. I
see it in use by pro PJ types at events here, but they're blasting away with
flashes, so can stop down a bit.

IOW, is the new lens actually worth $1000 more than the old one? Enquiring
minds pretty well need to know.

From the MTF charts at the link below, it sure looks like it's worth it...

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/c...0_f28l_is.html

That it's 10mm shorter and 150 gm lighter is real nice, too. The monster
front element is the only minus (other than the price) I can see. Well, 805
grams is still pretty heavy.

Alternatively, is the Sigma worth considering?

There are two Sigma 24-70/2.8 lenses: the old one's a dog, the new one
competes with the old Canon. (I got buttonholed by a Sigma rep at a camera
store in Tokyo just after the new one came out. It sounded as though they
were honestly proud of the thing.)

There's also a new Tamron that has image stabilization. I have two copies of
the old 28-75/2.8. My old copy had been abused pretty badly, so I bought a
new one. The new one's significantly worse optically than the old one.

Here's the new Tamron "VC" lens. But it's slightly larger/heavier than the
Canon and has the same monster 82mm front element.

http://www.tamron.com/en/news/2012/0206.html

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:58:54 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:
: There's also a new Tamron that has image stabilization. I have two copies of
: the old 28-75/2.8. My old copy had been abused pretty badly, so I bought a
: new one. The new one's significantly worse optically than the old one.
:
: Here's the new Tamron "VC" lens. But it's slightly larger/heavier than the
: Canon and has the same monster 82mm front element.
:
: http://www.tamron.com/en/news/2012/0206.html

It hasn't made it onto B&H's Web site yet. Any idea what the price will come
in at?

Bob

"Robert Coe" wrote:
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:58:54 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:
: There's also a new Tamron that has image stabilization. I have two
copies of
: the old 28-75/2.8. My old copy had been abused pretty badly, so I bought
a
: new one. The new one's significantly worse optically than the old one.

:
: Here's the new Tamron "VC" lens. But it's slightly larger/heavier than
the
: Canon and has the same monster 82mm front element.
:
: http://www.tamron.com/en/news/2012/0206.html

It hasn't made it onto B&H's Web site yet. Any idea what the price will
come
in at?

There's no price (or even release date) listed on their Japanese page*. When
the smoke clears, I'd guess it'll cost around US$1,000 or so (i.e. twice the
28-75/2.8 plus some change). That's a lot of glass and stabilization. A lot
of people are going to find the VC bit really attractive even if it isn't
quite as good optically as the Canon. With the 70-200/4.0 IS, I can get
sharp images at 1/30 (requires bracing the elbow of the arm supporting the
lens), which is seriously amazing. Still, the MTF charts for the Canon are
amazing: at 24mm it looks better than any 24mm other than the 24TSE,
including Zeiss. If the 5D3 has a similar pixel count to the D800, though,
they are going to need that level of optical performance.

*: http://www.tamron.com/ja/news/2012/0206.html

I'm not sure how useful stabilization is in this range. My experience is
that at 1/30, one gets a lot of people shots that are trashed by subject
motion. I suspect that Canon may have called this one right. PJ types can't
afford that sort of thing and will bring their flashes along, landscapers
will bring their tripods. Still, if it allows shooting at 1/15, that could
leverage the reasonable speed of the lens and the speed of the sensor for
travel shooters.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

In article , Bruce
wrote:

I like selling Sigma lenses. The profit margin is the highest of any
brand and they sell well. Externally, they appear well made and most
buyers trust the magazine review they read before buying rather than
the evidence of their own flawed images. The return rate is the
highest in the business - but who cares, when they sell well and
deliver huge margins?

lensrentals.com has extensive repair data from lenses they rent which
shows sigma to be extremely unreliable. for instance, the sigma
120-300mm had a 90% failure rate. they don't carry as many copies of
that lens so it's no longer on more recent charts, and they no longer
carry a sigma lens at all if there's an alternative manufacturer's lens
covering the same range (i.e., no sigma 70-200 since nikon/canon make
one).

http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2008.09.20/lens-repair-data-10

they also used to have a page about how so many of their brand new,
never used sigma lenses failed out of the box and how sigma refused to
fix them, citing 'user damage.' that page is gone, and as far as i can
tell, sigma threatened them.

John A. wrote in
:


It's not needed! With ISO capabilities where they are now. An f4.0
would be just perfect. For about 1/3 the cost. But neither Canon nor
Nikon are willing to release one that matches the quality of their
f2.8 stuff.

Unless you want that aperture range for more choice of DOF.


Well, there is a limit, Nikon once made a 300mm f2.0. Not any more.

Doug McDonald wrote in
:

On 2/9/2012 1:23 PM, John A. wrote:

Canon's first retaliatory shot is an upgrade of their 24-70mm f/2.8
full-frame walking around lens. If you believe B&H, the price of
the new lens comes in at almost twice the price of the old one. And
it doesn't even have the image stabilization that rumors had
predicted. If the price point of the 5D3 is comparably enriched
(relative to the 5D2), there's probably no way I'm going to be able
to afford one.

$2300 for an f/2.8 walker?!

It's not needed! With ISO capabilities where they are now. An f4.0
would be just perfect. For about 1/3 the cost. But neither Canon
nor Nikon are willing to release one that matches the quality of
their f2.8 stuff.

Unless you want that aperture range for more choice of DOF.

I do not understand the lack of IS on a 70mm lens likely
to be used on a 7D or 7D-pixel-sized full frame! It is
incomprehensible. And at $2300?? Absurd.

Doug McDonald


I don't know why any lens, short of a really wide-angle lens that doesn't
have I.S. Maybe it's why the shoot 8-11fps, so at least some shots are
sharp?

On Thu, 9 Feb 2012 12:37:41 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
wrote:
:
: "Robert Coe" wrote in message
: ...
: On Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:43:10 +0000, Bruce wrote:
: : Robert Coe wrote:
: : While we Canonians continue to sit here and wonder whether there will
: : ever even be a 5D3. And whether we can afford one if there is. :^|
: :
: : The Canon EOS 5D Mark III is imminent.
: :
: : It is just that Nikon got their (D800) retaliation in first. :-)
:
: Canon's first retaliatory shot is an upgrade of their 24-70mm f/2.8
: full-frame walking around lens. If you believe B&H, the price of the new
: lens comes in at almost twice the price of the old one. And it doesn't
: even have the image stabilization that rumors had predicted.
:
: The list price in Japan is only slightly more (5%) for the new one than the
: old one. As I've mentioned before, the dollar is only about 2/3 the value it
: used to be, so an object that has seen no price inflation in Japan will be
: 50% more expensive in the US.
:
: If the price point of the 5D3 is comparably enriched (relative to the 5D2),
: there's probably no way I'm going to be able to afford one.
:
: Canon has been insistent on manufacturing their non-entry-level bodies and
: lenses in Japan up to now. That may bite them in the arse. Hard.
:
: $2300 for an f/2.8 walker?! The mind reels. Maybe the very absence of IS
: hints that Canon considers it a specialty studio lens that will almost
: always be used on a tripod-mounted camera. If so, maybe they'll keep the
: old 24-70 in production for a while. Do you have any prediction on that
: score, Bruce?
:
: Both are still listed on their web sites, but the price difference is so
: small that no one will be interested.
:
: Despite the monster front element size the new lens is almost 150 gm
: lighter. If the IQ is closer to primes, it might be interesting here (where
: my walk-around kit is currently all non-Canon: Zeiss 21, Voightlander
: 40/2.0, Stigma 70).
:
: A month ago I probably wouldn't have cared; FF was the farthest thing from
: my mind. But now there's talk of blowing up some of my images to fit the
: side of a good-sized truck, and my 7D and 50D seem marginal for that
: purpose.
:
: Yep. 5D2, prime at f/8 on a tripod, convert with no sharpening, upsample,
: and sharpen to taste and you'll be way happier than with a 7D. Even more so
: with a D800. ROFL.

But as I sit here patiently awaiting Canon's expected announcement on the
28th, the auguries aren't good. All rumors seem to suggest that the 5D3 (or
5DX or whatever it's called) will be painfully more expensive than the D800,
with at best comparable capabilities. And Canon's new FF lenses appear
oriented towards the 1DX, with no consideration given to keeping the price
reasonable. The 5D2 has become affordable, but its rudimentary (by today's
standards) autofocus makes it a poor event camera, good as it may be for
landscapes and portraits. So maybe I'll scrap the FF notion and get another
7D. The 7D has pretty good AF, and my 17-55 walker has proven quite
satisfactory, once I got the AF microadjustment properly set. If I actually do
need more MP to get pictures for the trucks, maybe I'll rent a 5D2 or a 1Ds.

A 7D Mark II has been rumored, but most seem to think it's far in the future.
More AF points would be nice; but IMO what the 7D needs more than anything
else is a usable (i.e., Nikon-like) auto-ISO capability. (Wouldn't you think
they could fix that in firmware?)

Bob