Forums
New posts
Articles
Product Reviews
Policies
FAQ
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Digital Lifestyle
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography
Is fast glass with image stabalizing redundant?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Village Idiot" data-source="post: 1142288" data-attributes="member: 29446"><p>Price. The difference between the 70-200 f/4L and MKI f/2.8L IS and non IS is about $500-$600. </p><p></p><p>Canon has:</p><p>EF 70-200 f/4L - $636</p><p>EF 70-200 f/4L IS - $1210</p><p>EF 70-200 f/2.8L - $1300</p><p>EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS - $1899</p><p>EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII - $2269</p><p></p><p>Where as Nikon's only current 70-200, is their f/2.8 VR (IS equivalent) which retails for $2149. Canon has more choices and that opens up more potential customers. They could choose to discontinue all but the 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII, but why would they do that when people are still purchasing the other lenses?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Village Idiot, post: 1142288, member: 29446"] Price. The difference between the 70-200 f/4L and MKI f/2.8L IS and non IS is about $500-$600. Canon has: EF 70-200 f/4L - $636 EF 70-200 f/4L IS - $1210 EF 70-200 f/2.8L - $1300 EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS - $1899 EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII - $2269 Where as Nikon's only current 70-200, is their f/2.8 VR (IS equivalent) which retails for $2149. Canon has more choices and that opens up more potential customers. They could choose to discontinue all but the 70-200 f/2.8L IS MKII, but why would they do that when people are still purchasing the other lenses? [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Digital Lifestyle
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography
Is fast glass with image stabalizing redundant?
Top