# EF 300 & 400 f/2.8L IS II Shipping to Selected Dealers



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 25, 2011)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; margin: 70px 0 0 0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/08/ef-300-f2-8l-is-ii-shipping-to-selected-dealers/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 -50px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/08/ef-300-f2-8l-is-ii-shipping-to-selected-dealers/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/08/ef-300-f2-8l-is-ii-shipping-to-selected-dealers/"></a></div>
<strong>Woo!</strong>

Canon has announced that its EF300mm f/2.8L IS II USM and EF400mm f/2.8L IS II USM telephoto lenses Ã¢â‚¬â€œ which feature completely redesigned optical systems, the latest Canon Image Stabilization (IS) technology, new IS and AF Modes and improved build quality Ã¢â‚¬â€œ are now shipping to selected dealers.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732108-USA/Canon_4411B002_EF_300mm_f_2_8L_IS.html">Canon EF 300 f/2.8L IS II $7299 @ B&H</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/732109-USA/Canon_4412B002_EF_400mm_f_2_8L_IS.html?BI=2466&KBID=3296">Canon EF 400 f/2.8L IS II $11499 @ B&H</a></strong></p>
<p><em>thanks Guillermo</em></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## KyleSTL (Aug 25, 2011)

Excited to see reviews (and that Canon is finally shipping new stuff announced several months ago).

Edit: Not that either is in my budget (or needed for my amateur photography). Rental would be fun for a special event, though.


----------



## thepancakeman (Aug 25, 2011)

KyleSTL said:


> Rental would be fun for a special event, though.



I was thinking rental could be special for a fun event... ;D


----------



## EYEONE (Aug 25, 2011)

thepancakeman said:


> KyleSTL said:
> 
> 
> > Rental would be fun for a special event, though.
> ...



I think a rental sounds like a fun special event all by itself.


----------



## Enrico (Aug 25, 2011)

Where can I rent fun?


----------



## Shnookums (Aug 25, 2011)

I would need to sell 2 of my 400mm 2.8 V1 to buy the new V2... Unfortunately, I only have one...


----------



## markIVantony (Aug 26, 2011)

argh! why are these lenses so expensive?? I recently installed a new engine in a friends S10. We paid $2100 for a brand new GM 2.2L engine, NEW, from the local GM dealership. Think of how much metal, engineering, etc is in an engine. For the price of ONE lens, we could buy three new engines!

I do not understand :-/ The time to precision-grind glass? Umm...

LOL, I still want one!


----------



## pgabor (Aug 26, 2011)

markIVantony said:


> argh! why are these lenses so expensive?? I recently installed a new engine in a friends S10. We paid $2100 for a brand new GM 2.2L engine, NEW, from the local GM dealership. Think of how much metal, engineering, etc is in an engine. For the price of ONE lens, we could buy three new engines!
> 
> I do not understand :-/ The time to precision-grind glass? Umm...
> 
> LOL, I still want one!



Optical glass (high clarity glass) is not a cheap thing, and there's a lot of glass in these things!


----------



## Sunnystate (Aug 26, 2011)

pgabor said:


> markIVantony said:
> 
> 
> > argh! why are these lenses so expensive?? I recently installed a new engine in a friends S10. We paid $2100 for a brand new GM 2.2L engine, NEW, from the local GM dealership. Think of how much metal, engineering, etc is in an engine. For the price of ONE lens, we could buy three new engines!
> ...



Soon we will see lenses being sold by weight by karats if this glass will keep getting so expensive... or maybe this are the signs of something called monopoly, price fixing between very few players?


----------



## gmrza (Aug 26, 2011)

Sunnystate said:


> pgabor said:
> 
> 
> > markIVantony said:
> ...



The economics of the markets for super-telephoto lenses and car engines are very different.
I suspect that there is not much demand elasticity in the market for super-telephoto lenses - the people who buy them are, mostly, people who have to have them for their work, pretty much regardless of price. That means that if Canon decreased the price, there would be no corresponding increase in demand. Similarly, if Canon increase the price, there is little or no decrease in demand.

As you also imply, Nikon is literally the only other game in town, so there is no real competition. For most users of super-telephoto lenses, jumping ship from Canon to Nikon or Nikon to Canon is not really an option, so Canon and Nikon don't really represent competition to each other. The only potential for real competition is from Sigma and friends, who haven't yet convinced professionals of the quality of their lenses.

Thus, there is no pressure on Canon to price competitively. In fact, there is a lot of incentive for Canon and Nikon to mirror each other's behaviour - notice that I did not say "collude". Even without active behind-the-scenes collusion, Canon and Nikon will closely track each other's behaviour and will only make a break when there is a real strategic advantage to be gained. It's a bit like the tactics employed in cycle racing.


----------



## -zero- (Aug 26, 2011)

Don't forget that the price of a lens element increases exponentially with its diameter, kind of what we see with FF vs APS-C sensors,

and the front element on those monsters... well they are monstrous.

but that doesn't explain the price difference between version I and II so this whole post was kind of useless 

maybe those fancy coatings and fluorite elements play a role in the price increase


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 26, 2011)

Prices will drop once the early adapters have their lenses and sales slow down. Its always this way with new lenses and bodies.

However, we will never see the prices of the previous version.


----------



## canonmonster (Aug 26, 2011)

Price will not go down, look at the 800mm 10500 to 14000.
http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/canonmonster/5173637516/sizes/m/


----------



## pedro (Aug 26, 2011)

Well, then I'd say: big lenses first, big bodies 1D(whatever) first, 5Diii after X-mas? So Canon are ready for the pro to get aquainted with their new gear...


----------



## AG (Aug 26, 2011)

pedro said:


> Well, then I'd say: big lenses first, big bodies 1D(whatever) first, 5Diii after X-mas? So Canon are ready for the pro to get aquainted with their new gear...



Id say if they are going to release the 5D3 it will be before XMAS to capitalise on the holiday sales.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Aug 26, 2011)

gmrza said:


> The economics of the markets for super-telephoto lenses and car engines are very different.
> I suspect that there is not much demand elasticity in the market for super-telephoto lenses - the people who buy them are, mostly, people who have to have them for their work, pretty much regardless of price. That means that if Canon decreased the price, there would be no corresponding increase in demand. Similarly, if Canon increase the price, there is little or no decrease in demand.


I share your suspicion! I do think, however, that this theoretical analysis somewhat ignores the potential for great differences in technology requirements on pricing and also the impact of the used (or the currently satisfied) markets on that overall demand: Consumer surplus is actually quite high in this market. You get a lower price, you get a lot more bang for your buck. The real point where economic elasticity factors in is where it affects the producer, not the consumer. Part of the reason I'm on the EOS system, after all, is because of the large list of not only EF lenses but third party lenses available as well. Many people are "locked in" to the EOS system (or with Nikkors) but Canon cannot realistically get away with being seen selling lenses similar to their competitors at a price far above, unless there is some specific justification - and even then, most people will save their money and make do with something slightly less sophisticated (assuming that fast autofocus and great sharpness are standard features in these lenses, which they are).

There isn't much wiggle room for either manufacturer to sell new lenses at not just lower prices but also at lower quality, for lenses specified similarly - but reducing the price of these lenses will help them out in the price wars and would help them make sales to upgraders. A lot of pros will probably be very skeptical about their need for the new lenses - I'd just about expect weight considerations to be as big a selling point for many as the slightly-refined optics, since you would have to blow a tiger print up to a rather silly size or have to crop severely to start benefiting from that extra resolution - and the old lenses still get you most of the way there. This is where things are getting iffy for the manufacturers - launching the top-end lenses certainly is an investment in their lineup for the next few (or however many years), not an expectation that the economy is going to rebound joyously and people will rush to dump their old lenses on the market. Realistically, I would expect that the older lenses will continue to be used as long as possible by many pros.

A car engine may be highly engineered but it was only recently that manufacturers started paying serious attention to some of the most expensive engineering projects centered around fuel efficiency. Their economies of scale allowed them to basically ameliorate all of the front-end costs and cut out inefficiencies related to actual production.

The high-performance lenses don't benefit from such exceptional economies of scale. But knock down the price of car engines (cars specifically) and lenses and you will always sell a lot more of them; they're desirable items.


----------



## dr croubie (Aug 26, 2011)

markIVantony said:


> I do not understand :-/ The time to precision-grind glass? Umm...



Don't forget the time to actually grow the fluorite crystals before grinding. The 1200 f/5.6 allegedly took nearly a year to grow the crystal for each lens. The fluorite lens in the 400 f/2.8IS mk1 doesn't look nearly as big, but i wouldn't be surprised if it took a few weeks to grow...


----------



## UncleFester (Aug 26, 2011)

The 300 is backordered already.


----------



## jvirta (Aug 27, 2011)

Nobody seems to remember one big thing that affects prices; inflation!

Canon EF 400/2.8 L IS USM was released back in the 1999, let's say (because I didn't find the actual figure) it was $ 7,999 as it is it's current msrp.

If you add the US inflation to that price from 1999 to 2011, it would be $10,847.24.
Not that far away from the mark II lens that is currently selling at $11,499. Only 650 US dollars difference!


----------



## Sunnystate (Aug 27, 2011)

Great, everybody seems to be eager to pay price of a small car for a lens, glad you are doing so well.

Strange thing is that the photography is probably the only high tech industry where prices are climbing with time exponentially, just compare ti with the prices of storage, memory, computers, TV sets etc.
There is more to the story and certainly some elements of the healthy free market are missing in my opinion. 

It amazes me that some users of this forum are bluntly conditioning us to accept the situation, wonder how many of you have said: "Since Nikon 200-400mm cost $7000 than, I expect Canon 200-400mm, "PLUS" 1.4 converter build in (few such a nice professionally looking screws, levers and bell shaped forms) to cost no less than $11,000.00"
Let's write similar statements hundred more times on all forums and Canon will just surprise us in to submission releasing this lens with $14,990.00 price tag, why not!


----------



## dnhjr (Aug 27, 2011)

Man! Canons big lens prices sure have gone up. Much higher the Nikons now.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Aug 27, 2011)

jvirta said:


> Nobody seems to remember one big thing that affects prices; inflation!


I usually mention inflation but not this time - you're right though, buying a new car engine isn't like buying a lens of a ten-year old design. It's appropriate though - when you pay for old technology you are getting less (compared to what is now possible) than you would have in 1999 (I know some people will disagree but I mean this in a purely economic sense, not in terms of how capable the lens actually is for users, and so on).


----------



## markIVantony (Aug 29, 2011)

A (translated) update from the Canon.jp website:
>>
*Notice of product supply EF300mm F2.8L IS II USM*

August 31 (Wednesday) to Okimashi to EF300mm F2.8L IS II USM for sale, and have gotten orders far exceeding initial expectations, the period of time, is expected to stimulate your time before delivery of the product.
We apologize to our customers that will apologize for the inconvenience you.
Today, it strives for a stable supply of products on the relevant departments, thank you as your understanding.
>>

Same for EF400mm II


----------



## Scott_7D (Aug 30, 2011)

The GM 2.2L is hardly a good example here. It's the automotive equivalent of an old EF28-90mm f/3.5-5.6 or (insert terrible, cheap Canon lens here). It is as basic and unrefined an engine you'll find these days, though it has been discontinued for 5 years or so. Your average brand-new 2-2.5L 4 cylinder costs about $5k and some, like Honda's awesome Type-R grade K20A is about $13k. 

A 400mm f/2.8 is an ultra-high performance product with low production volumes. Think of it as a Porsche GT3 or Ferrari engine. Those go for $50k and up.

Just the time taken to grow the crystals for the Fluorite elements is huge, never mind grinding and producing all the "regular" glass elements. 




markIVantony said:


> argh! why are these lenses so expensive?? I recently installed a new engine in a friends S10. We paid $2100 for a brand new GM 2.2L engine, NEW, from the local GM dealership. Think of how much metal, engineering, etc is in an engine. For the price of ONE lens, we could buy three new engines!
> 
> I do not understand :-/ The time to precision-grind glass? Umm...
> 
> LOL, I still want one!


----------



## markIVantony (Aug 30, 2011)

yes it was a poor example. I'll be sure not to make that mistake in the future.


----------

