Hey Folks,

I have been following the new Canon lens prices with a bit of a fixation. It seems like all of the high end lenses (like the newly announced 500 f4 and 600 f4) lenses are significantly more expensive than their predecessors - it seems to be about 3 grand more per lens. Rumor has it that the price on the 300 F2.8 will also be about that much more.

Anyway, given these recent numbers, I was figuring that the new 200-400 F4 would probably be in the 7k range. Appalled by the idea of that prospect, I decided to check out what Nikon is charging. Their 200-400 is about 6500 bucks. A solid little mint and no real savings over the Canon. I just checked the Sony 300 f2.8 and it is also about 6300 bucks.

So, it has prompted a few questions:

(1) Have Nikon lens prices also risen recently?
(2) What, outside of shear greed, could be accounting for the increase in price of these lenses?
(3) Does it make you re-assess your relationship with 3rd party lens manufacturers?
(4) Are you thinking about 'skipping out' on the upgrade for the lesser expensive older model?

Just some thoughts...

Cheers
James

1. Yes
2. From what I know the Yen/Dollar conversion is at the front of this.
3. Lucky enough that I don't need those specialty lenses. But if my living needed it, I would buy them.
4. Again, don't need those exotic long lenses, so not an issue for me.

Roman

I paid about 5100 for my Nikon 200-400 f/4 VR (2007) and now the new model that they call VR II is in the 6500 range. The new 500 VRII is around 8500.

There is a savings of about $500 if you purchase a "gray market" 500, but you forgo the 5 year Nikon warranty.
And it's next to impossible to get any of Nikon's long lenses (500 and 600) they are constantly back-ordered with 6-8 months of waiting.

I just wish the things didn't smell so good!

I wonder why we are not seeing comparable increases in the cost of camera bodies and other accessories? It seems like increased costs are associated only with the luxury end lenses. Yes? Or am I mistaken?

James

Could it be that we because replace camera bodies alot more often than we do glass so they feel the need to get more up front for that one time purchase? I also think in the past 5 years alot of big guns ( 300mm f/2.8-600mm f/4) have been purchased with the boom of digital photography and let's face it... there is nothing like good glass to make an image more than just a nice shot, so if folks are purchasing these babies, make as much money as possible?

I have a good friend that has allowed me access to her 300mm f/2.8 and good thing because since I do not make my money from my wildlife passion I do not own those big expensive lenses. And at the prices they are going to looks like I will be staying with my workhorses, 70-200mm f/2.8 and 300mm f/4, perhaps upgrading to the newer versions and maybe adding to the wide angle end.

The simple answer is that the price of skilled labor continues to increase. And very generally speaking, cameras are made by machines and the L lens are made (assembled) by hand.

Here is how they make them:

Material preparation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkWsk9rXpcU

Making the glass: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T7BDeMU_Ks

Hand assembly: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpkAWZTwqI4

Also, with the camera bodies, there is an economy of scale that you get making a million bodies versus making a specific L lens that might sell tens of thousands.