So much for overpriced Canon IS/Nikon VR lenses

[Visual Reality]

Sony announced two new lenses today along with their A900:

f/2.8 16-35mm - $1800
f/4.0-5.6 70-400mm - $1500

Excuse me? In the age of excellent Nikon 4.5-5.6 70-300 VR lenses for $400-500, what is this? More overpriced lenses from Sony?

These things better have a lubricated suction end to pleasure me in between shots for that price. And for the ladies, a battery powered vibrating shaft...

[dr4gon]

Sony announced two new lenses today along with their A900:

f/2.8 16-35mm - $1800
f/4.0-5.6 70-400mm - $1500

Excuse me? In the age of excellent Nikon 4.5-5.6 70-300 VR lenses for $400-500, what is this? More overpriced lenses from Sony?

These things better have a lubricated suction end to pleasure me in between shots for that price. And for the ladies, a battery powered vibrating shaft...

I really don't want this to continue but, are you kidding? You cant even compare it to something like that. I couldn't even find a comparable Nikon lens at Adorama or B&H for either of the two lenses (not in those specific focal ranges at least). You could have (but didn't) argue that Canon has something cheaper, but you didn't. You fail to realize that these are HIGH END lenses and not your kit lens type quality glass. These are Zeiss and G lenses with SSM...... They are equivalent to Canon L glass.

So please, compare apples to apples, leave out the lame jokes, and then we can discuss.

[Rooz]

nikons 17-35mm/ 2.8 has been a benchmark for many years now. that bar was recently raised with the 14-24/2.8. both of these lens' are gold ring product quality and arguabley the best performing WA lens' on the market; particularly the 14-24.

nikon also have an 80-400, canon have a 100-400L.

in saying that, i think VR is being a bit provocative on purpose.

[Visual Reality]

Yeah, perhaps. We all know Sony's lenses are pricey...but seriously, for those prices they better entertain me in between shots...

[DonSchap]

We really need to have a shoot out, dog gone it. The "high-priced glass follies" and see what happens. Just using system glass ... and see who's system performs, if you want justification. God knows, I've shot some real crap in my day ... and I also have shot the "good stuff."

Wait until we arm up with the current crop and then, say in December ... we shoot Christmas decorations. All sorts of scenarios ... and see what comes of it.

The investment in glass will be outrageous, no matter what system is chosen. Ring this list up!

The current SONY A900 Group:
A900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2999
CZ 17-35/2.8 . . . . . . . $1799
80-400/4-5.6 G SSM . . $1499
70-200/2.8 G SSM . . . . $1799
CZ 24-70/2.8 . . . . . . . .$1749
CZ 135/1.8 . . . . . . . . . $1399
CZ 85/1.4 . . . . . . . . . . $1299
Edit: VG-C90AM . . . . . . . . .$350

Yeah ... hot stuff, huh? SONY System total: $12,893(<- Editted total)

Sets a whole new level of fun, doesn't it, guys?

Let's use Canon's premiere Full Frame, the EOS 1Ds Mk III
EOS 1Ds Mk III . . . . . . . . . . . .$7999
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM . . . . $1450
EF 100-400/f4.5-5.6L IS USM . . $1420
EF 70-200/f/2.8L IS USM . . . . . $1650
EF 24-70/2.8L USM . . . . . . . . . $1190
EF 135/2L USM . . . . . . . . . . . .$1000
EF 85/1.2L II USM . . . . . . . . . .$1870

Canon System total: $16,579

Nikon's King of the Dance, the D3
D3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4999.95
AF-S Zoom-NIKKOR 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED. . . . . .$1499.95
AF VR Zoom- NIKKOR 80-400/4.5-5.6D ED. . . . . . $1429.95
AF-S VR Zoom- NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED. . $1629.95
AF-S Zoom Nikkor 24-70/2.8G ED. . . . . . . . . . . .$1695.95
AF DC-NIKKOR 135/2D. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1069.95
AF Nikkor 85/1.4D IF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1024.95

Nikon System total: $13,350.65

My word, that SONY sure does look expensive ... and imagine, anti-shake thrown in for free. Go ahead and tell me all about the price of a camera system, dudes. The numbers readily speak for themselves and half the Canon and Nikon lenses ... well, they sh-sh-shake ... and so does the body they are riding on.

[dr4gon]

AHHH my eyes!

(even at the sony price lol)....

For me, bottom line, they're all expensive. You can't just pick out a couple items and knit pick.

Also don, to be fair, the A900 needs a vertical grip, even then it slides under Nikon.

[DonSchap]

Like I said ... a costly system ... whatever the choice.

I would guess this thread is dead.

[Visual Reality]

Just got tired of the "overpriced in-lens stabilization" drivel about how in-camera IS means cheaper lenses.

[dr4gon]

Just got tired of the "overpriced in-lens stabilization" drivel about how in-camera IS means cheaper lenses.

Not in the pro end of the spectrum, we've established that.....

I don't know why you have to bring this up..... see trolling


I know it's saved me money.... and it's been very beneficial in many circumstances with my lenses no matter the length.

[DonSchap]

The Carl Zeiss® certification has a premium attached to it.

SONY has decided to use these "certified" lenses and that certification costs real money. Guess who pays for it?