After Coupon code, it brings down to $3839.20.
Cheapest price around I believe for RF 70-200 Lens.
Offer Period. This offer commences at 10:00am AEDT on 25 January 2023 and is available for a limited time only, for as long as it is advertised on the eBay.com.au site (“Offer Period”). eBay reserves the right to cancel the offer at any time.
Lens seems to be cheaper and have better glass?
The lens at f/2.8 is faster as well.
As fast as almost all zoomy bois
Thanks for letting us know. Please let us know about every deal that is irrelevant to you.
Don't post drunk
Ouch, I recall only spending about $2k on the Canon 70-200 2.8 … admittedly EF … aaaaand nearly a decade ago (old man yells at clouds!) … FML I'm old.. and out of the loop these days! :-)
Same, bought my 1Dx for $7k and 70-200 2.8 II for about $2k.
Now - similar price for R3 - around $7k, but what the ffffffff happened with the lenses?
It's rough that there are no other cheaper native 70-200mm f/2.8 alternatives for Canon's RF mount.
I hope they change their policy and open up their lens mount to 3rd party manufacturers for budget conscious enthusiasts.
A cursory look at B&H's website for mirrorless lens shows the following number available:
123 Canon RF mount
174 Nikon Z mount
465 Sony E-mount
It is wild how Sony's strong uptake of mirrorless after their legacy A-mount has recovered their photography product lines. DigiDirect's eBay also shows discounts for both Tamron's and Sony's 1st generation model:
$1655 Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 Di III VXD
$2439 Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS
With a Sony 10%+ cashback on CR/SB it's pretty easy to get a new Sony 70-200 2.8 GM2 for ~$2700 too (after cashback).
Are RF lenses generally more expensive than EF? Or just because they would be newer?
Usually since they're a revision of the existing EF… But also some quality upgrades maybe needed to manage the same size with different flange distance
The RF lenses are completely different to the old EF versions.
Yeah upon closer inspection, the RF version looks nothing like my EF version. Just checked and can't believe I only paid $1500 for it, albeit 7 years ago…
Some are the same such as the 3rd party ones such as Samyang.
Also, what i meant by revisions are they actually used a higher grade lense. Like the difference between Mark I and Mark II lenses for example.
Who needs this when you can use your phone camera?
….bring on the negs, ha!
You are not wrong. My DSLR + $$ lenses are mostly sitting in their bag where my phone steals the show. Can't beat phones for convenience. Most photos are for socials anyways!
If it was a 24-70 sure, but not a 70-200 2.8. Phone zooms still have a long way to go, especially in low light. Even 1" sensor cameras like the RX100 that are almost obsolete on wide angles come out way ahead at range.
and I thought Sony lenses are expensive
This lens or
https://www.carsales.com.au/cars/details/2001-toyota-corolla…
Such a dilemma…