Heads up folks, Canon lens pricing went up this afternoon.

I noticed just this afternoon that Adorama, B&H, Amazon and others raised the price of the EF 100-400 from $1360 to $1400 (after current Canon rebate applied). If you were just about ready to "pull the trigger" on a lens, better get out and look for a reseller that had not yet raised prices.


I found an article on Bloomberg.com today that speaks to what happened to the Yen:


"The Japanese yen weakened versus 15 of the 16 most-active
currencies on prospects that gains in U.S. stocks will spur
investors to buy higher-yielding assets. The results of the
stress tests, due out at 5 p.m. in Washington today, will show
JPMorgan Chase &
Co. doesn’t need a deeper reserve against losses, people
familiar with the matter said yesterday."


Reading that article, it would appear to me that prices for these lenses may remain up or go higher for awhile. There are some resellers that have not yet adjusted prices, but that may change soon. I think the big boys (Adorama, B&H, ect) were just faster on the draw due to these currency changes.


Rick

Yeah the 70-200 2.8 IS I was contemplating has jumped up $100 negating half of that rebate. The 16-35 jump $50 so I don't feel bad about paying $1450 for a couple weeks ago. It almost looks like they halved all the rebates.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"]The excuse that Canon has raised pricesso the retailer needs to increase their pricesis not totally valid.<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;"]The lenses in their inventory were purchased at the lower prices and should not increase in price until they make new purchases from Canon. Just another way the retailers are taking advantage of the rebate making them of less value to the customer.<o:p></o:p>

J&amp;R has not raised their prices as of this writing. I was able to snag the 70-200 2.8 IS for $1499. I wasn't ready to buy it but that lens at that price was too hard to pass up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob

<span style="font-family:'Arial','sans-serif';color:black;font-size:10pt;"]The excuse that Canon has raised pricesso the retailer needs to increase their pricesis not totally valid.


<span style="font-family:'Arial','sans-serif';color:black;font-size:10pt;"]The lenses in their inventory were purchased at the lower prices and should not increase in price until they make new purchases from Canon. Just another way the retailers are taking advantage of the rebate making them of less value to the customer.

---

I don't know what all the resellers deals are but some of them don't actually pay for inventory until it is purchased. So when Canon raises the prices the retailers usually have to follow suit to maintain there profit margin.

What's interesting is how many lens B&amp;H are out of stock or backordered on.

I was waiting for the rebates to come out this spring. I guess waiting for a rebate didn't work this time.


I'm not sure how this will impact sales. I can't imagine that sales will increase as the price increases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob

<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]The excuse that Canon has raised pricesso the retailer needs to increase their pricesis not totally valid.


<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]The lenses in their inventory were purchased at the lower prices and should not increase in price until they make new purchases from Canon. Just another way the retailers are taking advantage of the rebate making them of less value to the customer.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

Fact or not, the reality is that retailers often tie prices to their wholesale costs. Look at gas prices - market price goes up, street price goes up, even before the next truckload arrives. Or cigarettes, which as I understand it retailers began charging higher prices ahead of the tax increase so there was no price increase WHEN the tax hit.

Here's an interesting read on "The State of the SLR Industry 2009" from the folks over at Lens Rentals.com. This article's link has been circulating around several of the DSLR discussion boards as people try to digest what is happening to camera and lens pricing, availability, etc.


http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.04.24/state-of-the-slr-industry-2009


Rick

Keith B


I doubt that Canon will carry the inventory cost of the retailer. If so, I should open a estore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob

Keith B


I doubt that Canon will carry the inventory cost of the retailer. If so, I should open a estore.

---

Read this from above.


http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.04.24/state-of-the-slr-industry-2009


I'm sure small Joe Shmoe places don't get the credits B&amp;H will, but read the part about Wolf/Ritz and 40 million lost in lenses.

<span style="font-size: small; font-family: Times New Roman;"]Well.... I was gonna get a new lens when rebates came out.... doesn't seem as though the price is all that different now... might as well save til I can really afford it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40Doodle

"The Japanese yen weakened versus 15 of the 16 most-active currencies...."

---

When the US Dollar strengthens vs. the Japanese Yen the price of Japanese goods should go down!

Yep that fact hit me when I reading that article over at the Lens Rental site where he talked about currency differences.


Rick

Just checked the B&amp;H site, the 24-70 2.8L with rebate is now at the same price it was before the rebate. I checked some of the other lenses I have on my wishlist and it appears (to me anyway) that only the lenses that have a rebate went up. Specifically the 300mm 2.8 L didn't go up a penny. If the whole currency thing was an issue wouldn't all of there products go up the same percentage including camera bodies making that lens several hundred dollars more then it was? It sounds like a load of garbage to me. I noticed the same thing with Sandisk rebates in the past. Has anyone noticed non-rebate items prices going up?





Fred~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40Doodle

Yep that fact hit me when I reading that article over at the Lens Rental site where he talked about currency differences.


Rick
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

---

<div>Here is a quote from the article regarding the Dollar vs. the Yen. It doesn't seem like the strongest argument in the world to me but admittedly I'm no expert in international money markets!</div>


"The Dollar versus the Yen


The party line for most of the price increases has been that the buying power of the dollar has weakened significantly against the yen. This is true, the dollar dropped from 110 yen in August, 2008 to 90 yen in January, 2009. On the other hand, the dollar has rebounded to 100 yen by March, 2009. When you consider that most multinational companies hedge currency pretty effectively the change doesn&rsquo;t seem enough to justify the price increases, but I&rsquo;m sure it does contribute to them to some degree. Or at least justifies them to some degree. The Euro has had a slightly greater loss against the yen than the dollar and European prices seem to have increased more than U. S. prices, so maybe there is something to it. But Japanese prices have increased too, so maybe not all that much."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith B

Read this from above.


[url="http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.04.24/state-of-the-slr-industry-2009]http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.04.24/state-of-the-slr-industry-2009[/url]


I'm sure small Joe Shmoe places don't get the credits B&amp;H will, but read the part about Wolf/Ritz and 40 million lost in lenses.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

---

Please don't spread FUD. It's not $40M lost, it's $40M valued as an asset line item in a bankruptcy filing. Those lenses weren't stolen or destroyed, they're perfectly sellable goods. Wolf/Ritz can and does sell lenses, often at a higher price than Adorama/B&amp;H/etc. but there's no reason that they can't be sold. Wolf/Ritz can sell them at their normal pricing, sell them closer to superstore pricing and make less profit per item but move them faster, or sell them below superstore pricing at even less profit or possibly a small loss. Regardless, we the community can and will buy them (somehow). The manufacturers can still get most or all of their wholesale cost back, assuming they haven't been paid already (I suspect they're going to be slow-paid under the bankruptcy filing terms for recently-delivered stock, as it was probably sent on net terms of some form).

I just ordered canon 35mm 1.4 On 04/21 with J&amp;R even though It's been back ordered for a while on their web site and they shiped it on 04/29 and i received my lens on 05/04(standerd free shiping), pretty fast and smooth.price? $1180, age of the lens?UX0406. I'm very happy I did that. same thing happened to my 135mm 2.0 with Adorama($935 right before they raised their price and code number UX0312).I hope these information may help those who wants to buy lenses now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by peety3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keith B

Read this from above.


http://www.lensrentals.com/news/2009.04.24/state-of-the-slr-industry-2009


I'm sure small Joe Shmoe places don't get the credits B&amp;H will, but read the part about Wolf/Ritz and 40 million lost in lenses.

---

Please don't spread FUD. It's not $40M lost, it's $40M valued as an asset line item in a bankruptcy filing. Those lenses weren't stolen or destroyed, they're perfectly sellable goods. Wolf/Ritz can and does sell lenses, often at a higher price than Adorama/B&amp;H/etc. but there's no reason that they can't be sold. Wolf/Ritz can sell them at their normal pricing, sell them closer to superstore pricing and make less profit per item but move them faster, or sell them below superstore pricing at even less profit or possibly a small loss. Regardless, we the community can and will buy them (somehow). The manufacturers can still get most or all of their wholesale cost back, assuming they haven't been paid already (I suspect they're going to be slow-paid under the bankruptcy filing terms for recently-delivered stock, as it was probably sent on net terms of some form).

---

<div>


Sorry. Not spreading FUD (whatever that is). I see how my statement ending like that may have sounded like that. I should have said that is how much they claimed in the bankruptcy. My point was to direct reader to the section of the article so they could read what I was talking about, with them owing creditors for those lenses.


I know it wasn't lost and that the lenses were probably returned. My point was that the companies were still owed for the equipment. I realize the lenses were either sold off or returned.
</div>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob

<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]The excuse that Canon has raised pricesso the retailer needs to increase their pricesis not totally valid.


<span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]The lenses in their inventory were purchased at the lower prices and should not increase in price until they make new purchases from Canon. Just another way the retailers are taking advantage of the rebate making them of less value to the customer.

---

Get an accounting book and check into "LIFO" (Last In, First Out) versus "FIFO" (First In, First Out). Those are two (but not the only) different ways of accounting for the value of inventory. How a company accounts for inventory can affect the way they set their prices. (It can have a marked effect on their taxes, as well, if the prices are going up.)


By Bob's logic, if Canon offered a rebate on new lenses, then B&amp;H should wait until all the lenses in their inventory were sold before offering the rebate. Similarly, if the yen drops, then they should wait until they've sold all their inventory before changing prices. That would be a bit difficult, as they would have to track every product and change its price according to their sales, maybe on a daily, even hourly basis. Retail stores don't do that.

Fred,


I had to stand corrected on the "currency" issue and now believe this is just Canon tinkering with the prices that Dealers are supposed to show for these rebate products. I have not watched the non-rebate lenses because I wasn't interested in buying them. I've mainly watched the 100-400L since before and during the Spring rebate came out. Matter of fact, I just bought one before the prices took their latest $40 post-rebate offering jump and it should be here Wed!


This rebate/pricing thing has been a heated topic on some of the other photography forums as people have compared "Google cached" pricing to the Dealer prices for the various rebate affected products. I have no interest in beating up Dealers on this because I feel that it is a Canon produced situation. From what I can tell (having recently talked about this with one of my favorite Dealers), Canon tells the Dealers what price they want them to observe during these rebate events. The Dealers try to protest when they feel that it will adversely affect customer purchases and sometimes they get around the issue by advertising the price that Canon publicly wants to see, but then offering a lower price when you load the item into the basket or call them to ask for a "special price". I used to see this same kind of stuff in the high-end espresso machine market where Dealers were more or less forced into doing things outside the manufacturer's box to get sales done. I feel that there's plenty of stuff that goes on "behind the curtain" between Dealers and the manufacturer that are not visible to us. Sometimes people interpret it as Dealer greed when it's really being driven/influenced by the manufacturer.


I'm no expert on this stuff, but this is what appears to be going on from my perspective. Some people get mad at the Dealers for not saying (in public forum) what they are doing with pricing during these Canon rebates. From what I can tell, the Dealers are wisely keeping their mouths shut because they walk a line between the customer and Canon and have to be careful with what they say. Thats's my 50-cents worth...


Rick

<span style="font-family: 'Verdana','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 6pt;"]


<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]<span style="font-size: small;"]George,<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]<span style="font-size: small;"]You forgot one = Cost Averaging which is easier to do.<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]<span style="font-size: small;"]Most stores do not order lens that often - once every quarter, so to raise prices the week before the rebate is not manage their inventory, just taking advantage of the rebate. Not every retailer is doing this which proves my point - so we can still shop for the best deal, sometimes it is not on the internet. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"]<o:p></o:p>


<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"]<span style="font-size: small;"]Bob<o:p></o:p>