UK lens pricing

[stroberaver]

I often find myself coming up against the limits of my lenses these days - although I have a lot to learn with regards to creative and interesting compositions, I'm at the stage where I really want to make a bit of pocket money. I'm involved with pictures for my local gym and feel like I'm gravitating towards events and indoor photography at the moment. But my glass just isn't good enough. I have an 18-70, 50/1.7, Sigma 70-300, and Tamron 90.

The 18-70 is, as I'm sure everyone knows, pretty damn slow at f/5.6 for most of it's range, and is soft towards the long end. The 50/1.7 is nice but is noticeably lacking in contrast compared to the others (perhaps a Sony 50/1.4 would improve this with it's better coatings) and doesn't have the zoom versatility that you need when you don't have the freedom to take steps forwards or backwards. The Sigma 70-300 hunts terribly in lower light and has no focus limiters or anything to help it. The Tamron is easily my best quality lens (optically) but also focuses slowly, hunts, and has no zoom.

Top of my list would be a 70-200 SSM. Yes, it's heavy, and looks rediculously disporportionate on a little A100, but it has the brightness and focal range that I find myself yearning for.

But jeez... the price. I can understand paying for quality. I don't expect a pro-grade lens to ever be what you would call "cheap". But I hate being ripped off, and that's what it feels like Sony UK is doing.

Does anyone (especially David K, should he read this) have any idea why the prices are so disproportionate? Is there any sort of valid reason behind it, or is it simple price gouging? I know it's even worse in Scandinavia, but a large part of that price is their taxes. I know that just because the dollar is weak doesn't make it any cheaper to manufacture the lens or to do business in the UK, but this thing sells for ~$1900 in the US. The cheapest I can find it for in the UK is ~£1600, which is ~£1360 without VAT. Even if I'm generous and allow for a more typical 1.7 USD to the pound rather than the currently very weak dollar, that's still ~$2300. Direct at the current exchange rate for the past few months, that's over $2700.

And if we're talking Sony MSRP, that's £1565 before tax, which is over $3100 at current exchange rates.

I can get the equivalent lens from Canon for only £800. Might not be quite as good as the Sony G, but is the Sony G really twice as good as the Canon? And if it can be sold in the US for $1900, why can't our pre-tax price get anywhere near that?

Everytime I look at this lens, I just get angry that Sony UK is basically giving me the finger, and telling me to go shaft myself. I'll happily invest in quality, but I won't be ripped off.


PS. Nice Photoworld mag this quarter David, enjoyed reading it. Good quality, informative and useful technical insight, as always. However I was slightly bemused to find a page dedicated to listing all the Sony Centre's in the UK. I was bemused because I've yet to find a Sony Centre that will have anything to do with the Alpha line.

[Philip]

The Sony policy on lens pricing (outside the USA) is one of the most frequently raised subjects on discussion forums (by non US photogrphers of course!). You have unfortunatly chosen one of the two worst lenses to compare with other brands (the other is the 300mm f2.8 ). Sony must, by now, be aware that their pricing policy is not doing them any favours - the new 24-70 is priced around the same as an equivelent N*k*n - a lens that it matches in performance, by all accounts. It is rumoured that the current price of the 70-200 was based on the ebay sale prices of it's Minolta 70-200 forerunner, and it is also rumoured that there may be a CZ replacement just around the corner..... However, in the meantime Tamron and Sigma are both due to offer third party options in this lens range, both of which could be good alternatives and worth investigating.

Philip

[stroberaver]

Well, you'd think Sony UK would've realised the damage their lens pricing has been doing to them. I 've even seen them taking flak for it in mainstream reviews of the A350, and it's unusual for magazine reviews to look at lenses/the system beyond the camera body and kit lenses. Sony NL can manage to do a good price with decent offers on the 70-200, so I'm guessing it's not a Europe-wide thing.

And yeah, the 70-200 and 300/2.8 are the worst lenses for price disparity. I don't know if it's just me, but the 300/2.8 always strikes me as something of a niche, specialist lens. Not so for a 70-200 - it's the standard professional workhorse. In the UK, which pro or semi-pro in their right mind would switch from Canon or Nikon to a system where the lenses they need are twice the price?

It's really frustrating as a consumer. The camera bodies are really good (I'm sorely tempted to shell out for an A700 in the coming months, even though I shouldn't financially). The lenses are, generally, pretty damn good. But the UK prices and availability are just an insult. It's pretty clear where the priority of Sony UK lies - I already have a Bravia LCD because it was the best model available, and it was at a good price.

I guess it's different for the veteran Minolta shooters - they're coming from a different perspective. But I'm not. I never had a KM DSLR, my first DSLR was a Sony. I had the choice of Canon or Nikon, but I chose Sony for the Minolta ergonomics and in-body stabilisation. But now, as I gradually learn and gain experience, I feel like I'm being ripped off for better glass. Maybe a letter to Sony UK is in order, asking them why I shouldn't switch to Canon, given the price disparity in the UK, and the price disparity with Sony in the US....

[Philip]

Another user writing to Sony wouldn't go amiss, but if my experience is anything to go by, don't hold your breath for a reply..............

Philip