BHphoto created that nice page to display the up to $200 savings running on A/E mount lenses. And here are all lens saving details:
E-mount lenses:
$100 off on the 10-18mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Sonystore.
$50 off on the 16-50mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Sonystore.
$100 off on the 18-200mm OSS at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Sonystore.
$100 off on the 24mm Zeiss at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Sonystore.
$25 off Sony 30mm f/3.5 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Sonystore.
$50 off on the 5omm f/1.8 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Sonystore.
A-mount lenses:
$50 off on the 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 DT at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$50 off on the 16-50mm f/2.8 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$100 off on the 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Zeiss at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$200 off on the 16-105mm f/3.5-5.6 DT at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$100 off on the 24mm f/2.0 Zeiss at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$100 off on the 24-70mm f/2.8 Zeiss at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$100 off on the 35mm f/1.4 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$25 off on the 35mm f/1.8 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
$50 off on the 100mm f/2.8 at Amazon, Adorama and BHphoto.
$100 off on the 135mm f/1.8 Zeiss at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
0 Responses
Wow, Sony. No sale price on the over price 70-200mm G2? Insane.
Why no instant savings in Europe??
awesome.
And how many pounds off? Oh, of course, you ignore the UK and Europe…
Even if they included UK and EU, they’d probably never figure out that there’re also yet other countries besides that…
Oh wait, they must know about Japan. But that’s probably it.
You know why right? Because you people are VAT 😛
Once again the continuous ridiculously high prices we have to pay in England and Europe subsidize the never ending discounts given to the good old US of A. There is no excuse for this Sony, we are sick of being the cash cow for others.
You pay those prices because you live in socialist countries with ridiculous taxes.
We pay same or higher prices in Russia.
Only US gets the discounts – and they are the richest country in the world, so they don’t even need it to begin with.
LOL. Says someone who knows nothing about the TRUTH of America.
Rich? Ha! Maybe some people. Not most.
Enlighten me. Are you from the US? If so, is the average salary for a full-time job where you live >$1000 a month?
We get the discounts because we have to subsidize the world by paying obscene prices for medicine. I’d rather pay more for gear but let all of us here get the discount on medicine!
Who would buy the CZ 135 1.8 now when they are about to update it? It should be $500.00 of but hey, Its Sony, What else can you expect from them.
CZ 135 update hasn’t been announced yet
Remember how 400 f/4 evaporated? That can happen too
Pathetic, Cannon lowers lens prices by up to $2000. Sony $200! Try harder Sony, this “sale” is a farce.
Try using percentages and don’t compare a combined Canon rebate to the of a single Sony lens. Maybe then it will make sense for you.
Wow! $100 dollars off a $1700 lens, such a deal. Not…. Stop drinking the koolaid, Sony lenses are overpriced and this lame sale does not help.
Don’t even try to change the argument. Where’s that 2000$ off Canon lens? Wow, they made a 500$ discount on a 14000$ lens! Give me a break, there’s basically one good deal on the 24-70 and that’s it.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/08/17133/#more-17133
The 2000$ arguement was not to point, but that doesn’t change the bottom line that Sony’s lenses are rediculously overpriced compared to Canon’s and “sales” don’t help much
The whole argument was about Sony’s sale being a “farce” compared to Canon’s rebates; not about pricing. Yet again going for a straw man. And even your completely different argument is nothing more than a bad generalization.
But it is. You take $100 off an already good price and you get a deal.
You take $100 over an overpriced Sony lens, you get a farce.
After the discount, the price is still inadequate to what the competition has to offer without any discounts.
I can only repeat my initial comment here, which I won’t do, as it is available above. What is so expensive about a-mount lenses and how many are actually overpriced compared to Canon ones? Let’s see how many you can name.
Sony 70-200G1 is 83.900 rubles
Canon 70-200L USM is 41.980 rubles
2x price difference
(don’t start on the Canon’s IS version – Sony doesn’t offer in-lens IS, so comparing it to IS Canon isn’t fair; we pay for IBIS when we pay for body)
Canon 16-35 f/2.8 II is 46.060 rubles
Sony 16-35 f/2.8 is 59.800 rubles
Canon 100-400L IS USM is 46.150 rubles (with IS! a non-IS version would be even cheaper)
Sony 70-400G1 is 56.990 rubles
Worth mentioning that all Canon L lenses are weather-sealed, while Sony’s aren’t. If you need weather-sealing, that’s 101.710 rubles for 70-200G2 and 80.490 rubles for 70-400G2.
Need I go on?
No need, because you won’t be able to. Is the 35mm f1.8 overpriced? Or the 85mm f2.8? Or the 16-50 f2.8? Or, the 70-300G? The 24mm Zeiss? Or, what about the Canon 24-70 that costs more than the Sony? Need I go on? You are quick to vaunt the weather sealing of the 100-400, but forget it’s an outdated push/pull design and that the Sony has a bigger range. Your “argument” is nothing more than cherry-picking. The simple fact is that your generalization about Sony lenses being overpriced is flawed.
Dont you mean “Sonny?”
Since everything’s got an extra “n” with you?
IT’S SPELLED CANON. Sound it out with me now…. C – A – N – O – N. Canon.
Canon produces photo equipment, maybe Cannon produces cannon artillery?
Then he should have said “…Cannon lowers cannonball prices by up to $2000.”
The Photokina time is almost upon us, yet there’re zero exciting rumors so far.
Either Sony is playing it close to the chest, or it’s going to be another event where they showcase E-Mount point-and-shoots.
With any luck, they’ll announce their departure from the photography field altogether.
The sooner they do, the sooner we can all put this silly distraction behind us and get back to real photography gear from Canon, Nikon and others. Sony’s gadgets have long since lost their appeal.
This would be a good move for Cannon, they might finally get a good full frame sensor from Sony.
“Cannon?” What’s that?
Oh! You mean Canon, the leading camera and lens maker.
I don’t say “Sonny”. Learn how to spell bub.
Yes, Canon with the worst sensors in the business. Lags behind cameras selling at half the price in image quality, but for a fanboy that’s ok.
That’s why the Canon 5D Mark III, being nearly 3 years old, still outperforms ANYTHING with a comparable pixel density from Sony. Color accuracy, dynamic range, and above all, noise.
5DMIII > A99
5DMIII > A7
5DMIII > A7R
5DMIII > Oh yeah…thats right. Sony only has 3 high resolution FF interchangeable lens cameras right now.
See, I’ve actually USED an A99, to see what all the hype was about. And it was just that – hype. To say it sucked would be an understatement.
Heck, I’d take a Fuji before I’d take a Sony.
Obviously nothing is lagging with Canon. If you’d ever used a 5DMIII you’d know that. But, if you want to believe that your Sony gizmos are actually photographic tools, that’s ok for a fanboy.
Only in the alternate universe bubble in which you live. Canon sensors are junk in comparison to Sony (and by proxy Nikon) and fall behind in image quality and every measurable parameter. This data has been proven and demonstrated many times. Sorry for you loss.
Canon put their red ring through your nose and pulls you around like a midget pony with a braided tail… taught you to say “nay” to all challengers. Wish they’d send someone over to clean up your krap.
I hope you are not being serious. Nothing against Canon, but where is that Canon sensor that outperforms Sony’s DR or the performance of the a7s? Comparable pixel density, lol, make your rules, then play your game.
Canon sensors are actually really good. They hold their tones really well into the higher isos
Finally a voice of reason.
^^^ Yeah obvs. not me.
SLT holds great appeal and was contrived single-handedly by Sony. It wasn’t part of Minolta legacy.
The problem is, Sony is not marketing it right, emphasizing its great advantages over a conventional DSLR, and doesn’t put any emphasis on the system alltogether, having instead switched to ‘gadgets’ of E-Mount.
You do realise though, that if Sony departs from imaging business, A/E mounts won’t just die, they will be bought by someone? Like Ricoh bought Pentax etc. or Sony itself bought Minolta?
Maybe A-Mount would be better off with a more ambitious company… say, Samsung?
They most certainly can die off. Will there be lawsuits and angry people? Yeah. Would A-mount be better off with Samsung at the helm? Yeah I think so too.
The bottom line is that Sony has always sucked when marketing their gear. They always will. So it doesnt matter if they have something good or not, no one will know about it and thus very few will care.
Very True. If Sony Would have marketed the A580 (The best APS-C Alpha Sony has produced to this day) got it on some shelves and not produced the underperforming A55(and all SLT’s After), spent all the marketing money on it, Lost their way with the SLT “technology”, And kept the 36Mp sensor for itself and put it in a true a900 replacement, And not have switched the Flash Mount, SONY ALPHA WOULD HAVE BEEN A DSLR LEADER BY NOW.
On the contrary, the desicion to differentiate themselves from Canikon by making SLTs was bold and applausible.
But they didn’t make a big PR campaign for SLT, telling people about it’s great advantages over a classic DSLR.
All people new in the end was that ‘SLT loses light’.
If they marketed SLT properly, THAT’s the way Alpha could have been a DSLR leader.
+1 about Sony’s marketing sucking a$$
I don’t think the system can just die though. Not because of lawsuits and anger, of course, but because it has value. It’s the 3rd most popular DSLR system, with lenses, patents, user base etc. – 8,5% of DLSR market, that’s worth something.
Pentax K was smaller than Sony A, and it got bought by Ricoh, and they released K3 since then, so K system is alive.
Surely Sony can find a buyer for A system.
“SLT holds great appeal and was contrived single-handedly by Sony. It wasn’t part of Minolta legacy.”
Actually, Minolta did it better by making their EVF tilt. See that “EVF” label on the back… This would be the bomb were it to have current technology applied.
http://www.ixbt.com/digimage/minolta/7i/vid2.jpg
Oh, and it had global shutter for flash sync up to 1/2000th ss.
The 16-105 is a remarkably good lens with an extremely useful range. I liked it better then the Z16-80
With a noisy, slow, and archaic focusing system from the 1920’s.
True, but a great lens.
I’m sure it’s fine for those seven or eight misguided people using Sony crap…i mean crop… cameras. Or you could just use a coke bottle and some duct tape for a lens. 😉
Lol, I had a A700….they never came out with a replacement so I went to a Canon 7d
A700 – never came out with a replacement? The A77 never existed to you? I’ve only just retired my A700 and picked up the A77-ii, it’s a fantastic replacement!
The A77 is not a replacement for the A700. Not in any way except they both have the number 7 in their name.
The A77II is the camera the A77 should have been. But its still not a replacement…
Exactly! Well said.
I used to have an A900 – in it’s day it was really something. Sony killed any future with it’s stupid SLT gimmick. The A99 is NOT a replacement either.
OK, so you don’t think it was an upgrade, or even a worthy replacement, but it is still definitely the replacement camera! I absolutely loved my A700, and can’t really fault anything said about it. I only upgraded when it fell out of my bag and the lens tore the mount off the body. Now that I have my A77ii though, for all of it’s quirks and steeper learning curve, as well as having to get to know it like I knew my A700 (and A100 before that), I have to say I’m loving it. The ‘gimmicks’ all seem pretty bloody handy so far – and there is no way that the A700 high iso is anywhere close to the high iso on the A77ii (not sure on the A77), even at ‘only’ 6400 (I shoot raw on both). Luckily I managed to repair my A700 myself to the point where everything now works except changing the aperture (it’s locked fully open now), so it will still make for a great 2nd body backup!
Not a replacement? What’s your logic there?? I’m pretty sure it’s always been classed as the replacement…
The A700’s menu and response was FAST. The A77 is extremely sluggish (even after updates)
The A700 was solidly built. The A77 grip on all 3 of the cameras I’ve had is loose. The top plate is thin and plasticy. Poor built.
The A700 had a big, bright OVF. The A77 has a dim, pixelated EVF. Additional overlays and features? No thanks.
The A700 was a photographers machine. No gimmicks. No video. No silly modes and filters and bloatware. The A77 is like a point and shoot with an A-mount.
The A700 has better image quality at low ISO than the A77. At high ISO, it’s pretty much a draw. But the A700 has a much better jpg engine.
The A700 STILL holds its value. It is going on 8 years old, but still sells for 250-300 dollars. The A77 is two years old and I’ve seen it sell for 300-400 used. Soon the A700 will be worth more than the A77.
I could go on and on, but I am tired after a long day of work.
Wow. If you liked the A700 that much. I cant Image how much you would like the A580. I don’t think you would ever buy another camera again.
Sensor envy, will it ever end?
I saved a lot more than the “deals” by not buying any. 🙂