If you buy the GX8 at BHphoto (Click here) you get a $300 off and a special bundle deal too: Add the Panasonic 25mmf /1.7 lens for $50 only! Click on the green “Build Bundle” button to see the lens bundle deals!
More deals:
[shoplink 56557 ebay]$520 off on the brand new Panasonic 35-100mm X lens (Click here)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 56558 ebay]$350 off on the brand new Panasonic 12-35 X lens (Click here)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 56561 ebay]Silver E-M5II for $749 (Click here)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 56560 ebay]Black E-M5II for $749 (Click here)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 56562 ebay]GH4 for $1,069 (Click here)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 56596 ebay]LX100 for $589 (Click here)[/shoplink].
Panasonic US launched a new rebate on the GH4. You get it now for $1,297 at Amazon and Bhphoto. And the latter also gives you an extra $50 gift card and other free extras.
36 Responses
Deal no mas. The body is back up to 1199.
Hey admin, delete this headline news of yours. It’s misleading now. Price has changed to under 1200 (body only) Unless, of course, you really like to push the ’43 rumor’ slogan… then there’s nothing to see here.
Now, $50 for 25/1.7 is the right price for m43 lens like this (given that Canon 50/1.8 STM with 4 times bigger image circle is $119).
Just set the prices right, morons in Oly and Pana! 25/1.8 and 25/1.7 should be $99! 45/1.8 and 42.5/1.7 should be $149!12-35/2.8 should be $399, 12-40/2.8 $449. 35-100/2.8 should be $599, 40-150/2.8 should be $799. Then people will buy, both the lenses and cameras for them!
I wonder how many of those lenses you own? MFT is fortunate to have some of the sharpest constant aperture standard zooms in any format. The Oly 12-40 and the Pana 12-35 are outstanding and would cost over $1500 on any other format. Sony doesn’t even offer a f/2.8.
The 42.5 f/1.7 is a bargain for the images it produces. And the Oly 45 can be had for well under $200. The Sony FE eq is $1000.
I agree on the 25/1.7 being priced closer to $120-150, and it looks like panasonic is going that route. It should be the system’s nifty fifty.
Sony actually does offer f/2.8, for its APS-C A-mount cameras. 16-50/2.8 costs $600 in kits or off kits. Because 12-40/2.8 is like 16-53/3.5 for APS-C, it has lower value and should cost less than that (see my price given). There are even cheaper lenses, Tamron SP AF 17-50/2.8 XR Di II LD is $499, Sigma 17-50/2.8 EX DC OS HSM is $469, all for APS-C with SLR flanges for which producing wides is more expensive (they all have much more glass to reflect that and bigger coverage).
The Sony 16-50/2.8 is $800 at BH. That is the price. On par with Oly 12-40/2.8. The others are third party lenses.
“Because 12-40/2.8 is like 16-53/3.5 for APS-C, it has lower value and should cost less…”
Haha. In terms of DOF, ok. Go to a car dealership and tell them you will probably only drive that new car on surface streets, and you demand a discount!
One thing you equivalency nuts always forget is that lens aperture is a mathematical derived number that can care less about the sensor it is mounted to.
In every term coming from amount of light captured (including shot noise and higher OOF blur produced by extra light coming from OOF areas, and amount of glass needed to capture that light) f/2.8 for m43 is approximately equal to f/3.5 for APS-C. It just is. Educate yourself.
Sure. And an iPhone f/2.2 is actually an f/16, and making the m43 a sensor square in the largest dimension instead of a rectange would make the f/1.7 an gather light like a f/1.2 …and cropping a FF photo changes the exposure.
You should go into an Apple store and tell them you’ll pay no more than $300 for the iPhone 6s because it’s actually an f/16 in “total light gathering blah blah blah”. Maybe make on offer on an Oly 12-40 on eBay. Tell them it’s really an f/4 and you’ll pay $499 max.
Cite the “natural law” and your photography “education” from trolling photo blogs.
iPhone is a smartphone, not camera. A camera in it is practically free.
The value of a camera system to the customer is not solely derived from the number of photon it captures per unit time.
On the latter, the photophysics, I agree with you, but the former is much more complex. CN’s example of the iPhone is quite good. Samsung is an example where things went the other way, and also shows that the situation is much more complex than you make it out to be. Their camera system basically didn’t sell at any price, even though it collected the “right number of photons” and their lenses were quite good.
On the other hand, the idea of offering a really cheap system isn’t completely crazy, either. But im not sure there is enough market opportunity left for such a system. Eventually canikon will fill this gap. Not quite like you imagine, but to some extent. And then times will get tough for m43 and fuiji X, and maybe even for Sony.
Sadly, that $800 16-50/2.8 does not perform any better optically on a 24MP sensor than the $900 Olympus 12-40mm does on a 16MP M4/3 sensor. It is marginally sharper in the center, and significantly worse at the edges and corners, and has worse aberrations.
http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/730-sony1650f28?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/m43/862_oly1240?start=1
You get what you pay for. Very, very few APS-C lenses outresolve their M4/3 counterparts. You need to step up to FF before you’re going to get a real resolution advantage.
Sorry, I’m going to continue to call you on your garbage, because it’s not reflective of the real world.
(That Tamron 17-50/2.8, by the way, is outresolved by the Panasonic kit lens when both are tested on a 12MP sensor…)
http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/386-tamron_1750_28_sony?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/olympus–four-thirds-lens-tests/414-pana_1445_3556?start=1
Quite a contradiction to have any sort of desire for a given piece of gear from a company presumably run by morons.
As for how those lenses should be priced, there is unfortunately no natural law. Sales goal, maybe.
There are natural laws, laws of economics. For example, in a normal competitive market (with the rare exception of Veblen goods, which no Panasonic/Olympus etc is), you cannot offer less value than competition and expect competitive sales.
And the fact that some engineers do a good job does not mean that morons setting non-competitive prices are not ruining value of their work.
The GX8 is the #1 mirrorless seller on Amazon. Not sure if your “natural law” is being observed.
It got there diring the $899 (+$50 for the lens) sale, temporarily. It is #2 already, only a few hours after the sale ended (Amazon sales ratings are moving averages). At its normal price, it never been even in top #20.
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Mirrorless-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3109924011
It was the #1 seller last week before the sale.
BS. It is #6 already, behind all kinds of a6000 as usual. And keeps falling, it is still #6 because of the sale. When the sale time get out of the running average range, it will not be even in top 20 again (unless they have another sale).
Well, if you think that they are violating some economic laws and that somehow it goes against human right, go ahead, sue them.
You do not make any sense, Jules. They are not violating any economic laws (it is impossible to violate any natural laws), they just seem not to know or ignore them, and it hits them in the pocket.
You ought to be able to tell when I am not trying to make sense, at least on a first degree. No need to lecture me on natural law. Speaking of not making any sense:
Your thesis about the worth and value of their gear, which is not obvious, is being passed as an argument. It’s called begging the question.
Maybe Panasonic and Olympus knows a thing or two about realistic sales figure given several price fork scenarios, cost involved in R&D, quality control and the kitchen sink. This is all vapor talk, I don’t have any insiders. But I do believe that you don’t have any more clues than I do. By that, I too can check the price of Canikon, Sony and all others. Still doesn’t tell me the whole story.
Add to this that that Canon lens is actually corrected optically, and hence will be much more expensive.
Mirrorless was a brilliant marketing concept by manufacturers who tried and failed in the DSLR space (Sony, Olympus, Fuji) to then create “innovation” by replacing the reflex viewing system with a little TV, and convincing customers that this was “the future.”
This was brilliant because taking out the mirror and prism finders saved a lot of cost, in terms of complex and pricey components, assemblies, manufacturing. The cost to the manufacturers was reduced, but not the sales price. Since cost reductions were not passed on to the customer, there was more margin for the manufacturer.
Add to that: Lenses for mirrorless could now be corrected in firmware. This meant a huge cost savings for the manufacturers, since the lenses no longer had to be optically corrected, which is pricey, pricey, pricey, using more components with more complex manufacturing. Again, brilliant- cost savings, plus keep the price high.
So that Canon lens had to deliver true optical quality, so justifiably cost more. The actual cost of MFT lenses should/could be much less than what they are launched at.
It is a brilliant innovation, specifically because it “saved a lot of cost, in terms of complex and pricey components, assemblies, manufacturing.” and also provided a lot of features an optical viewfinder and separate AF system simply cannot do. But the same moronic (mis)management which made the companies fail in DSLR market does the same again, and incorrect pricing is just one of the epic fails.
In the end, Canon Rebels and its lenses are so popular specifically because Canon does not overprice them, markets them properly and gives the most important features customers actually want (including proper AF-C even in cheapest models absolutely required by customers to shoot their children playing sports – contrast it with Olympus which has proper AF-C in exactly ONE camera at the top of the range and still grossly overpriced 2+ years later), not because Canon cameras are superior technically.
Good god man… that 50mm has been printed by Canon for decades. They have more than recouped any and all R&D from that lens plus, Canon likely has, at miminum, an order of magnitude more potential buyers for their stuff. Canon has economies of scale + manufacturing the same product for decades = a good price.
50/1.8 STM is BRAND NEW. Canon DOES have economies of scale for this lens – precisely because it is priced to sell in truckloads. Overpriced stuff has marginal sales, so R&D (very very cheap for a lens like 25/1.8 m43, it is not a rocket science) has to be distributed between very few copies. BECAUSE it is overpriced.
When can I buy the PeeVee line of bargain cameras and lenses?
The Olympus 25/1.8 has 9 elements in 7 groups, and 2 aspherical elements. For a similar level of optical complexity in FF land, you can step up to the $1600 Nikon 58/1.4, or perhaps the $1400 Canon 50/1.2.
All of the lower end FF lenses are far simpler in design and construction, largely based on the 6- or 7-element double gauss designs originating in the 19th century and developed extensively in the 60s. Almost none have any “special glass,” which pushes up costs.
What’s that? It seems making a sensor 1/4 of the size resolve 3/4 as much detail is difficult, perhaps. It’s not rocket science, but it is optical science…
You did not just compare FF 50/1.2 for m43 25/1.8, did you? Sheesh. Amount of glass in 25/1.8 is very much comparable to 50/1.8 STM.
I’m comparing the optical designs, not what the lenses can do. Which is what I said in the first place.
And again, you’re totally wrong. The 50/1.8 STM has 6 elements / 5 groups. No aspheric elements. No high refractive elements. It’s about as simple as a modern lens can be from an optical design point of view. It’s not like we’re shooting Tessars anymore on digital…
Pany deals might have gone but if you are up for Oly, the link above for EM5MII, silver model is $699 now (not $749 as shown) as compared with $899 on Amazon / B&H
You are pretty stupid, evidently.
So did this deal go away already? Looks like it. But the screen shot with this post shows “Offer Ends Nov 20.”
$899 is a much more realistic price for the GX8 body. $1199 seems overpriced. I doubt Panasonic is selling many of them at $1199.
$999 for the GX7 was too expensive, it’s about right for the GX8.
I walked into B&H and bought a GX8 a few weeks ago before there were any of these deals. The $899 thing is gone, but possibly picking up a 25mm f1.7 seems like a no-brainer to me.
I’ll call and see if they’ll honor the deal since I purchased so close to when this deal was listed. Fingers crossed.
Despite the $300 discount plus the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 offer having lapsed very shortly after this thread was started, this thread has not been updated even after several post indicated that the offer is no longer valid as the thread remains a very effective click-bait for readers to click through to BH Photo. While this resulted in a lot of click-through to BH Photo which benefitted this site, this was a time-wasting effort for the readers.
I support this site by clicking on the ads as well as starting my purchase from here but what I see happening on this thread is quite disappointing as it promotes the interest of this site at the expense of the reader rather than to the benefit of the reader as well. A recent thread in sonyalpharumors promoting the lame Zeiss 16-70mm has the same effect..
I hope that Admin will change this approach in generating revenue from its readers. Ideally, visiting and clicking on this site will be a win-win situation for the rumor website and its readers. Promoting the interest of this site at the expense of the reader will work up to a point before the readers wizened up and stop supporting this site.
I saw this add as soon as it was posted and never did find the discount. Maybe I need to shift my computer clock to the moon timezone. I don’t know if it’s bad reporting or what but it doesn’t reflect good on B&H, the manufacturer or this site. It’s frustrating to try to be responsible to your pocket book, find the equipment that will work for you and spend your time chasing false leads. Just another reminder to keep rumor down to murmur Nothing to shout about here.
The discount was there. It was removed sometime late yesterday, but those who called to remind B&H that their wording seemed to indicate the price was good through the 20th got the discount for the camera.