Canon to release a new 24-70 f4 L and 35mm f2 lenses WITH IS!!!

they already have 24-105 f4. Why would anyone want lens that's more expensive and has less range?
Who with the right mind does release an F4 zoom today?
Just puzzling.....
 
optitek said:
they already have 24-105 f4. Why would anyone want lens that's more expensive and has less range?
Who with the right mind does release an F4 zoom today?
Just puzzling.....
Click to expand...

Well, it's not really that puzzling if you look at it from the perspective of someone who is already invested in the Canon system, or shoots primarily handheld (whether video or stills). To start, the lens is likely designed as a kit lens for the relatively smaller 6D, and the lens itself is lighter and smaller than the 24-105, so it will keep a very compact full-frame package familiar to those stepping up from APS-C. Also, consider that many Canon shooters already own one of the iterations of the 70-200mm zoom lens; photo/videographers may be put off doubling up their focal length when packing a bag (especially when weight & space is at a premium). Pair the incredible performance of hybrid IS with the exceptional low-light capabilities of modern cameras, and many would gladly trade 1 stop of aperture for more steady shots, especially for video, and at significantly less cost of the 24-70 f2.8 II. And as an owner and frequent user of the 24-105, I can firmly stat that hybrid IS stomps all over the 24-105's older stabilisation implementation. Finally, since it's a shorter focal range, and if the new f2.8 version gives any inclination, IQ will likely be a good bit superior to the 24-105 with sharper performance, and less distortion & vignetting at it's extreme focal lengths.

I love my 24-105 and use it probably more than any other lens, but if I owned a 70-200mm lens (I don't, so this is theoretical), I would very earnestly consider this lens. Probably just for the hybrid IS alone.
 
There is ton of optical stuff they could have worked on. Instead they spent time and resources on something redundant and unnecessary.
I pick 24-105 any day because I can get extra 35mm FL out of it.
The rest is splitting hair....
 
optitek said:
There is ton of optical stuff they could have worked on. Instead they spent time and resources on something redundant and unnecessary.
I pick 24-105 any day because I can get extra 35mm FL out of it.
The rest is splitting hair....
Click to expand...

Are you saying that you don't think this lens will be any better optically than your 24-105? When did the 24-105 come out? Wasn't it like 2004 or 2005? Doesn't it seem reasonable to you that Canon can and will make a much better lens in 2012?
 
It came out in 2008 with the 5DM2. There is nothing wrong with it. Even though the new 24-70 is (most likely) better nobody will see that or care. What they will see is that the lens is 35mm short of a 4 year old kit lens they already have
 
optitek said:
It came out in 2008 with the 5DM2. There is nothing wrong with it. Even though the new 24-70 is (most likely) better nobody will see that or care. What they will see is that the lens is 35mm short of a 4 year old kit lens they already have
Click to expand...

If there is nothing wrong with it, why do some want an updated version?

Bassman2003 said:
Like an updated 24-105!
Click to expand...

J.F.R. said:
Or a 24-105mm f/2.8 IS.......
Click to expand...

If it's better, people will see it and will care. Certainly not everyone. But certainly not "nobody." Same way that some people see the 5DIII as better than the 5DII, the same way that some people see the 24-70 2.8 II as better than the 24-70 2.8 I and...
 
On paper, it's a loser. It's even more expensive than the 24-105 f/4L IS ($1500 vs $1100). But we still don't know how good it actually is, so it's way too early for reaching any conclusions. In any case, it better be really good, or this release will be laughable.
 
I'll stick with my 24-70/2.8 because nothing beats speed. It's my most used on the 5D3 and covers most of what I shoot.
 
Donald Ong said:
Hell, why not give us a 24-200 f/2.8 IS? haha
Click to expand...

That would be impossible lens geometry, but the 24-70 f/2.8 IS shouldn't be that hard for them to do. The newest version of the 24-70 is still a great lens, but a disappointment in what we're getting in a revised lens at twice the price of it's predecessor.

Frankly... I just wish I could still buy the old 24-70 f/2.8... brand new... for what they cost a year ago.
 
MattinSTL said:
Frankly... I just wish I could still buy the old 24-70 f/2.8... brand new... for what they cost a year ago.
Click to expand...
The upside for those of us who already own the old version & might be considering the 24-70mm V2 is that the V1 is now selling used at a premium & I could probably sell my V1 for more than I paid for it a year ago.
 
The 24-105 is a very versitile lens and it is very good at all things. What I would be willing to upgrade to is a 24-105 that is great at all things - better geometry and sharper. I am sure the new 24-70 F4 will be sharper as they seem to have made great strides with lens manfacturing. We will have to see if the distortion at the wide end is better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top