Comments on: 24-105 f/4L IS Replacement http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/ You gotta know Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:50:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Paul Smith Shoes http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-32466 Paul Smith Shoes Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:03:27 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-32466 Many people have alos become fans of <a href="http://www.newpaulsmith.com/paul-smith-shoes-c-518.html" rel="nofollow">Paul Smith Shoes</a> since they came into the market. I also one of them , I very like <a href="http://www.newpaulsmith.com/paul-smith-wallets-c-521.html" rel="nofollow"> Paul Smith Wallets </a> and <a <a href="http://www.newpaulsmith.com/paul-smith-belt-multi-stripe-100-leather-100-pewter- buckle-p-21559.html">Paul Smith Belts</a>,It designs very good. Many people have alos become fans of Paul Smith Shoes since they came into the market. I also one of them , I very like Paul Smith Wallets and <a Paul Smith Belts,It designs very good.

]]> By: Scott http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28336 Scott Thu, 08 Oct 2009 01:10:44 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28336 I'd much rather have them do 24-105 2.8 than some 20-135 4.0 I’d much rather have them do 24-105 2.8 than some 20-135 4.0

]]> By: Todd Wallace http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28237 Todd Wallace Tue, 06 Oct 2009 06:02:26 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28237 Maybe because the 24-105 is a macro lens Maybe because the 24-105 is a macro lens

]]> By: Michal http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28112 Michal Sun, 04 Oct 2009 04:35:12 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28112 Don’t see a reason for a refresh of this lens if the aperture stays the same. It’s a fine, sharp lens with little to improve. The new hybrid IS is of questionable value in a non-macro lens. If Canon really must make a new version of it so be it but I hope that the price will not increase. Don’t see a reason for a refresh of this lens if the aperture stays the same. It’s a fine, sharp lens with little to improve. The new hybrid IS is of questionable value in a non-macro lens. If Canon really must make a new version of it so be it but I hope that the price will not increase.

]]> By: Mucher http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28083 Mucher Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:44:40 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28083 28-85/4L can also covers FF cameras, x1.6 it is still a 45-136 and it can be in a lighter package than 24-105/4L as I can believe, so it would be a nice all around lense for almost everyone. Current and future sensors are so dense and low light performance is and will be so good, there isn't much point to carry a big piece of metal and glasses for this general purpose range. 28-85/4L can also covers FF cameras, x1.6 it is still a 45-136 and it can be in a lighter package than 24-105/4L as I can believe, so it would be a nice all around lense for almost everyone.

Current and future sensors are so dense and low light performance is and will be so good, there isn’t much point to carry a big piece of metal and glasses for this general purpose range.

]]> By: Jimbo http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28068 Jimbo Sat, 03 Oct 2009 20:31:51 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28068 Just noticed mucher said virtually same thing ie. 28-85Lf4. Canon are you listening?! Just noticed mucher said virtually same thing ie. 28-85Lf4.
Canon are you listening?!

]]> By: Jimbo http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28067 Jimbo Sat, 03 Oct 2009 20:30:07 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28067 Bah Can do without such nonsense. 24-70L is excellent, 24-105 is lighter and ok. What I want is a small, light 35-90L f4 with perfect optics. I'd upgrade from my 24-70L f2.8 in a heartbeat. Bah

Can do without such nonsense. 24-70L is excellent, 24-105 is lighter and ok.

What I want is a small, light 35-90L f4 with perfect optics. I’d upgrade from my 24-70L f2.8 in a heartbeat.

]]> By: Stark-Arts http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28061 Stark-Arts Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:46:16 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28061 i think you are wrong on the new IS needing more room - the 100 2.8 is minisculey larger than the older 100 2.8 i think you are wrong on the new IS needing more room – the 100 2.8 is minisculey larger than the older 100 2.8

]]> By: Stark-Arts http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28060 Stark-Arts Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:45:19 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28060 you mean bokeh or DOF - the aperture is not the same. the light is doubled plus a bit more... the real case in point is that the 135 is a better lens outside of a studio. JC you mean bokeh or DOF – the aperture is not the same. the light is doubled plus a bit more…

the real case in point is that the 135 is a better lens outside of a studio.

JC

]]> By: Stark-Arts http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/10/24-105-f4l-is-replacement/comment-page-1/#comment-28059 Stark-Arts Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:42:31 +0000 http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=2744#comment-28059 no. they are definitely talking about the range. for me I don't need it any longer but a 20-105 f4 or better yet 2.8-4 (why does no one do this anymore) would be a very useful lens. the precedent has been set to expand at the wide end. 28-70 2.8 became 24-70 2.8 - no reason that we can't get a bit wider... JC no. they are definitely talking about the range. for me I don’t need it any longer but a 20-105 f4 or better yet 2.8-4 (why does no one do this anymore) would be a very useful lens. the precedent has been set to expand at the wide end. 28-70 2.8 became 24-70 2.8 – no reason that we can’t get a bit wider…
JC

]]>