Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS [CR1]

[tron]

For me, it would have to be lower than the cost of the 70-200/2.8L IS II, which is a bigger lens, with bigger elements, spectacular optics, and IS.  To get there, they'd likely have to reduce the cost of the II non IS.

+1

[marekjoz]

I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?

Introducing this lens together with high MP body will force you to use higher shutter speeds at the same time even for static objects... or simply leaving IS on
After having spent 7-9k$ for body it doesn't make a big difference to add another 500-1k$ for IS in a lens costing 2k$ itself

[kirillica]

I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?

It's about having the flexibility to go slow when there's a need.  The two new wide primes with IS - I wonder if the people using them turn IS off?  I'm betting no...

well, as I said, this possibility exists only for non-moving subjects

[kirillica]

I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?

Introducing this lens together with high MP body will force you to use higher shutter speeds at the same time even for static objects... or simply leaving IS on

how MP are connected to SS?

[marekjoz]

I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?

Introducing this lens together with high MP body will force you to use higher shutter speeds at the same time even for static objects... or simply leaving IS on

how MP are connected to SS?

If your object moves you can do nothing but increase the shutter speed anyway, but for static objects (at 100% magnification) you will notice more blur on a camera with high MPs - assuming of course you don't intend to make 800x533 photos for web from 40MPs body....

[Lee Jay]

I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?

Yes, I've shot at up to 1 second handheld with my 24-105.  In some cases, on moving subjects where I wanted the motion blur, but in most cases on stationary subjects.

[picturesbyme]

I too wonder what the price going to be ... 3-4000? 

If I would work for Canon I would package it in white boxes and advertise it as a special lens that makes your photos special in a special way.. that at the end you will feel especially special too
They might just double the price of the non IS version or just pick a number from a hat that they took from a cat... 

[cliffwang]

If it's true, i don't think it's pressure from Tamron since the Tammy IQ isn't as good as the 24-70LII

I would bet that if Canon does release this the IQ will not be as good as the mkII but will rival the Tammy at a similar price to the mk1.
Why? Because if the IQ is on par with the mk2 and with IS included, then those who bought the mk2 would be kinda disappointed and this will be prices too ridiculously high.

If they released it with the mk1 IQ but with IS, then at least for people who have IQ in mind, they buy the mk2, for those who want to do video and need IS, they buy this…

I disagree.  I bought Tamron 24-70mm VC for the VC feature.  The IQ of Tamron 24-70mm is not as good as Canon 24-70mm MK2, but it's better then the MK1 version.  That's good enough.  However, lack of IS make me go with Tamron.  IQ is not the only factor for people choosing a lens.

[candyman]

If it's true, i don't think it's pressure from Tamron since the Tammy IQ isn't as good as the 24-70LII

I would bet that if Canon does release this the IQ will not be as good as the mkII but will rival the Tammy at a similar price to the mk1.
Why? Because if the IQ is on par with the mk2 and with IS included, then those who bought the mk2 would be kinda disappointed and this will be prices too ridiculously high.

If they released it with the mk1 IQ but with IS, then at least for people who have IQ in mind, they buy the mk2, for those who want to do video and need IS, they buy this…

I disagree.  I bought Tamron 24-70mm VC for the VC feature.  The IQ of Tamron 24-70mm is not as good as Canon 24-70mm MK2, but it's better then the MK1 version.  That's good enough.  However, lack of IS make me go with Tamron.  IQ is not the only factor for people choosing a lens.

+1
And let's not forget, it is about 1000$€ cheaper than the Canon 24-70 MK2. The so called Canon 24-70 MKII with IS is just a rumor and no sign if and when it will hit the market for actual use.
The Tamron is on my short-list

[neuroanatomist]

how MP are connected to SS?

MPs are not really connected, but pixel size is, and in general, more MP means smaller pixels.  A given amount of shake means a specific amount of movement in terms of arc-seconds.  With smaller pixels, a given amount of movement covers more pixels on the sensor, which translates to more blur.  So, smaller pixels means you need an even faster shutter speed to compensate for camera shake.  1/FL is a film rule.  Even 1/1.6xFL is not enough on a high MP, small pixel sensor.

I keep on asking: why you need IS in this lens? to shoot 1/10? well, almost all "moving subjects" can do a lot of stuff within this time range, so you'll get blurred image anyway (well, with another kind of blur, but...). for non-moving subjects only?

Yes, I've shot at up to 1 second handheld with my 24-105.  In some cases, on moving subjects where I wanted the motion blur, but in most cases on stationary subjects.

Exactly.  The 24-105L IS is a greg 'walkaround' lens aka general purpose zoom.  The 24-70mm f/2.8L is great for events, etc., but not as great as a walkaround lens - because of the lack of IS. 

[vab3]

If IS is important for video, then maybe a stepper motor, too? 

[CatfishSoupFTW]

sigh, IS would be sooo great for video... but im sure it would cost an arm and a leg ... more than version 2.

not to mention i hate playing the waiting game, I bet I can wait a year, give up, buy the non is one and the BAM.. IS.

[neuroanatomist]

If IS is important for video, then maybe a stepper motor, too?

Egad, no. I'll take nice, fast ring USM, thanks...   

[Shamus1]

While I certainly don't regret upgrading to the 24-70 f2.8 II as it a super lens, AND I do hope Canon releases an IS version, I will be just a little piqued that after spend the extra increase for the non-IS version, that I will have to consider what to do on the IS one.   If both had been released simultaneously, would have just spent the extra for the IS.

[Dylan777]

I prefer 1/40 or above..."IS" is useless in this case.