New L Series Lenses coming out with the 5D Mk3?

[Abdel Ibrahim]

I am interested in moving from my crop sensor to a full frame dslr, and am waiting for the release of the 5DMk3 along with everyone else.  I've been thinking about purchasing some zoom glass ahead of time -particularly the f/2.8 24-70, but it occurred to me that there could be some new L series glass coming out in the near future as well.  I was thinking it'd be awesome if Canon offered an f/2.8 version of the 24-105mm that commonly accompanies the 5D as a kit lens.  Has anyone heard anything about such a lens or any other new L glass coming on the market soon?  I live in Japan and have asked some store clerks, but they don't seem interested in sharing any information about new gear given that the current stock is hardly moving.

[Radiating]

I am interested in moving from my crop sensor to a full frame dslr, and am waiting for the release of the 5DMk3 along with everyone else.  I've been thinking about purchasing some zoom glass ahead of time -particularly the f/2.8 24-70, but it occurred to me that there could be some new L series glass coming out in the near future as well.  I was thinking it'd be awesome if Canon offered an f/2.8 version of the 24-105mm that commonly accompanies the 5D as a kit lens.  Has anyone heard anything about such a lens or any other new L glass coming on the market soon?  I live in Japan and have asked some store clerks, but they don't seem interested in sharing any information about new gear given that the current stock is hardly moving.

Honestly a lens like this has been something that people have been requesting for the better part of the last decade. Specifically a 24-70mm F/2.8 L IS or even better a 24-105mm f/2.8 L IS.

No manufacturer has yet delivered or announced a lens like this, despite this being the most requested lens probably in history. 

[koolman]

Here is my perspective on your comments:

The physical size of the sensors - is swiftly becoming less and less relevant, as electronics and technology progress.  Having a "FF" sensor - is much less a landmark achievement today. If you compare a 7d with 5 years ago's FF DSLR - you will quickly see that the 7d is far superior in IQ.

I believe this will become even more true in the near future - as superior small sensors will easily outplay larger sensors.

If so, I am not sure I understand the wisdom of purchasing the mark3 for $2,500 ~ just because it is FF. (unless of course you need it for your professional use right away as part of your business as a photographer)

As far as a 24-105 2.8 - Sure such a lens could be produced - however it would be a very large heavy expensive piece for it to retain both IQ and the 2.8 and the focal length. I'm not sure its business savvy to produce such a lens. The 24-105 is aimed as a convenient quality walk around lens,  not a specialty lens.

[Flake]

It's not likely that anyone will produce a 24 - 105mm f/2.8 IS L.  Even with f/4 (Which isn't too bad an aperture) the 4.4x zoom lens isn't what might be termed a stellar performer especially at the wide end, a 2.8 version would certainly not perform very well wide open.

With ever increasing MP counts lenses need to become optically better - not worse, which is why a lens like this will never be made.  Then there's the cost the size & the weight!  The current 24 - 105mm is a wedding tool, it's nice and light - enough to be hand carried for hours on end, while snapping away.

Photographers often cannot see beyond their own photography, and yet Canon Nikon & Sony all have to satisfy the needs & wants of photographers all over the world, and that can often leave some dissapointed.  My suggestion is that you buy another body and a 70 - 200mm f/2.8 IS L and then you have f/2.8 all the way from 24mm to 200mm.

[AG]

Honestly a lens like this has been something that people have been requesting for the better part of the last decade. Specifically a 24-70mm F/2.8 L IS or even better a 24-105mm f/2.8 L IS.

No manufacturer has yet delivered or announced a lens like this, despite this being the most requested lens probably in history.

Just so you don't confuse the poor OP,

Yes you can get a 24-70mm F2.8 L lens

Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8 L USM Lens
it just doesn't have IS..... YET! (patents say that it may be coming but we will see).

[gferdinandsen]

Here is my perspective on your comments:

The physical size of the sensors - is swiftly becoming less and less relevant, as electronics and technology progress.  Having a "FF" sensor - is much less a landmark achievement today. If you compare a 7d with 5 years ago's FF DSLR - you will quickly see that the 7d is far superior in IQ.

I believe this will become even more true in the near future - as superior small sensors will easily outplay larger sensors.

If so, I am not sure I understand the wisdom of purchasing the mark3 for $2,500 ~ just because it is FF. (unless of course you need it for your professional use right away as part of your business as a photographer)

As far as a 24-105 2.8 - Sure such a lens could be produced - however it would be a very large heavy expensive piece for it to retain both IQ and the 2.8 and the focal length. I'm not sure its business savvy to produce such a lens. The 24-105 is aimed as a convenient quality walk around lens,  not a specialty lens.

Comparison is not just on IQ.  What about DoF?  A FF beats crop on DoF any day of the week, and that is just physics, not technology.

What about FoV?  I can crop my 5D2 pictures taken at 50mm to look like your 7D at 85mm.  Again, that's not technology, but just old fashioned math (length times width).

Finally, given similar sensor technology, the FF will always out perform when it comes to noise and higher ISO.

Let's not start to equivate crop sensors with FF.  For all of the above, the same holds trues when comparing MF to FF, MF blows away FF.

[elflord]

Here is my perspective on your comments:

The physical size of the sensors - is swiftly becoming less and less relevant, as electronics and technology progress.  Having a "FF" sensor - is much less a landmark achievement today

DoF. Your slow zoom on a full frame has similar DoF to a fast zoom on a crop. Your fast zoom on a full frame has similar DoF to a fast prime on a crop. Your consumer primes on a full frame have shallower DoF than top of the line primes on a crop.

If you compare a 7d with 5 years ago's FF DSLR - you will quickly see that the 7d is far superior in IQ.

Not true,  the 5D classic trounces the 7D on the DxOMark.  http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_5D-vs-Canon_EOS_7D/specs

[Invertalon]

I have owned the 5Dc along with the 7D, and the 5Dc had the best IQ out of any body I have seen... Even my current 5D2. The 7D is a better body, but IQ wise, the 5Dc is king. You can't get better IQ for the price of used 5Dc bodies.

[EYEONE]

Here is my perspective on your comments:

The physical size of the sensors - is swiftly becoming less and less relevant, as electronics and technology progress.  Having a "FF" sensor - is much less a landmark achievement today. If you compare a 7d with 5 years ago's FF DSLR - you will quickly see that the 7d is far superior in IQ.

I believe this will become even more true in the near future - as superior small sensors will easily outplay larger sensors.

If so, I am not sure I understand the wisdom of purchasing the mark3 for $2,500 ~ just because it is FF. (unless of course you need it for your professional use right away as part of your business as a photographer)

As far as a 24-105 2.8 - Sure such a lens could be produced - however it would be a very large heavy expensive piece for it to retain both IQ and the 2.8 and the focal length. I'm not sure its business savvy to produce such a lens. The 24-105 is aimed as a convenient quality walk around lens,  not a specialty lens.

I don't think you are wrong regarding IQ at all. But there are other factors that come into play on someone decision to go Full Frame. For me, it's all about zoom range and DoF. The 24-70mm is designed as a good zoom range for a FF camera not a crop. It works just fine on my 7D but it's not wide enough. On a cropped body it becomes a 38-112mm lens which is just...awkward.

This affects DoF as you have to move closer to your subjects to get the same view as through a crop body.

[KyleSTL]

It's not likely that anyone will produce a 24 - 105mm f/2.8 IS L.

That is likely what people were saying in late 80's when the 35-70mm f2.8 was being made, and again in the mid 90's with the 28-70mm f2.8, and now with the 24-70mm f2.8.  Look at the progression, what makes you think it will stop?

UWA
20-35mm f2.8 (1989) -> 17-35mm f2.8 (1996) -> 16-35 f2.8 (2001)
Normal
28-80mm f2.8-4 (1989) -> 28-70mm f2.8 (1993) -> 24-70mm f2.8 (2002)
Tele
80-200mm f2.8 (1989) -> 70-200mm f2.8 (1995)

On top of that we could add the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 to UWA list, and the 35-70mm f2.8 to the Normal list.  Also, we could look further back in history with the FD mount: (24-35mm f3.5 [1979] -> 20-35mm f3.5 [1982]).  Constant aperture zooms have grown from less than 2x (24-35 is 1.46x, for example) to 5x (Nikkor 24-120mm f4).

[neuroanatomist]

I was thinking it'd be awesome if Canon offered an f/2.8 version of the 24-105mm that commonly accompanies the 5D as a kit lens.  Has anyone heard anything about such a lens or any other new L glass coming on the market soon?  I live in Japan and have asked some store clerks, but they don't seem interested in sharing any information about new gear given that the current stock is hardly moving.

It might be awesome, but it's pretty unlikely.  More likely is a 24-120mm f/4L IS to match the Nikon offering, and a revised 24-70mm (MkII), with or without IS, has been rumored for a long time. 

Store clerks would be just about the last people to know about any forthcoming products. 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Its quite possible to build a 24-105mm f/2.8 IS  zoom, but the size, weight, and price might make sales go slow.  It would likely cost $3K and be big and heavy. 

As to IQ, that can always be improved with the powerful computers today, it is possible to search thru billions of optical formulas to find a solution that just could not be found with the 1980's computers that were used for the 1990's lenses.  Its just a question of cost and weight versus the expected number of sales.

[Wrathwilde]

My Canon T-90 currently has a Vivitar Series 1 28-105mm 2.8-3.8, I would love to see something like it in a Canon L lens, it is my all time favorite walk around lens.

[GMCPhotographics]

It's not likely that anyone will produce a 24 - 105mm f/2.8 IS L.

That is likely what people were saying in late 80's when the 35-70mm f2.8 was being made, and again in the mid 90's with the 28-70mm f2.8, and now with the 24-70mm f2.8.  Look at the progression, what makes you think it will stop?

UWA
20-35mm f2.8 (1989) -> 17-35mm f2.8 (1996) -> 16-35 f2.8 (2001)
Normal
28-80mm f2.8-4 (1989) -> 28-70mm f2.8 (1993) -> 24-70mm f2.8 (2002)
Tele
80-200mm f2.8 (1989) -> 70-200mm f2.8 (1995)

On top of that we could add the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 to UWA list, and the 35-70mm f2.8 to the Normal list.  Also, we could look further back in history with the FD mount: (24-35mm f3.5 [1979] -> 20-35mm f3.5 [1982]).  Constant aperture zooms have grown from less than 2x (24-35 is 1.46x, for example) to 5x (Nikkor 24-120mm f4).

Canon did make a prototype 24-105mm f2.8 some years back. It was very big and heavy. It was rumoured to be the size and weight of a 70-200/2.8 and was dropped becuase it was felt that it was too big and heavy for it's focal range. Maybe things have changed now? Who knows?

[wallybarthman]

It's not likely that anyone will produce a 24 - 105mm f/2.8 IS L.  Even with f/4 (Which isn't too bad an aperture) the 4.4x zoom lens isn't what might be termed a stellar performer especially at the wide end, a 2.8 version would certainly not perform very well wide open.

The closest to this lens is the Tamron SP 28-105 f/2.8 lens.  I owned it for a brief period of time - but it was simply unwieldy to use.  82mm filters and just huge.  Tamron has stopped making it and replaced it with a 28-75mm f/2.8 that is outstanding.