Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

[marius]

It's a back (bad) focus. The focus is not on the flower in the middle (it's behind it).
Strange for a sample, though.

here it's a full size sample:
EOS 5D Mark Ⅱ, 70 mm, 1/12 sec, F/5.7, ISO 100

full size:

I don't know u guys but i think it's pretty soft for stopped down aperture!

[jordanbstead]

It's a back (bad) focus. The focus is not on the flower in the middle (it's behind it).
Strange for a sample, though.

here it's a full size sample:
EOS 5D Mark Ⅱ, 70 mm, 1/12 sec, F/5.7, ISO 100

full size:

I don't know u guys but i think it's pretty soft for stopped down aperture!

Note the image was shot at 1/12th of a sec. Hardly a good test if not shot on a tripod with a shutter release and mirror lockup engaged...

[RedEye]

If you don't mind, where was see side photo withe Church in the background taken?

Thanks,
Red

[alfeel]

If you don't mind, where was see side photo withe Church in the background taken?

Thanks,
Red

I'm sorry but I don't know, i took that sample on the canon korea website!

[waving_odd]

here it's a full size sample:
EOS 5D Mark Ⅱ, 70 mm, 1/12 sec, F/5.7, ISO 100

I don't know u guys but i think it's pretty soft for stopped down aperture!

here it's a sample of the brand new 24/2.8 IS, and it's way sharper!
EOS 5D Mark Ⅱ, 24 mm, 1.61 sec (yep, this IS works well), F/11, ISO 100

You're comparing sharpness of f/5.7 (and sort of close-up focused) to f/11 (focused to infinity for landscape)?   

[robbysalz]

Suddenly I'm not too worried about their announced price for the II. How long before we start seeing prices drop on the lens after it's released?

[sheedoe]

^  I don't know where amazon gets their "list price" from, but I'm guessing its not from this planet. I would not make any predictions on prices based on amazon's list price.

[scubasteve03]

^  I don't know where amazon gets their "list price" from, but I'm guessing its not from this planet. I would not make any predictions on prices based on amazon's list price.

It comes from canon. Thats the actual price set by canon for it's MSRP. Just like the 24-70  posted above. The MSRP for both 24-70s are within $100 of each other. The 24-70 is very old ad that's why the prices are down so low. The same thing with the 70-200 mk ii. That's what canon gives as the MSRP.

[sheedoe]

^  I don't know where amazon gets their "list price" from, but I'm guessing its not from this planet. I would not make any predictions on prices based on amazon's list price.

It comes from canon. Thats the actual price set by canon for it's MSRP. Just like the 24-70  posted above. The MSRP for both 24-70s are within $100 of each other. The 24-70 is very old ad that's why the prices are down so low. The same thing with the 70-200 mk ii. That's what canon gives as the MSRP.

Where are you getting this information from? You can check Canon's website for their MSRP.  http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup

[mackguyver]

According to dpreview.com's press release from September 24, 2002, the original 24-70 was $2100 at launch:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2002/9/29/canonef2470l

Taking inflation and currency valuations into account, that's not so bad.  Unfortunately early adopters take a bath for MSRP - just ask any 70-200 2.8 IS II or 24mm 1.4 II buyers out there...

[sheedoe]

So how many of you paid $4000 (amazon's list price) for the 70-200mm II?

[Chuck Alaimo]

Suddenly I'm not too worried about their announced price for the II. How long before we start seeing prices drop on the lens after it's released?

My guess would be we'll see various incentives throughout the year.  $50 rebate here, $100 rebate there, buy it with ______ and get both for XX% off.  I'm betting there's several benchmarks for sales, once they start hitting those marks, that means they've paid off the R&D and new item production costs, and they won't need as much profit per individual sale. 

http://chuckalaimo.com/

[scottsdaleriots]

So how many of you paid $4000 (amazon's list price) for the 70-200mm II?

I paid $3000 for mine (which i sorta had to haggle for since the store i bought it from were selling it for like $3200 pr something, too long ago i cant remember) pretty much right at the end of 2010, but then again I didn't buy it from amazon nor do I live in the US. That's why I hate the retail price, in like 12 months it'll be a couple of hundred dollars cheaper, it's not fair!

[wickidwombat]

So how many of you paid $4000 (amazon's list price) for the 70-200mm II?

I paid $3000 for mine (which i sorta had to haggle for since the store i bought it from were selling it for like $3200 pr something, too long ago i cant remember) pretty much right at the end of 2010, but then again I didn't buy it from amazon nor do I live in the US. That's why I hate the retail price, in like 12 months it'll be a couple of hundred dollars cheaper, it's not fair!

yeah mate we take it in the butt from canon here in oz

[birdman]

Have you guys seen the MTF charts on this baby? Jeez....it looks incredible.

I actually think that R & D considered IS for this lens, but decided it would degrade IQ just a smidgeon.

And let's face it: this thing will be on a tripod for many pros anyway. If i actually needed that FL it would be on my short list. I would probably even part with my 35L to get it....if I needed the 24-70. It looks to be THAT GOOD!!