August 27, 2014, 09:24:03 PM

Author Topic: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?  (Read 18567 times)

marekjoz

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
    • marekjoz @flickr
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #45 on: August 30, 2012, 02:13:34 PM »
Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible.  So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s.  If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.
I am not talking about subject motion.  I tried to avoid taking photos in low speed and when my son is moving.  You do take many photos in low speed shoot when your subject is not moving, don't you?  I really wonder if anyone taking photos only when your subject is moving?

Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2012, 02:15:25 PM by marekjoz »
flickr | youtube | 5D2, 50 F/1.4, 24-105 F/4 L IS, 300 F/4 L IS, x1.4 II

cliffwang

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 478
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #46 on: August 30, 2012, 02:27:59 PM »
Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.

I forgot  sport and wildlife photos.  However, I think 24-70mm for sport and wildlife photos is too short.
Canon 5D3 | Samyang 14mm F/2.8 | Sigma 50mm F/1.4 | Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC | Canon 70-200mm F/2.8 IS MK2 | Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro L | Canon Closed-up 500D | 430EX | Kenko 2x Teleplus Pro 300 | Manfrotto Tripod

marekjoz

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
    • marekjoz @flickr
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #47 on: August 30, 2012, 02:43:40 PM »
Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.

I forgot  sport and wildlife photos.  However, I think 24-70mm for sport and wildlife photos is too short.

There you are anyway in most cases above 1/750s, so IS doesn't matter too much. It helps somehow in targeting through viewfinder and while panning, if it provides mode 2.
flickr | youtube | 5D2, 50 F/1.4, 24-105 F/4 L IS, 300 F/4 L IS, x1.4 II

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3906
    • View Profile
    • http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/browse
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #48 on: August 30, 2012, 02:46:16 PM »
Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible.  So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s.  If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.
I am not talking about subject motion.  I tried to avoid taking photos in low speed and when my son is moving.  You do take many photos in low speed shoot when your subject is not moving, don't you?  I really wonder if anyone taking photos only when your subject is moving?

My 2cents:
Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing  etc....has more meaning then still shooting.   
« Last Edit: August 30, 2012, 02:48:55 PM by Dylan777 »
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 400L f2.8 IS II

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13931
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #49 on: August 30, 2012, 02:52:37 PM »
Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible.  So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s.  If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.
I am not talking about subject motion.  I tried to avoid taking photos in low speed and when my son is moving.  You do take many photos in low speed shoot when your subject is not moving, don't you?  I really wonder if anyone taking photos only when your subject is moving?

Sure, I take lots of pictures with static subjects - buildings, mountains, etc.  I also take lots of pictures where the subject is moving, and I want to capture that sense of motion - waterfalls, traffic, sports/action, etc. 

The thing is, when the subject is a person, they're always moving (well, the live ones, at any rate).  If you're trying to capture that motion - blur to indicate movement - fine.  But, even an adult holding still as they pose for a photo is going to have slight, involuntary movements that will reduce sharpness.  Kids are even worse.  Generally speaking, you need a shutter speed of around 1/60 s or faster to stop that involuntary motion (you can sometimes get away with 1/30 s or 1/15 s it you fire a fast burst and get lucky with a frame or two).  IMO, that is why Canon felt no huge need to add IS when they updated the 24-70mm - it's the 'wedding/event lens' and that means shooting people, and that means 1/60 s or faster, and with a 70mm lens, that negates the utility of IS in those situations (granted, I don't agree - just suggesting that's what Canon may be thinking).

Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing  etc....has more meaning then still shooting.   

To a point, yes.  But usually you want a shutter speed that captures a sharp face (sharp enough, at least) but moving extremities.  Since the extremities move fast (relatively), something on the order of 1/60 - 1/125 s usually works well for that.  If the face is a blur, too, it's usually a throw-away shot.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

acoll123

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
  • /
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #50 on: August 30, 2012, 04:41:52 PM »
Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.

I forgot  sport and wildlife photos.  However, I think 24-70mm for sport and wildlife photos is too short.

I am hoping mine gets here before basketball season (end ) - I use it when I can sit under the goal or corner of the court even - great for under the basket shots. I'm not too upset about the delay - more time to save up for it.

cliffwang

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 478
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #51 on: August 30, 2012, 04:50:28 PM »

My 2cents:
Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing  etc....has more meaning then still shooting.   
Agree.  I usually shoot with my Sigma 50mm F/1.4 when my son is dancing.  However, kids are not always in action and I have no chance to change lens.  That's why VC bring me benefits sometimes.  I still don't get why people think VC(IS) is not important.
Canon 5D3 | Samyang 14mm F/2.8 | Sigma 50mm F/1.4 | Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC | Canon 70-200mm F/2.8 IS MK2 | Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro L | Canon Closed-up 500D | 430EX | Kenko 2x Teleplus Pro 300 | Manfrotto Tripod

marekjoz

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
    • marekjoz @flickr
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #52 on: August 30, 2012, 04:58:16 PM »

My 2cents:
Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing  etc....has more meaning then still shooting.   
Agree.  I usually shoot with my Sigma 50mm F/1.4 when my son is dancing.  However, kids are not always in action and I have no chance to change lens.  That's why VC bring me benefits sometimes.  I still don't get why people think VC(IS) is not important.

IS is important but if it would make the price 30% higher but benefits from it (IS not price) would not sacrifice it frequently enough, then why include it? If you would be about to buy it - which version would you choose: 24-70 II for 2500$ or 24-70 IS for 3300$ assuming they had the same optics?
flickr | youtube | 5D2, 50 F/1.4, 24-105 F/4 L IS, 300 F/4 L IS, x1.4 II

cliffwang

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 478
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #53 on: August 30, 2012, 05:07:08 PM »

IS is important but if it would make the price 30% higher but benefits from it (IS not price) would not sacrifice it frequently enough, then why include it? If you would be about to buy it - which version would you choose: 24-70 II for 2500$ or 24-70 IS for 3300$ assuming they had the same optics?
I think we are off topic now.  I mention VC(IS) feature because pakosouthpark asked me the comparison between old Canon 24-70mm and Tamron 24-70mm.  I guess most people here reply post without checking the old post.  Tamron 24-70mm VC is 1299, not 3300.
Guys, please check all posts before you reply.
Canon 5D3 | Samyang 14mm F/2.8 | Sigma 50mm F/1.4 | Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 VC | Canon 70-200mm F/2.8 IS MK2 | Canon 100mm f/2.8 Macro L | Canon Closed-up 500D | 430EX | Kenko 2x Teleplus Pro 300 | Manfrotto Tripod

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13931
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #54 on: August 30, 2012, 05:12:44 PM »
I think we are off topic now....Guys, please check all posts before you reply.

The topic is that the Canon 24-70 II is likely delayed. Again. Or is that still? Regardless, once you've acknowledged that, and perhaps complained that this seems to be Canon's new normal, where else is there to go but off topic?!?   :P
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3906
    • View Profile
    • http://dylannguyen.smugmug.com/browse
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #55 on: August 30, 2012, 05:30:19 PM »

My 2cents:
Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing  etc....has more meaning then still shooting.   
Agree.  I usually shoot with my Sigma 50mm F/1.4 when my son is dancing.  However, kids are not always in action and I have no chance to change lens.  That's why VC bring me benefits sometimes.  I still don't get why people think VC(IS) is not important.

I can see the benefit of VC(IS) in slow shooting, but not fast shooting. I'm speaking on 24-70 II not ZOOOOM lens. Glad you happy with your. I'll wait for mrk II  :P
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 400L f2.8 IS II

marekjoz

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
    • marekjoz @flickr
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #56 on: August 30, 2012, 06:21:47 PM »

My 2cents:
Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing  etc....has more meaning then still shooting.   
Agree.  I usually shoot with my Sigma 50mm F/1.4 when my son is dancing.  However, kids are not always in action and I have no chance to change lens.  That's why VC bring me benefits sometimes.  I still don't get why people think VC(IS) is not important.

I can see the benefit of VC(IS) in slow shooting, but not fast shooting. I'm speaking on 24-70 II not ZOOOOM lens. Glad you happy with your. I'll wait for mrk II  :P

Don't go off topic! You were warned  ;D
flickr | youtube | 5D2, 50 F/1.4, 24-105 F/4 L IS, 300 F/4 L IS, x1.4 II

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1816
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #57 on: August 30, 2012, 08:48:16 PM »
OK then something on topic: There is a CR3 that 24-70 II will be available by October 2013 (or 2014?)  ;D

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4407
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #58 on: August 31, 2012, 03:48:50 AM »
OK then something on topic: There is a CR3 that 24-70 II will be available by October 2013 (or 2014?)  ;D

It should be a CR3 that there'll be a 24-70/2.8 IS before 2014 and 2/3rds of the people buying the non-IS version now will upgrade. People spending $2000+ for a standard zoom will pay $3000+ w/o flinching, too - and there always is the "off" button for IS:

Even if the IS version is a little worse optically in the corners or something (why should it?), on this level 2/3rds of users won't even notice: "Hey look, I just took some snaps of my kids, and see the blurry bokeh in the corner?".

But I admit I'm absolutely curious to see the first real review, af speed will be stellar of course, but will iq really rival the sharpness primes stopped down to f2.8, what about ca/vignetting, is the bokeh like on the 135L? When the lens arrives by xmas for the rest of us we'll know!

M.ST

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?
« Reply #59 on: August 31, 2012, 04:32:32 AM »
Delivery to the CPS merchants in Germany starts definetely next week. This is CR3 and reported a few times in the last two days by Canon Germany (CPS) and Canon Europe (CPS).

But I don´t think that Canon is able to fulfill all preorders. CPS members (platinum) are the first who get the lens.

I read a lot of IS. => You don´t need an IS. I am happy with my prototype of the lens without IS. If you want the best image quality and you shoot architecture, landscapes or available light use a good tripod with a gearhead like the Manfrotto 405. If you want to make videos get a tripod with a good video head. For sports, weddings and travelling you don´t need an IS.
« Last Edit: August 31, 2012, 04:48:16 AM by M.ST »