Archive for: 24-70 II

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L Officially Discontinued?

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L Officially Discontinued?

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L
A few reports around the globe about the EF 24-70 f/2.8L being officially discontinued. This was an inevitable event.

I’ve had at least 2 suggestions that have said the version II delay has been to dump excess stock of the version 1. How plausible is that? I don’t know.

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L @ B&H for $1579

There has been no mention of another delay for the version II. It’s still slated to start shipping in July. You can still preorder it at B&H for $2299. Do not expect any sort of price drop on the version II for quite some time.



EF 24-70 f/2.8L II [CR2]

EF 24-70 f/2.8L II [CR2]

Here we go again
More information has trickled in about the “thorn in my side”, aka the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS II. A new version of the updated lens started to make its way to the folks lucky enough to test the lens out. There have been upwards of 5 different variations of the new lens. It’s still reported that there is no IS in any of the prototypes. One design change that has apparently been seen is a fully internal zoom function, we’re not sure if that is with all the prototypes.

I won’t even hazard a guess as to when it will be announced, though it was suggested it has been pushed back on various occasions.

I can see the collective eye rolls about this post already. I post about 2% of the stuff that comes in about this lens, I understand you’re all sick of reading about it.

The Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L at B&H for $1249



The New EOS [CR3]

The New EOS [CR3]

We will see a new camera on Tuesday and below I am confirming what we pretty much already know.

  • 1D/1Ds line is about to be amalgamated. (Name Unknown)
  • Full Frame
  • 18mp
  • 12 fps
  • 61 AF Points
  • New Battery
  • Available in March
  • Price unknown, but I suspect more than the 1D Mark IV

2012 is shaping up to be an interesting year for EOS.

The previous spec lists are pretty much bang on.

I have received no word of a new lens being announced at the same time. I suspect they’ll stagger announcements. The 24-70 f/2.8L II is the only lens being mentioned. Possibly in November. This isn’t included in the [CR3] rating.



EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Patent Published

EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Patent Published

It’s coming, really!
We posted the filed patent of a 24-70 f/2.8L II way back in October. However it has now been published as of April 21, 2011. The big omission appears to be IS. I think it’s safe to say the lens is coming soon.

Other Lenses in the Patent
A couple of other lenses appear in the patent. A 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS, which has been released. Also appearing is a 55-250 IS lens. This could be a version II of the current lens. It could also shrink to 200mm at the long end.

Patent Information

  • Patent Publication No. 2011-81062
  • Published 2011.4.21
  • Filled 2009.10.5

24-70 f/2.8L II

  • Focal distance f=24.74 – 67.50mm
  • Fno 2.92 – 2.91
  • Half angle of view 41.17 – 17.77 deg.
  • Lens length 206.42 – 177.53mm
  • Back focus 38.43mm
  • Aspherical 2
  • zoom ratio 2.73x
  • MOD 0.38m

70-300 f/4-5.6L IS

  • Focal distance f=72.21 – 299.52mm
  • Fno 4.65 – 5.85
  • Half angle of view 16.68 – 4.13 deg.
  • Lens length 142.64 – 201.84mm
  • Back focus 37.77mm
  • Aspherical 1
  • zoom ratio 4.15x
  • MOD 1.4m

55-250 f/4-5.6 IS

  • Focal distance f=55.60 – 203.11mm
  • Fno 4.16 – 5.88
  • Half angle of view 13.80 – 3.85 deg.
  • Lens length 162.05 – 202.41mm
  • Back focus 58.79 – 82.03mm
  • Aspherical 0
  • zoom ratio 3.65x
  • MOD 1.5m

Egami notes the 24-70 patent shows possible performance issues. You can check out their findings here.


The performance does not seem to be so good. The spherical aberration is delivered to less than +-0.2mm in all conditions at the outskirts. The astigmatism exceeds 1mm extremely badly in the short distance. The distortion is -4% of barrels type in the wide side. In the short distance, the distortion is +5% of lozenge type in the tele side. The chromatic aberration of magnification is corrected well.