Canon in Active Development of EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS [CR2]

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,103
1,649
Irving, Texas
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Always a little curious that such a "leak" comes from Canon just about the time that the Sigma 24-70 OS ART and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 are about to come to market.

Hmmm, kind of reminds me of how the "leak" about the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS came about the time that the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART came to market. Of course, we have yet to see that lens.

slclick said:
Patience. It will happen and it will blow all 3rd party early to the party glass out of the water. Yes, it will cost more, perhaps it will weigh more.
That remains to be seen. Those of us who actually test lenses found that the Canon 24-70L II was better than, say, the Tamron 24-70 VC, but barely so, and not at all focal lengths...and at twice the price. I fully anticipate that the G2 version will significantly close that gap on all fronts and still undercut the current version in price. It's been a long time since I have seen a lens blow away the competition...the competition is just too good, and at the moment we are at a point of diminishing returns.
Dustin, I read your reviews and trust them more than any other reviews... even though I nearly always choose Canon.

Do you think third party manufacturers are starting to close the AF gap? That is something that really means a lot to me. I think the BR is big too. CA can be a real problem with my 135L at times. In fact, BR would weigh heavily on me when deciding to upgrade or not.

I've got a feeling every new lens is going to have BR. It seems very effective on the 35L. I think the 24-70 will have it and the new 135 and 85 to. I guess that and IS are the carrots on the end of the stick now.
 

romanr74

I see, thus I am
Aug 4, 2012
531
0
45
Switzerland
Cochese said:
Dear Canon:
Nobody gives a S___ if the lens is a little bit heavier so long as it's quality is worth the exorbitant price you're going to charge for it over your competitors.

Signed: Literally everybody forever.

Seriously, just give us a fast, sharp, wide lens; include IS and we'll all be happy. For those who don't want the extra weight, they've still got the wonderful 24-70 2.8 II.
It is perfectly ok if you just only talk for yourself. I'll express my opinion myself if you don't mind...
 

Surfwooder

I'm New Here
Jan 17, 2013
20
0
It's about time! I've been carrying my Tamron SP 24-70mm f2.8 VC USM now for events, festivals, wildlife, and a multitude of other subjects. I've never considered the weight, I just carried the lens. My recent house hunting expedition to New Hampshire, it never left the mount on my Canon EOS 5D Mark IV, as I shot the properties and interior of prospective homes. Tamron is now developing a follow up version, the G2, I'm sure will be coming with better image quality, and VC. If Canon thinks IS in this range is not marketable, Canon should think again, and rush to the table.
 

michi

EOS RP
Jul 26, 2011
270
6
I have a 24-70L 2.8. The AF has really come alive now that I have a 5DIV. Always tack sharp. I always eyed the II version but couldn't really justify the money for the small quality improvement. If there was a III with IS, and it would approach the $2,000 at some point, I would probably get one unless Sigma beats them to the punch, which I have the feeling will happen.
I don't know why people try to justify IS for this or that focal length. Heck, I would take it for my 15mm fisheye if I can squeeze a longer exposure without tripod out of it. Just put it in the body already, Canon...
 

jalbfb

EOS 80D
Feb 18, 2011
183
5
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Always a little curious that such a "leak" comes from Canon just about the time that the Sigma 24-70 OS ART and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 are about to come to market.

Hmmm, kind of reminds me of how the "leak" about the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS came about the time that the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART came to market. Of course, we have yet to see that lens.

slclick said:
Patience. It will happen and it will blow all 3rd party early to the party glass out of the water. Yes, it will cost more, perhaps it will weigh more.
That remains to be seen. Those of us who actually test lenses found that the Canon 24-70L II was better than, say, the Tamron 24-70 VC, but barely so, and not at all focal lengths...and at twice the price. I fully anticipate that the G2 version will significantly close that gap on all fronts and still undercut the current version in price. It's been a long time since I have seen a lens blow away the competition...the competition is just too good, and at the moment we are at a point of diminishing returns.
Totally agree with Dustin on this one. I am anxious to see what Tamron's G2 of this lens looks like (more than likely like all of their SP series) and performs. Canon, when and if they do release their IS version, will more than likely be cost prohibitive except for the very rich among us or high end pros. When Tamron comes out with its G2 version, I'll take a good look at it anymore than likely pull the trigger and get it rather than wait for Canon to release a much higher priced piece of glass whose IQ difference may not be worth the extra dollars or euros.
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
CanonFanBoy said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Always a little curious that such a "leak" comes from Canon just about the time that the Sigma 24-70 OS ART and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 are about to come to market.

Hmmm, kind of reminds me of how the "leak" about the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS came about the time that the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART came to market. Of course, we have yet to see that lens.

slclick said:
Patience. It will happen and it will blow all 3rd party early to the party glass out of the water. Yes, it will cost more, perhaps it will weigh more.
That remains to be seen. Those of us who actually test lenses found that the Canon 24-70L II was better than, say, the Tamron 24-70 VC, but barely so, and not at all focal lengths...and at twice the price. I fully anticipate that the G2 version will significantly close that gap on all fronts and still undercut the current version in price. It's been a long time since I have seen a lens blow away the competition...the competition is just too good, and at the moment we are at a point of diminishing returns.
Dustin, I read your reviews and trust them more than any other reviews... even though I nearly always choose Canon.

Do you think third party manufacturers are starting to close the AF gap? That is something that really means a lot to me. I think the BR is big too. CA can be a real problem with my 135L at times. In fact, BR would weigh heavily on me when deciding to upgrade or not.

I've got a feeling every new lens is going to have BR. It seems very effective on the 35L. I think the 24-70 will have it and the new 135 and 85 to. I guess that and IS are the carrots on the end of the stick now.
I've really been surprised at the new lenses that have NOT received the BR element. I would anticipate that the 85 IS would have it, but in truth we've heard so little detail about the lens that I don't know what to expect. But yes, the 35L II is special. I own it and love it, but I also know a lot of people look at the Sigma 35 ART and say that it is "good enough" - particularly for the difference in price.
 

tiggy@mac.com

Pentax K-1000
Jan 20, 2014
498
185
Thetford, VT
www.ForestMetrix.com
I would not be as pessimistic on the price issue. When the version two of the Canon lens was released there really wasn't much in the way of competition. The fact that there is competition now, and that two very proven competitors are coming out with new versions, all indicates to me that Canon is going to have to bend its pricing curve if it wishes to maximize revenue on this project. My guess is $2.2k usd. Not that this is cheap.

Btw, +1 for Dustin on his observation re: recent vaporware rumors timed to third party actual releases. He pointed out the 85 example. The 70-200 talk prior to that was another.
 

slclick

PINHOLE
Dec 17, 2013
3,158
685
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Always a little curious that such a "leak" comes from Canon just about the time that the Sigma 24-70 OS ART and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 are about to come to market.

Hmmm, kind of reminds me of how the "leak" about the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS came about the time that the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART came to market. Of course, we have yet to see that lens.

slclick said:
Patience. It will happen and it will blow all 3rd party early to the party glass out of the water. Yes, it will cost more, perhaps it will weigh more.
As long as the 70-200 2.8 Mark 2?

I owned the latest Tammy 24-70 prior to this G2 we're waiting on and it left me wanting. The current Canon version hits all the check boxes, especially since I'm not that big on IS for less than 100mm. Personally I will have no GAS as

That remains to be seen. Those of us who actually test lenses found that the Canon 24-70L II was better than, say, the Tamron 24-70 VC, but barely so, and not at all focal lengths...and at twice the price. I fully anticipate that the G2 version will significantly close that gap on all fronts and still undercut the current version in price. It's been a long time since I have seen a lens blow away the competition...the competition is just too good, and at the moment we are at a point of diminishing returns.
As long as the 70-200 2.8 Mark 2?

I owned the latest Tammy 24-70 prior to this G2 we're waiting on and it left me wanting. The current Canon version hits all the check boxes, especially since I'm not that big on IS for less than 100mm. Personally I will have no GAS and that is huge. I hate gear temptation.
 

scottkinfw

Wildlife photography is my passion
I have the 24-70 2.8 II L and absolutely love it. It is tack sharp, excellent color and contrast. No distortion.

For one thing, I have had some L lenses that were duds in the past, so I wouldn't want to risk losing a share thing. I might be tempted by the new lens IF it came with a significant improvement in iq- but this would be very difficult.

Finally, I am starting to lust after maybe a 12- 24, or perhaps a 500mm, and I have to save for them.

sek
 
Aug 11, 2010
402
30
Miami Beach
www.clicstudio.com
Enough with 24-70 2.8's. There are dozens of different companies making the exact same thing.
Extend the range to at least 24-100 and then we get something more useful and different.
Or make a 24-70 2.0 or something...
I can't believe technology hasn't evolved enough to do something better ::)
 

infared

Kodak Brownie!
Jul 19, 2011
1,411
11
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
CanonFanBoy said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Always a little curious that such a "leak" comes from Canon just about the time that the Sigma 24-70 OS ART and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 are about to come to market.

Hmmm, kind of reminds me of how the "leak" about the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS came about the time that the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART came to market. Of course, we have yet to see that lens.

slclick said:
Patience. It will happen and it will blow all 3rd party early to the party glass out of the water. Yes, it will cost more, perhaps it will weigh more.
That remains to be seen. Those of us who actually test lenses found that the Canon 24-70L II was better than, say, the Tamron 24-70 VC, but barely so, and not at all focal lengths...and at twice the price. I fully anticipate that the G2 version will significantly close that gap on all fronts and still undercut the current version in price. It's been a long time since I have seen a lens blow away the competition...the competition is just too good, and at the moment we are at a point of diminishing returns.
Dustin, I read your reviews and trust them more than any other reviews... even though I nearly always choose Canon.

Do you think third party manufacturers are starting to close the AF gap? That is something that really means a lot to me. I think the BR is big too. CA can be a real problem with my 135L at times. In fact, BR would weigh heavily on me when deciding to upgrade or not.

I've got a feeling every new lens is going to have BR. It seems very effective on the 35L. I think the 24-70 will have it and the new 135 and 85 to. I guess that and IS are the carrots on the end of the stick now.
I've really been surprised at the new lenses that have NOT received the BR element. I would anticipate that the 85 IS would have it, but in truth we've heard so little detail about the lens that I don't know what to expect. But yes, the 35L II is special. I own it and love it, but I also know a lot of people look at the Sigma 35 ART and say that it is "good enough" - particularly for the difference in price.
Yes, the 35mm f/1.4L II is special. So is the Sigma 135mm f/1.8mm. There are so many great lenses and cameras to choose from these days. It is a great time to be a photographer.
 
Mar 14, 2012
2,303
189
clicstudio said:
Enough with 24-70 2.8's. There are dozens of different companies making the exact same thing.
Extend the range to at least 24-100 and then we get something more useful and different.
Or make a 24-70 2.0 or something...
I can't believe technology hasn't evolved enough to do something better ::)
Harder than you think. The 24-70 f/2.8 II is already softer at 70mm than at 24mm, and the IQ of the 24-70 f/2.8 II is better than either Sigma's 24-105A f/4 and Canon's 24-105 f/4 IS II.
 

BeenThere

EOS 6D MK II
Sep 4, 2012
852
184
Random Orbits said:
clicstudio said:
Enough with 24-70 2.8's. There are dozens of different companies making the exact same thing.
Extend the range to at least 24-100 and then we get something more useful and different.
Or make a 24-70 2.0 or something...
I can't believe technology hasn't evolved enough to do something better ::)
Harder than you think. The 24-70 f/2.8 II is already softer at 70mm than at 24mm, and the IQ of the 24-70 f/2.8 II is better than either Sigma's 24-105A f/4 and Canon's 24-105 f/4 IS II.
Better zooms moves in the direction of larger and heavier; not what most want in a zoom. For better performance, look to some of the excellent primes.
 

Ladislav

EOS RP
Feb 13, 2013
332
44
37
Czech Republic
Seriously, this is the most depressing rumor I have seen here for ages. It actually does not rumor anything. It is like a copy of rumor released about 2 years ago ...

[rant begin]
Dear Canon, just cut of the bull***t and give me the lens! I don't give a s**t if it is 100g heavier than the non-IS one, so if that is your biggest concert, go straight to manufacture.
[rant end]
 

Pixel

EOS 80D
Sep 6, 2011
105
7
The version II is simply too good of a lens to justify the cost of replacing it only for IS. Talk to me in five or six years when it HAS to be replaced.
 

pokerz

EOS 80D
Aug 19, 2016
167
0
justaCanonuser said:
Just remember the Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD: only 825 g with a very good IS (VC), Canon's current F 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM weighs only 20 g less. I never understood the argument that Canon abandoned IS because they were concerned about weight. If the Mark III version of this lens would include IS, I'd really make up my mind about upgrading to Canon's zoom. The Tamron is quite an impressive lens, given its price, but its AF isn't too reliable so I did lose some otherwise nice shots with it (yes, I AFMAd my Tamron).
So that you will have to pay more in 2470L IS
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,103
1,649
Irving, Texas
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
CanonFanBoy said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Always a little curious that such a "leak" comes from Canon just about the time that the Sigma 24-70 OS ART and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 are about to come to market.

Hmmm, kind of reminds me of how the "leak" about the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS came about the time that the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART came to market. Of course, we have yet to see that lens.

slclick said:
Patience. It will happen and it will blow all 3rd party early to the party glass out of the water. Yes, it will cost more, perhaps it will weigh more.
That remains to be seen. Those of us who actually test lenses found that the Canon 24-70L II was better than, say, the Tamron 24-70 VC, but barely so, and not at all focal lengths...and at twice the price. I fully anticipate that the G2 version will significantly close that gap on all fronts and still undercut the current version in price. It's been a long time since I have seen a lens blow away the competition...the competition is just too good, and at the moment we are at a point of diminishing returns.
Dustin, I read your reviews and trust them more than any other reviews... even though I nearly always choose Canon.

Do you think third party manufacturers are starting to close the AF gap? That is something that really means a lot to me. I think the BR is big too. CA can be a real problem with my 135L at times. In fact, BR would weigh heavily on me when deciding to upgrade or not.

I've got a feeling every new lens is going to have BR. It seems very effective on the 35L. I think the 24-70 will have it and the new 135 and 85 to. I guess that and IS are the carrots on the end of the stick now.
I've really been surprised at the new lenses that have NOT received the BR element. I would anticipate that the 85 IS would have it, but in truth we've heard so little detail about the lens that I don't know what to expect. But yes, the 35L II is special. I own it and love it, but I also know a lot of people look at the Sigma 35 ART and say that it is "good enough" - particularly for the difference in price.
:) My mistake. For some reason I thought the 35II was the first, but also thought it was being implemented on all new lenses since inception. I didn't realize it wasn't. I guess that shows what happens when one gets tunnel vision and only looking at the lenses I'm interested in. I wonder why it isn't being put into all the new lenses? Anybody's guess, I guess. :)
 

LonelyBoy

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 18, 2015
745
0
I do wonder how much stuff Canon considers to be in "active development".

For example, Apple had the Intel version of OS X in the lab from day 1 and ready to be decanted whenever necessary. It would be surprising if Canon didn't have a 24-70/2.8IS design ready to be sent to the factories whenever it became a big enough problem not having one (as has been said on this thread, they must have designed the current one to have a place to add it), even if they're still trying to find a way to pull the weight and price down if they can. This also means I assume they have a FF mirrorless body and mount that they could send to the factories if the market suddenly turned. They're certainly still working on improving it, I'd assume, but it would surprise me if they didn't have the design ready for "wow, the Sony freaks are actually right and we're losing sales, we need to pounce now". Even if that's just a 5D body with the mirror removed and an EVF, using a regular EF lens mount.
 

TWI by Dustin Abbott

EOS 5D MK IV
Oct 4, 2012
2,669
17
www.dustinabbott.net
CanonFanBoy said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
CanonFanBoy said:
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Always a little curious that such a "leak" comes from Canon just about the time that the Sigma 24-70 OS ART and Tamron 24-70 VC G2 are about to come to market.

Hmmm, kind of reminds me of how the "leak" about the Canon 85mm f/1.4 IS came about the time that the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 ART came to market. Of course, we have yet to see that lens.

slclick said:
Patience. It will happen and it will blow all 3rd party early to the party glass out of the water. Yes, it will cost more, perhaps it will weigh more.
That remains to be seen. Those of us who actually test lenses found that the Canon 24-70L II was better than, say, the Tamron 24-70 VC, but barely so, and not at all focal lengths...and at twice the price. I fully anticipate that the G2 version will significantly close that gap on all fronts and still undercut the current version in price. It's been a long time since I have seen a lens blow away the competition...the competition is just too good, and at the moment we are at a point of diminishing returns.
Dustin, I read your reviews and trust them more than any other reviews... even though I nearly always choose Canon.

Do you think third party manufacturers are starting to close the AF gap? That is something that really means a lot to me. I think the BR is big too. CA can be a real problem with my 135L at times. In fact, BR would weigh heavily on me when deciding to upgrade or not.

I've got a feeling every new lens is going to have BR. It seems very effective on the 35L. I think the 24-70 will have it and the new 135 and 85 to. I guess that and IS are the carrots on the end of the stick now.
I've really been surprised at the new lenses that have NOT received the BR element. I would anticipate that the 85 IS would have it, but in truth we've heard so little detail about the lens that I don't know what to expect. But yes, the 35L II is special. I own it and love it, but I also know a lot of people look at the Sigma 35 ART and say that it is "good enough" - particularly for the difference in price.
:) My mistake. For some reason I thought the 35II was the first, but also thought it was being implemented on all new lenses since inception. I didn't realize it wasn't. I guess that shows what happens when one gets tunnel vision and only looking at the lenses I'm interested in. I wonder why it isn't being put into all the new lenses? Anybody's guess, I guess. :)
I think price is a factor. It's a very expensive addition, and may not work the same in every optical formula. It worked a treat in the 35L II, but we've not really seen a major high end prime release from Canon since. Some zooms, but the BR didn't make it into the 16-35L III or the 24-105L II for some reason.