Any thoughts on a 24-70mm f/2.8 III?

[cid]

just one thought: why do you expect replacement? current 24-70 II is brilliant lens and even if replaced the only benefit I see is added IS and maybe weight loss

 

[Matthew Saville]

The existing 24-70 is already quite ready to resolve a sensor like the 5DsR, IMO, so there's really zero incentive for Canon to make a mk3 in the next 2-4 years at a minimum. They've already made it very clear that IS is for their teles and f/4 zooms; if you want stabilization in a 2.8 zoom you should look to Tamron. They cost less than half as much, and are almost as sharp and almost as reliable to focus. Emphasis on almost, unfortunately. A general hobbyist shouldn't think twice about buying either the Tamron 24-70 or the 15-30, but a working pro should at least think twice about which 24-70 they want to make their "workhorse". Personally, as a full-time wedding shooter, I hate 24-70mm in general, and I dumped my 2.8 in favor of a 24-XXX f/4 a while ago. I'd rather have an ultra-wide zoom, a couple primes, and a tele zoom. But for walk-around stuff where you also "need" the aperture, I suppose the existing Canon 24-70 2.8 mk2 is a champion.

=Matt=

 

[StudentOfLight]

I don't think Canon has sold a "mk-III" lens without a first selling a "mk-I" and a "mk-II" so if IS gets added to the current 24-70 f/2.8 L optical formula then the lens wouldn't be called the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS III USM, instead it would likely be called the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM.

 

[privatebydesign]

I don't think Canon has sold a "mk-III" lens without a first selling a "mk-I" and a "mk-II" so if IS gets added to the current 24-70 f/2.8 L optical formula then the lens wouldn't be called the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS III USM, instead it would likely be called the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM.

Correct.

 

[Pixel]

It's the best lens I've got and one of the best Canon lenses I've ever used. And trust me, I've used almost all of them.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

I will buy a Canon EF 24-70, but I don't know if it is a good choice. The last two years it was every summer in cash-back, this year not. Should I wait for a possible 24-70 III next year or so?

just get it, you'll never regret your decision. It's a fantastic lens and I don't think it'll be replaced in next years

 

[super_newbie_pro]

Maybe need IS for the III ?

 

[digital paradise]

I love it. I have always owned IS lenses and was very concerned with it but took the chance because it only went to 70. I have never missed not having IS.

 

[sirnose66]

I love it. I have always owned IS lenses and was very concerned with it but took the chance because it only went to 70. I have never missed not having IS.

Superb images. Kinda killed the thread though, I love it when a picture speaks louder than 1000 words

Seriously I've just treated myself to one of these after much deliberation, will be very happy if I can get some images of this standard.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Maybe need IS for the III ?

Adding IS resets the numbering scheme. Mark numbers are only used if all of the following are identical:

EF/EF-S/EF-M mount
Focal length
Aperture
L designation
IS presence
AF motor name

This is why, for example, the EF 50 f/1.8 STM is not the EF 50 f/1.8 STM III (even though it replaced the EF 50 f/1.8 II): new AF name (unnamed micromotor being replaced with STM) restarts the numbering scheme.