Buy Canon 24-70l II today or wait for Newer version with IS?
- Thread starter davidgator
- Start date
- Status
L
Loswr
Guest
scrappydog said:
Of course, 100-400 vs. 24-70 ranges have quite a difference in the shutter speed needed for handholding.
I can also get sharp handheld shots with the 24-105/4 at 1/15 s...the furniture is sharp, anyway. The people are blurry, because 1/15 s isn't fast enough even for people posing for a picture. IS would be nice, but I don't miss it on my 35L or 85L...
Upvote
0
I need the IS for video. That said, I bought the new one a few weeks ago and don't regret it even with this rumour. I'll be able to sell it in a year and buy the new one and take advantage of having the current version for at least a whole year.
Upvote
0
Jesse said:
That's an easy one. They're both stellar lenses and you'd be happy with either, it really boils down to whether or not you have almost $2k to blow on the 85L. If yes, get it, if not, get the 85 1.8, it's an awesome lens. In terms of value for money, the 85mm f/1.8 is definitely the better lens.
Upvote
0
C
carlc
Guest
Why no mention of the new 24-70 f/4 IS version that should be available in January? I have the 24-70 vII now and just rented the Tamron for comparison. I didn't care for the Tamron that much and didn't feel their VC comes anywhere close to the Hybrid Canon IS version that is on the 70-200 vII.
Now I am considering returning the f/2.8 and ordering the f/4. Just don't know. I love the IQ with the new 24-70 on the 5DMkIII but scared to death of camera shake on the shot that I need to capture.
Any speculation that the IQ will be less on the f/4?
Now I am considering returning the f/2.8 and ordering the f/4. Just don't know. I love the IQ with the new 24-70 on the 5DMkIII but scared to death of camera shake on the shot that I need to capture.
Any speculation that the IQ will be less on the f/4?
Upvote
0
carlc said:
Speaking specifically of the announced 24-70 f4, it is still unclear to me why a shorter range with the same aperture of f4 would be better than the 24-105 L for an average user. Unless perhaps it is almost exclusively geared to be paired as a kit with 6D.
Perhaps 24-105L being rather ubiquitous makes it less disirable for some? But then, the new 24-70 f4 will be equally so in a few years. I can't speak for individual copy variation that seems to exist among 24-105L, but mine is sharp. Unless the IQ and IS are both updated in the 24-70 f4 to the extent where its reduced weight becomes a key selling point, I think the 24-105L is still the better contender at give away prices.
If the price of the new 24-70 f4 L (now listed at $1499) comes down eventually to $900 then I think it becomes a more interesting match up and will present a tougher decision... lighter, marginally higher IQ and IS of the 24-70 f4, against an older, heavier, bulkier 24-105L. For some, the ergonomics could be an important issue, but not at ~$600 price differential with a shortened range.
Upvote
0
Ray2021 said:
The fact that it's nearly a true macro lens means that one lens gives you fairly wide to short tele and macro capabilities. That's a lot of versatility in one lens, and for people stepping up to full frame, being able to buy a single lens which may cover most of their needs (i would imagine a 70-200 of some description would be the next lens people would buy, which overlaps with the extra reach on the 24-105 anyways) may seem attractive.
...And its rumoured to be significantly sharper, particularly wide open.
Upvote
0
I have to say that a new update L lens within one or two year range of the current model is too fast. I just ordered Mark II yesterday and see this rumor. Of course I can sell it when a new model announced like I am selling my mark I right now. But if I have to do it within 2 years, of course I do not feel good. The good thing is it is only a rumor. We never know when until it ship. I know businessman are way smarter than I am. If you have to take pictures, buy the current model now. 
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
