Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Announced
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
G
gene_can_sing
Guest
This is so anti-climatic. Kind of reminds me of the wait for the "New" Star Wars Episode iV, and getting Jar Jar Binks.
But this is actually much worse because these are the tools that I use to make my living. If this lens was a 77mm filter and had IS, I would have gladly paid the extra 1K for this lens with little hesitation.
So I might be taking a look at the Tamron lens when the 4K Canon Full Frame VDSLR comes out. I hope the mechanics are better than their other lenses since I manual focus for video, or hoping that Sigma comes out with something in this range with IS.
But this is actually much worse because these are the tools that I use to make my living. If this lens was a 77mm filter and had IS, I would have gladly paid the extra 1K for this lens with little hesitation.
So I might be taking a look at the Tamron lens when the 4K Canon Full Frame VDSLR comes out. I hope the mechanics are better than their other lenses since I manual focus for video, or hoping that Sigma comes out with something in this range with IS.
Upvote
0
IS, no IS, i don't care for video production, what we film makers DO care about is if the end of the lens protrudes out when zooming or focusing so we can ride a matte box. if it does then i won't be buying this lens, id just get the 70-200mm and then one of the wide primes 
Upvote
0
I hope it's better made than the current 24-70, I hate the build quality of that lens. I don't care about IS at all.
For me image quality is at best random in my copy.
It's wobbly (extending zoom - what the hell
), it's made of cheap plastic (like the 50 1.2). The older lenses were a lot better. My ancient 16-35 and 16 year old 70-200 feel more solid than the new ones.
For me image quality is at best random in my copy.
It's wobbly (extending zoom - what the hell
), it's made of cheap plastic (like the 50 1.2). The older lenses were a lot better. My ancient 16-35 and 16 year old 70-200 feel more solid than the new ones.
Upvote
0
jlev23 said:IS, no IS, i don't care for video production, what we film makers DO care about is if the end of the lens protrudes out when zooming or focusing so we can ride a matte box. if it does then i won't be buying this lens, id just get the 70-200mm and then one of the wide primes
Get the 16-35 (not the II), awesome awesome lens. 70-200 is ok for video if you got one hell of an solid stabilization rig.
No L-lens protrudes or rotates during focusing... And won't a matte box usually be attached to the camera and not the lens (where you'd attach the hood doesn't move either...) and then you adjust it, if you use on of them extend / distend-lenses (which the old and the new 24-70 is).
If you have the money to throw at primes and you are only doing video I don't get why you just don't get CZ-lenses and old nikon ones? They are better in lot of cases too.
Upvote
0
I bought a new one for € 1069 one week ago...dealaddict said:US $2299 ????? ouch ...
Although I expect it will be expensive, not that expensive though. Even more expensive than the 70-200 F2.8 IS II?
The guy who bought my MK I for $1040 must be very happy.
Upvote
0
B&H is taking pre orders and - Expected availability: April 17 2012
but canon went nuts with the price :-\
but canon went nuts with the price :-\
Upvote
0
Bruce Photography
Landscapes, 5DX,7D,60D,EOSM,D800/E,D810,D7100
Well now we Canon people get to look at an overpriced 24-70 without IS where Nikon people wake this morning to see 2 new 36MP cameras complete with numerous new features. I'm glad that the clock has now started ticking for Canon. They must now decide if they wish to remain competive by not delivering the products they announced last summer as well as having cameras that are second place in resolution. I will give them some time. About as much time as it takes for Nikon to ramp up to full production volume so these new cameras are generally available. After all I'm a Canon guy and I used to waiting for more than 6 months between release and when I can really buy them.
Upvote
0
K
KitH
Guest
Question 1. Multiple Choice (mark all that apply)
The lack of IS in this lens at this price is caused by:-
a) Canon have found the upper limit on image quality possible with image stabilisation using what is, after all, a wobbly lens element held in place by motors and springs and for this lens chose to tie the glass down tightly?
b) Canon don't want to kill any remaining sales of the 24-105mm f4 IS, which has been around for a while and has nicely paid back its investment already?
c) Canon found they had sufficient image quality to do serious damage to the the L- prime lens market if they put this lens out with IS, because then only the bokeh-chasers would have any use for the big f1.4s?
Question 2. Short Answers
Discuss your answer to Q1, illustrating with visual aids, MTF charts, WTF charts and stuff pasted off the web as appropriate.
The lack of IS in this lens at this price is caused by:-
a) Canon have found the upper limit on image quality possible with image stabilisation using what is, after all, a wobbly lens element held in place by motors and springs and for this lens chose to tie the glass down tightly?
b) Canon don't want to kill any remaining sales of the 24-105mm f4 IS, which has been around for a while and has nicely paid back its investment already?
c) Canon found they had sufficient image quality to do serious damage to the the L- prime lens market if they put this lens out with IS, because then only the bokeh-chasers would have any use for the big f1.4s?
Question 2. Short Answers
Discuss your answer to Q1, illustrating with visual aids, MTF charts, WTF charts and stuff pasted off the web as appropriate.
Upvote
0
ssrdd said:
What do you mean lost? Do you mean they aren't making everything that you want them to make?
Let's be honest, the old school canon people obviously care more about straight photography and not much about video. If canon only catered to people like you then they would be lost. Let's look at other companies that decided to not progress with the market's demands:
Every single US automaker - people have been buying big trucks for years, so let's keep doing that and screw these babyman eco battery cars...
RIM - touch phones are toys...
Kodak - digital will never catch on...
Borders - people only want paper books...
The list can go on.
I'm sorry to say it, but video is the future. I want photography first, and it seems like you do also, but we are not the majority. And who cares if they incorporate video into their amazing dslrs, and who cares if they make lenses that work great for video and stills?
People saying canon is lost, and they are just screwing everyone don't really know what they are talking about. They might be screwing a few people, but if they just made stuff that you wanted they wouldnt even stay in the dslr business.
Upvote
0
K
KitH
Guest
phischeye said:
IS does have a place in video capture, especially in electronic newsgathering when things are more often handheld. It's when the camera is on a tripod that IS becomes a mixed blessing - but that's true for tripod mounted stills too, several lenses detect and disable IS when the vibrations appear to be consistent with tripod use. So the Arri users with their Cooke lenses aren't likely to be in the market for IS.
That said, there are many who like devices such as the Steadicam Merlin, I've used one, it's astonishing that something so simple works as well as it does. IS can be an issue because when you reach the end of its' travel it lets go in an unpredictable way and that can give the framing a kick until it recovers again.
Lots of people here tonight are having a pop at Canon. For what it's worth, I can envisage the future of video and stills converging on the APS-C / Super35 sized image circles and using the PL mount with more intelligent electronic interfaces. If that's true then Canon have it about right.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
