Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Has Made its Way To Retailers

[LetTheRightLensIn]

You can't get rid of the 24L. No sane person, regardless of what they are shooting, that, once they have, can ever sell that lens. That'd just be insane

I actually might get rid of the 24 1.4 and one day add a 35L.
Granted I am insane. But still.

If the 24-70 delivers a monster 24mm then you have that for landscapes and general work and yet for general shots and low DOF, on FF, I feel 35mm is more overall useful than 24mm so yeah I could see selling the 24L and getting the 24-70 and, if I had one, keeping the 35L. But the 24-70 does needs to deliver in spades at 24mm. It would seem hard for it too but slower lenses are easier to design well and the price is insane, I mean, one element from a 300 2.8 probably had more in it than all 24-70 elements combined and it sold for less than twice as much not so long ago. The MTF from Canon actually show it to be better than the prime 24 1.4 II. So....

 

[bdunbar79]

You can't get rid of the 24L. No sane person, regardless of what they are shooting, that, once they have, can ever sell that lens. That'd just be insane

I actually might get rid of the 24 1.4 and one day add a 35L.
Granted I am insane. But still.

If the 24-70 delivers a monster 24mm then you have that for landscapes and general work and yet for general shots and low DOF, on FF, I feel 35mm is more overall useful than 24mm so yeah I could see selling the 24L and getting the 24-70 and, if I had one, keeping the 35L. But the 24-70 does needs to deliver in spades at 24mm. It would seem hard for it too but slower lenses are easier to design well and the price is insane, I mean, one element from a 300 2.8 probably had more in it than all 24-70 elements combined and it sold for less than twice as much not so long ago. The MTF from Canon actually show it to be better than the prime 24 1.4 II. So....

The MTF of the 24-70L I shows that it's better than the 35L, which it is, because I've owned both. Yes, the version I lens. So certainly the 24-70L II will be much better than the 35L. That's why I sold the 35L; I don't shoot many photos wider than f/2.8 and even the mark I was sharper than the 35L, at 35mm. However, if you need to go wider than 2.8, then of course the lens is very useful.

The 35mm focal length is more useful on FF, which is why I'm getting the 24-70L II; it is sharper at 35mm than the 35L.

 

[birtembuk]

You can't get rid of the 24L. No sane person, regardless of what they are shooting, that, once they have, can ever sell that lens. That'd just be insane

I actually might get rid of the 24 1.4 and one day add a 35L.
Granted I am insane. But still.

If the 24-70 delivers a monster 24mm then you have that for landscapes and general work and yet for general shots and low DOF, on FF, I feel 35mm is more overall useful than 24mm so yeah I could see selling the 24L and getting the 24-70 and, if I had one, keeping the 35L. But the 24-70 does needs to deliver in spades at 24mm. It would seem hard for it too but slower lenses are easier to design well and the price is insane, I mean, one element from a 300 2.8 probably had more in it than all 24-70 elements combined and it sold for less than twice as much not so long ago. The MTF from Canon actually show it to be better than the prime 24 1.4 II. So....

The MTF of the 24-70L I shows that it's better than the 35L, which it is, because I've owned both. Yes, the version I lens. So certainly the 24-70L II will be much better than the 35L. That's why I sold the 35L; I don't shoot many photos wider than f/2.8 and even the mark I was sharper than the 35L, at 35mm. However, if you need to go wider than 2.8, then of course the lens is very useful.

The 35mm focal length is more useful on FF, which is why I'm getting the 24-70L II; it is sharper at 35mm than the 35L.

Well, all comes down to personal preferences and nothing's wrong with that. For me, I'll sure keep my 35L together with the 24-70II as it is my choice 50mm (or 56 for that matter) on cropped sensors. Plus, until there's an mkII, it's still the king of the fast 35's around.

 

[Marsu42]

The MTF of the 24-70L I shows that it's better than the 35L

I have to ask this: am I missing something, are the first reviews up? Charts are all fine, but for month people have been stating how great the 24-70ii just because it's that expensive and lacks IS (so iq has to be even better). And afaik one problem of the mk1 was bad quality control and there were many mediocre lenses around, but no one has compared the mk2 samples for duds - but again, because of $2000 qc has to be stellar?

I'd advise some caution, though even I am considering the new 24-70 because yesterday I realized again how important a fast and precise af is (like on my 70-300L)...

 

[bdunbar79]

You definitely missed something. I said Mark I, not II. I also owned both, and Bryan Carnathan says the same thing. I'm not arguing that everyone should get rid of the prime. It's a great prime. I bought it didn't I? Someone simply asked me why I sold that vs. the 24L, and the reasons I've stated are why. Because the 24L and even the 24-70L I are both sharper. That's all.

 

[Dylan777]

The MTF of the 24-70L I shows that it's better than the 35L

I have to ask this: am I missing something, are the first reviews up? Charts are all fine, but for month people have been stating how great the 24-70ii just because it's that expensive and lacks IS (so iq has to be even better). And afaik one problem of the mk1 was bad quality control and there were many mediocre lenses around, but no one has compared the mk2 samples for duds - but again, because of $2000 qc has to be stellar?

I'd advise some caution, though even I am considering the new 24-70 because yesterday I realized again how important a fast and precise af is (like on my 70-300L)...

Where do you see people stating this???

Most CRs members believe mrk II going to be "THE LENS" because of MTF chart, not because of the expensive price tag.

 

[Marsu42]

You definitely missed something. I said Mark I, not II.

Wupps, sorry, I misread this. Actually I just grabbed your post as a random example of people predicting the 24-70 II as "the lens", I just happened to quote the wrong one

Most CRs members believe mrk II going to be "THE LENS" because of MTF chart, not because of the expensive price tag.

Neither you nor me can say what "most cr members" believe, but I have the definite impression that the high price tag contributes to the high expectations. Unless I read the first real reviews of the final product, I don't rely on any mtf charts (that were made before the lens was delayed and modified, mind you) to make it into every real world lens after qc.

 

[bdunbar79]

You definitely missed something. I said Mark I, not II.

Wupps, sorry, I misread this. Actually I just grabbed your post as a random example of people predicting the 24-70 II as "the lens", I just happened to quote the wrong one

Most CRs members believe mrk II going to be "THE LENS" because of MTF chart, not because of the expensive price tag.

Neither you nor me can say what "most cr members" believe, but I have the definite impression that the high price tag contributes to the high expectations. Unless I read the first real reviews of the final product, I don't rely on any mtf charts (that were made before the lens was delayed and modified, mind you) to make it into every real world lens after qc.

Eh you're right, I'm not much into charts either I guess. I'm just really hoping

 

[Dylan777]

You definitely missed something. I said Mark I, not II.

Wupps, sorry, I misread this. Actually I just grabbed your post as a random example of people predicting the 24-70 II as "the lens", I just happened to quote the wrong one

Most CRs members believe mrk II going to be "THE LENS" because of MTF chart, not because of the expensive price tag.

Neither you nor me can say what "most cr members" believe, but I have the definite impression that the high price tag contributes to the high expectations. Unless I read the first real reviews of the final product, I don't rely on any mtf charts (that were made before the lens was delayed and modified, mind you) to make it into every real world lens after qc.

What about when you buy NEW car, do you rely on manufacture est. mpg? or medicine?


There are 12 stages(I'll list 8 here) in designing new product:
1. Wish List spec+ features - usually come from marketing team
2. Design & protoype to wish list. reviews and approves by marketing
3. Beta build: minor adjustment usually improvment, build prototype near production level(where you get your MTF chart)
4. Reviews & collects feedbacks from trusted users(not public yet)
5. Final review + very minor chance(s), almost no chance in hardware
6. Pilot build: 99.5% production level, dealers get to play at this level
7. Production build

8. If build by 3rd party, price quote will be sent out to qualified contractors

 

[marekjoz]

What about when you buy NEW car, do you rely on manufacture est. mpg? or medicine?


There are 12 stages(I'll list 8 here) in designing new product:
1. Wish List spec+ features - usually come from marketing team
2. Design & protoype to wish list. reviews and approves by marketing
3. Beta build: minor adjustment usually improvment, build prototype near production level(where you get your MTF chart)
4. Reviews & collects feedbacks from trusted users(not public yet)
5. Final review + very minor chance(s), almost no chance in hardware
6. Pilot build: 99.5% production level, dealers get to play at this level
7. Production build

8. If build by 3rd party, price quote will be sent out to qualified contractors

If I can jump into your interesting discussion I'd change it a little bit making it better fit - in my opinion - to Canon.

1. Design and discover something in the lab
2. Patent it
3. Ask marketing what it's worth and if/when should go into production
4. Estimate production costs and give it to marketing so they could work with sales on profit margin
5. Put it into the box and place onto the shelve
6. After X years take the box off the shelve
7. Recalculate costs and price.
8. Add 25%-30% to the price.
9. Make announcement
10. Send box to the factory with a note "make me more of these but change the font and make the red ring more shiny"


There can be step 6.5 - Take another box off the shelve with similar contents inside and decide (or throw a coin) which box leave and which to take

The question remains on the decision process: which box and when should we take off the shelve? Maybe the cleaning lady in the warehouse decides looking on the dust amount?

 

[dave]

My EF 24-70 II is very sharp and you can focus very quick with it.

But I don´t know how big are the fabrication tolerances from Canon.

Dude, if you've got one how about posting some actual photos ???

 

[newera]

I had a play with the 24-70 II yesterday in Adelaide, South Australia. Put it on the 1D X and 5DIII, felt lighter than series one straight away, love the rubber rings, shame about the hood design, from the few shots I snapped it looked very sharp! most likely sharper than the 70-200 II. The Canon rep said there's a few around now

 

[tx8koibito]

Arrived early Sept

 

[canonian]

Arrived early Sept

I'm jealous ;D Where are you located and where did you get it from?

 

[Razor2012]

The MTF of the 24-70L I shows that it's better than the 35L

I have to ask this: am I missing something, are the first reviews up? Charts are all fine, but for month people have been stating how great the 24-70ii just because it's that expensive and lacks IS (so iq has to be even better). And afaik one problem of the mk1 was bad quality control and there were many mediocre lenses around, but no one has compared the mk2 samples for duds - but again, because of $2000 qc has to be stellar?

I'd advise some caution, though even I am considering the new 24-70 because yesterday I realized again how important a fast and precise af is (like on my 70-300L)...

Where do you see people stating this???

Most CRs members believe mrk II going to be "THE LENS" because of MTF chart, not because of the expensive price tag.

That was the first thing that made me think of awesome, and if I'm not mistaken, it should be as sharp if not sharper than the 70-200 2.8 II.

 

[dave]

Arrived early Sept

Congratulations!

Now, all you've got to do is stick it on the camera, take some photos and post them here.

...also don't post photos of it next to a lens with 'Image Stabiliser' on it. Who knows what confusion or involutary reactions that might create.

 

[Marsu42]

...also don't post photos of it next to a lens with 'Image Stabiliser' on it. Who knows what confusion or involutary reactions that might create.

but we figured out that IS on a standard zoom is for sissies and Tokina-amateurs only!

But actually there is another distinction between the cheap kit-lens 24-105L and the real lens 24-70ii: The lens data is not written between the red ring and the lens hood, so Canon might really consider this as "the" lens as no small print with tech details is necessary? But I'm still waiting for the first reviews, please someone post some shots his doorknob in the meantime

 

[dave]

...also don't post photos of it next to a lens with 'Image Stabiliser' on it. Who knows what confusion or involutary reactions that might create.

but we figured out that IS on a standard zoom is for sissies and Tokina-amateurs only!

But actually there is another distinction between the cheap kit-lens 24-105L and the real lens 24-70ii: The lens data is not written between the red ring and the lens hood, so Canon might really consider this as "the" lens as no small print with tech details is necessary? But I'm still waiting for the first reviews, please someone post some shots his doorknob in the meantime

Maybe there were so many delays and adjustments they actually forgot what it was? Maybe it is their new minimalist approach...minimal features, maximum price.

I am actually not that jaded its just that when I first saw the IS in the poster's photo I got all warm and fuzzy imagining canon's press release to us loyal fans...

"Dear friends

Canon (insert region here) wishes to apologize for all of the delays, false promises and that it didn't make the D800. However in addition to our previous gift to you all the 70-200mm is ii we deligtedly advise that we have pulled a shifty (giggle) and actually included IS for you all, except the sissies, you can keep the mark I for a real challenge. No thanks necessary - we do it for love..."

 

[tx8koibito]

Arrived early Sept

I'm jealous ;D Where are you located and where did you get it from?

Hi im from Melb Aus, Got it from my local CPS dealer.

 

[dave]

Arrived early Sept

I'm jealous ;D Where are you located and where did you get it from?

Hi im from Melb Aus, Got it from my local CPS dealer.

Woohoo! Whose calling Australia backwards now?

Maybe Canon felt sorry for us after our dismal failure the Olympics and threw us a bone.

Don't mention that you didn't even need to preorder or you will prompt wholesale virtual apoplexy.