GMCPhotographics said:
That is true, but I guess I would not mind having a large aperture lens which can also be stopped down and do video as well. I think it is not just 'either/or' but more like a multi-purpose.
Upvote
0
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS in Development? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
That is true, but I guess I would not mind having a large aperture lens which can also be stopped down and do video as well. I think it is not just 'either/or' but more like a multi-purpose.
A dream:
- Performance like 24-70/2.8 L II
- 4 stop IS
- "Macro" feature like 24-70/4 L IS
- Inner zoom
- Initial price < $3000
Upvote
0
siegsAR said:
I think it's fair to assume this lens (if real) would be a clone of the 24-70 f/2.8L II with some extra internals and an IS switch.
Historically, when canon has IS and non IS version of lenses designed on/around the same timeframe, the front element is the same diameter. It's the max aperture that bosses that front element diameter:
Consider:
70-200 f/4L = 67mm
70-200 f/4L IS = 67mm
70-200 f/2.8L = 77mm
70-200 f/2.8L IS I = 77mm
70-200 f/2.8L IS II = 77mm
So I think an 82mm filter size would be logical to expect on a 24-70 f/2.8L IS.
- A
Upvote
0
Ladislav said:
Zero chance of an internal zoom in my book:
1) Canon does internal zoom for UWA lenses and the 70-200s, but every EF 24-something zoom does not have internal focusing to keep the lens compact when you put it in your bag. Take any 24-70 you own out to 70mm and then freeze it there*. It would be that big. That's fine for some, but not fine for all. Some folks travel will smaller bags or want to pack more inside of them.
2) I believe they co-developed the 24-70 f/2.8L II and 24-70 f/2.8L IS at the same time, or at least left enough room for the IS internals (to be developed later) for the IS version. I'm expecting the IS version to look just about identical to the 24-70 F/2.8L II but have one more switch and weigh a little bit more. I would be stunned if Canon made an about face on internal zooming given the rapturously acclaim the current 24-70 f/2.8L II has received.
- A
*Not including the reverse extending 24-70 f/2.8L I. Imagine that one at 24, I guess.
Upvote
0
... as discussed here some month before - this was to expect. Canon has to have an fine sense in what is happening around in the market. Nikon was the first to be known, that something like that is in the pipeline - so they will have to follow to keep the pro's on board. For a production equipment price is not the key point if it brings better performance and productivity. We will see what we get presented ...
J.
J.
Upvote
0
Agreed. Wouldn't an internal zooming 24-70mm IS also require a larger front element to prevent excessive vignetting at the 24mm end of the zoom range?ahsanford said:Zero chance of an internal zoom in my book:
1) Canon does internal zoom for UWA lenses and the 70-200s, but every EF 24-something zoom does not have internal focusing to keep the lens compact when you put it in your bag. Take any 24-70 you own out to 70mm and then freeze it there*. It would be that big. That's fine for some, but not fine for all. Some folks travel will smaller bags or want to pack more inside of them.
2) I believe they co-developed the 24-70 f/2.8L II and 24-70 f/2.8L IS at the same time, or at least left enough room for the IS internals (to be developed later) for the IS version. I'm expecting the IS version to look just about identical to the 24-70 F/2.8L II but have one more switch and weigh a little bit more. I would be stunned if Canon made an about face on internal zooming given the rapturously acclaim the current 24-70 f/2.8L II has received.
- A
*Not including the reverse extending 24-70 f/2.8L I. Imagine that one at 24, I guess.
Upvote
0
optikus said:
This has been a 'cold war' sort of lens. A 24-70 f/2.8 is a staple lens reportage/sports folks use comically often, and it's stellar general purpose lens for other shooters.
So I think Canon and Nikon both have had a 24-70 f/2.8 IS design sitting in the books and neither have offered one yet because neither has flinched yet. If Canon offers a 24-70 2.8 IS, expect Nikon to have one out far faster than your normal development lead times -- because they've probably had one ready to go (on paper) for some time.
- A
Upvote
0
Having to choose between a top quality 24-70 with no IS and a non top quality 24-70 with IS would be ironical, funny, whatever... It would seem that Canon thinks sadistically or that they are not capable of a lens that is a superset. Of course right now the situation with a 24-70 2.8 II non IS and a 24-70 4 L IS seems similar but I guess they have technical limitations in introducing 24-70 2.8L ISsuper_newbie_pro said:Good new. But... If we could have a 24-70mm f/2.8L II is ($$$$), i hope the 24-70mm f/2.8L IS will be affordable... Yes, we can dream... But why not propose a 24-70 f/2.8 IS (no L for better price) affordable for 500-700€/$ like the 24-105 ?
Upvote
0
Hjalmarg1 said:
Agree, this will be a $2500+ sort of lens at launch. The 24-70 f/2.8L II price has eroded slightly since launch ($1799 down from $2299), but I still think the first to market of the two majors will gouge the dickens out of people for it.
- A
Upvote
0
I have the Tamron 24-70 2.8 with IS, and I have to admit not been entirely happy with it, especially the sharpness when I AF it to a distant object at 24mm for landscape shots, specifically that should be at the hyperfocal distance. I probably need to spend time with MFA on my 6D to get it into better focus.
Also, if you forget to turn off IS on the Tamron when you are using it on a tripod, the results don't just sacrifice a little sharpness, they are quite blurry. The Tamron IS is very unforgiving in this respect. I've achieved excellent results even when I forget to turn the IS off for tripod shots on my Canon 70-200 2.8L IS II, but the Tammy makes you pay dearly for this gaffe, at least my copy of this lens does.
One silver lining is that I am getting much better at remembering to flip that IS switch off now. I used to forget about 25% of the time, since I tend to be mostly a handheld shooter. Now I forget maybe 5% of the time. Another thing is that the resulting blur is so bad that chimping on the camera reveals it pretty readily, so I usually catch it in time to correct it. With the Canon 70-200, sometimes I would fool myself because the images were still sharp -- in fact I usually don't really see a difference when I turn off the switch (I did notice a difference on my gen 1 of the same lens). Hopefully if Canon produces a 24-70 IS it will be on a par with the 24-70 II, and have IS that is forgiving of absent-minded photographers like me when using it on the sticks.
Also, if you forget to turn off IS on the Tamron when you are using it on a tripod, the results don't just sacrifice a little sharpness, they are quite blurry. The Tamron IS is very unforgiving in this respect. I've achieved excellent results even when I forget to turn the IS off for tripod shots on my Canon 70-200 2.8L IS II, but the Tammy makes you pay dearly for this gaffe, at least my copy of this lens does.
One silver lining is that I am getting much better at remembering to flip that IS switch off now. I used to forget about 25% of the time, since I tend to be mostly a handheld shooter. Now I forget maybe 5% of the time. Another thing is that the resulting blur is so bad that chimping on the camera reveals it pretty readily, so I usually catch it in time to correct it. With the Canon 70-200, sometimes I would fool myself because the images were still sharp -- in fact I usually don't really see a difference when I turn off the switch (I did notice a difference on my gen 1 of the same lens). Hopefully if Canon produces a 24-70 IS it will be on a par with the 24-70 II, and have IS that is forgiving of absent-minded photographers like me when using it on the sticks.
Upvote
0
It's already out. A7RII IBIS + 24-70 f/2.8 II. 
(OK, just being silly, but not 100% silly though)
(OK, just being silly, but not 100% silly though)
Upvote
0
... now how do I use ST-E3-RT and 600EX-RT flashes with a Sony body?LetTheRightLensIn said:It's already out. A7RII IBIS + 24-70 f/2.8 II.
(OK, just being silly, but not 100% silly though)
Upvote
0
LetTheRightLensIn said:It's already out. A7RII IBIS + 24-70 f/2.8 II.
(OK, just being silly, but not 100% silly though)
I love how Sony states their adaptered lenses are as fast as native lenses and then all of a sudden it's "All your lens are belong to us. You may no longer not buy our cameras for that reason."
Tip your cap, people. That's marketing in action.
When their AF tracks as quickly & accurately as my 5D3, I'll consider buying one of those things, but I think that might not happen until the 5D6 comes out.
- A
Upvote
0
Although I'd like one, it will probably be priced too high for me for the number of times I'd use it.
I know it's considered the most useful range of a staple lens, but i find that range not wide enough for wide, and not long enough for long. But I've been very happy with this two lens combo:
16-35 f/2.8L II
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
When I want wide shots, the 24-70 doesn't cut it
and when I'm looking for tele shots, 24-70 doesn't cut it
I know it's considered the most useful range of a staple lens, but i find that range not wide enough for wide, and not long enough for long. But I've been very happy with this two lens combo:
16-35 f/2.8L II
70-200 f/2.8L IS II
When I want wide shots, the 24-70 doesn't cut it
and when I'm looking for tele shots, 24-70 doesn't cut it
Upvote
0
StudentOfLight said:... now how do I use ST-E3-RT and 600EX-RT flashes with a Sony body?LetTheRightLensIn said:It's already out. A7RII IBIS + 24-70 f/2.8 II.
(OK, just being silly, but not 100% silly though)
Get a Yongnuo YN-E3-RT and use manual mode.
Upvote
0
I am currently testing yet another 24-70 f2.8 MkII against my 2004 24-70 f2.8 MkI and still can't see a worthwhile difference.
On the other hand if an IS version comes out I am all in whatever the IQ (I know it won't be bad after all).
On the other hand if an IS version comes out I am all in whatever the IQ (I know it won't be bad after all).
Upvote
0
JonAustin
Telecom / IT consultant and semi-pro photographer
Justhandguns said:
I think my black 24-85 (my first Canon EF lens) is still alive, as well; I'll have to check with the "cousin-in-law" to whom I sold it about 9 years ago.
Justhandguns said:
Because Canon's business plan is all about maximizing sales / sales revenue / profit. They realized that the 24-70 II was enough of an improvement over the original, 10-years-older design that photographers who live on the bleeding edge would spring for it, IS or no. Those same bleeders will be first in line to snatch up the IS version when it becomes available.
Upvote
0
