Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS USM

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/canon-ef-24-f2-8-is-usm/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/canon-ef-24-f2-8-is-usm/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/canon-ef-24-f2-8-is-usm/"></a></div>
<strong>Canon EF 24 f/2.8 IS USM</strong>

The 24 f/2.8 that showed up in a patent a few months ago, shows up in image form as an IS prime.</p>
<div id="attachment_8765" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/24-IS.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-8765" title="Canon 24 f/2.8 IS USM" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/24-IS-575x431.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="431" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Canon 24 f/2.8 IS USM</p></div>
<p><strong>Source:</strong> [<a href="http://digicame-info.com/2012/02/ef28mm-f28-is-usmef24mm-f28-is.html">DC</a>] & Submissions (thanks)</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
<div class="prli-social-buttons-bar"><a href="http://del.icio.us/post?url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/delicious_32.png" alt="Delicious" title="Delicious" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/stumbleupon_32.png" alt="StumbleUpon" title="StumbleUpon" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/digg_32.png" alt="Digg" title="Digg" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://twitter.com/home?status=RT @prettylink:  [url=http://www.canonrumors.com/]http://www.canonrumors.com/[/url] (via @prettylink)" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/twitter_32.png" alt="Twitter" title="Twitter" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.mixx.com/submit?page_url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/mixx_32.png" alt="Mixx" title="Mixx" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://technorati.com/faves?add=http://www.canonrumors.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/technorati_32.png" alt="Technorati" title="Technorati" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http://www.canonrumors.com/&t=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/facebook_32.png" alt="Facebook" title="Facebook" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.newsvine.com/_tools/seed&save?u=http://www.canonrumors.com/&h=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/newsvine_32.png" alt="News Vine" title="News Vine" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://reddit.com/submit?url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/reddit_32.png" alt="Reddit" title="Reddit" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=http://www.canonrumors.com/&title=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/linkedin_32.png" alt="LinkedIn" title="LinkedIn" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a><a href="http://myweb2.search.yahoo.com/myresults/bookmarklet?u=http://www.canonrumors.com/&=" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/plugins/pretty-link/images/yahoobuzz_32.png" alt="Yahoo! Bookmarks" title="Yahoo! Bookmarks" border="0" style="padding: 0 10px 0 0;" /></a></div>

 

[mkln]

nice! not an L lens! such a long time.
and small! great, just great.

 

[Justin]

Very interesting indeed. First non-L prime in quite some time and with IS. But the 24-70 is without?! FTW

 

[candyman]

.............. First non-L prime in quite some time and with IS...................

Would that be for video purposes?
Or to make it more easy for HDR (bracketing) indoor and not using mono/tri-pod?


Why IS on a 24mm?

 

[mkln]

.............. First non-L prime in quite some time and with IS...................

Would that be for video purposes?
Or to make it more easy for HDR (bracketing) indoor and not using mono/tri-pod?


Why IS on a 24mm?

handheld night pics of still objects (architecture, landscape, whatever).
4 stops of IS means you can put f/8 and get a great pic handheld.

 

[Justin]

Right! Since Canon and Nikon refuse to implement in-camera IS, and tout the "vastly superior" in-lens version, you really have to cry foul when they leave it out of any lens design, save maybe the widest of angles.

.............. First non-L prime in quite some time and with IS...................

Would that be for video purposes?
Or to make it more easy for HDR (bracketing) indoor and not using mono/tri-pod?




Why IS on a 24mm?

handheld night pics of still objects (architecture, landscape, whatever).
4 stops of IS means you can put f/8 and get a great pic handheld.

 

[kubelik]

.............. First non-L prime in quite some time and with IS...................

Would that be for video purposes?
Or to make it more easy for HDR (bracketing) indoor and not using mono/tri-pod?


Why IS on a 24mm?

handheld night pics of still objects (architecture, landscape, whatever).
4 stops of IS means you can put f/8 and get a great pic handheld.

a lot of time wide-angle lenses are useful for architectural photography. photographing architecture is dim or low light (evening shots, cathedral shots, other interior spaces) is a very common occurrence. since none of Canon's current wide primes (nor the current or apparently future 24-70) have IS, this is a great addition.

as mkln noted, with architecture you really want more DOF, so being able to hold steady longer is a great feature.

 

[DramaMask]

Why IS? Marketing...

Most of the cheaper lenses have IS. Probably because the Marketing Machine has led a lot of consumer to believe that lenses with IS are better than lenses without IS.

 

[TheOm3ga]

I can't understand these two new prime lenses. I mean, 2.8? Seriously? I'd rather dump the IS and have a 1.8 or 2.0 lens. Canon, please, do yourself some good and release a 35mm 2.0 II .

 

[whatta]

sorry, but where do we see in the picture that it is 2.8?

 

[candyman]

sorry, but where do we see in the picture that it is 2.8?

It's a rumor based on: http://digicame-info.com/2012/02/ef28mm-f28-is-usmef24mm-f28-is.html#more

 

[dstppy]

IS on a 28mm prime?

Are we sure no one is having fun with us?

 

[Alfonso]

guess it'll be great for video, as the only Canon wide lens with IS would be 24-105 f/4
but not sure id sell my 28 1.8 for this, unless its THAT much sharper than the 1.8 @ 2.8
any ideas on price range? same goes for the 28mm

 

[mkln]

Most of the cheaper lenses have IS. Probably because the Marketing Machine has led a lot of consumer to believe that lenses with IS are better than lenses without IS.

hmm let me think about this...

yeah they're better.

( can make taking pics easier in lots of situations = better )

I'll also take IS over f/2. Not a big deal on a 24mm lens.
then even less of a big deal for a non-L lens.
would you prefer a 24 f/2 non-IS non-L with probably harsh bokeh so that when (when!) you get OOF areas, they're also ugly? thanks but no thanks.

this is just about right. leave the f/2 for L glass. give the poor, marketing-indoctrinated consumers the 2.8 IS's.
we finally get cheap glass for FF. just great. finally!

 

[EYEONE]

Right! Since Canon and Nikon refuse to implement in-camera IS, and tout the "vastly superior" in-lens version, you really have to cry foul when they leave it out of any lens design, save maybe the widest of angles.

For composition purposes is it vastly superior.

And at 24mm and 28mm there is no reason for IS at all. I have no problem at all buying a non-IS lens that is below 100mm. Now I suppose I'll hear from the video people about that.

 

[AprilForever]

Right! Since Canon and Nikon refuse to implement in-camera IS, and tout the "vastly superior" in-lens version, you really have to cry foul when they leave it out of any lens design, save maybe the widest of angles.

For composition purposes is it vastly superior.

And at 24mm and 28mm there is no reason for IS at all. I have no problem at all buying a non-IS lens that is below 100mm. Now I suppose I'll hear from the video people about that.

No reason for IS at 24? Really? Why do you think it is in the 24-105? The 17-50?

IS is really quite helpful even at wider focal lengths. To be sure, not the same as at 600mm, but, still helpful.

 

[bear]

f/2.8 prime and it's not even pancake lens? It has to be cheaper than 50/1.8

 

[EYEONE]

Right! Since Canon and Nikon refuse to implement in-camera IS, and tout the "vastly superior" in-lens version, you really have to cry foul when they leave it out of any lens design, save maybe the widest of angles.

For composition purposes is it vastly superior.

And at 24mm and 28mm there is no reason for IS at all. I have no problem at all buying a non-IS lens that is below 100mm. Now I suppose I'll hear from the video people about that.

No reason for IS at 24? Really? Why do you think it is in the 24-105? The 17-50?

IS is really quite helpful even at wider focal lengths. To be sure, not the same as at 600mm, but, still helpful.

I think IS is in the 24-105 because it zooms to 105mm... :
I think the 17-55mm (I assume that's what you meant) has IS because on APS-C 55mm is 88mm. Though back in the day I had a 18-55 IS and I never noticed the effect at 55mm. I'd argue that the 17-55mm doesn't really need IS either.

I certainly don't think they included IS because of the short end of the focal range. It was because of the long end.

Helpful? Oh, of course IS is always helpful. What I think we should steer clear of is whining, complaining, and declaring that any lens without IS unfit for use by a photographer. I do have to remind myself of this often, honestly. Sometimes I really want better ISO performance or a higher ISO range and then I remember that people shot weddings and all kinds of events on cameras with a top ISO of 1600 or less. If they can do it I can do it. IS didn't always exist. Feel free to smite me, but that's what I think.

 

[Stuart]

Good, i've wanted a good 2nd prime for my aps-c - this is neat, though if IS add more than £50 to the price i'll be upset.

 

[whatta]

sorry, but where do we see in the picture that it is 2.8?

It's a rumor based on: http://digicame-info.com/2012/02/ef28mm-f28-is-usmef24mm-f28-is.html#more

ok, so it is indeed not visible