Canon in Active Development of EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS [CR2]

[Deleted member 91053]

I REALLY hope this is not true! A 24-70 F2.8 L IS, why would Canon spoil such a lovely lens!

 

[brad-man]

I REALLY hope this is not true! A 24-70 F2.8 L IS, why would Canon spoil such a lovely lens!

I just don't understand posts like this. We get it. YOU don't like IS, and because YOU don't like it, nobody else should either, right? Never mind that the release of a new 24-70 f/2.8L IS will not effect your or future copies of the v2 in any way. YOU don't think it should even exist :

 

[LesC]

I REALLY hope this is not true! A 24-70 F2.8 L IS, why would Canon spoil such a lovely lens!

How would IS spoil a lens?

If it means being able to get sharper results at even lower shutter speeds, then great.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Because IS inevitably involves both optical and constructional compromises. Were we back in the film days or looking at cheap cameras/lenses then I have no problem with IS. When IS was introduced it was a life saver for photographers!

These days with higher end cameras and lenses I find that IS has more drawbacks than advantages. The impaired AF and tracking is more of a problem for me than learning to hold a lens steady or bumping ISO a little. So I do not like IS.

You probably consider me as mad as a box of Frogs ;D That's absolutely fine! However, if you do not live too far from South Wales I am more than happy to demonstrate the advantages of not using IS and, if we are lucky, introduce you to some other photographers who have benefited from disabling their stabilisers.

I have 4 Canon IS lenses (16-35 F4 L IS, 100-400 Mk2 L IS, 300 F2.8 L IS and 800 F5.6 L IS) - do I turn IS off to make a point or to spite myself? Err - no! I do it because I get better results - unfortunately turning IS off does not help with composition or inspiration - sorry! I have found a marked improvement, especially with moving or unpredictable subjects, so should I not share?