EF 24-70 f/2.8L II [CR2]

[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/2012/01/ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-cr2/"></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/2012/01/ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-cr2/" 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/2012/01/ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-cr2/"></a></div>
<strong>Here we go again

</strong>More information has trickled in about the “thorn in my side”, aka the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS II. A new version of the updated lens started to make its way to the folks lucky enough to test the lens out. There have been upwards of 5 different variations of the new lens. It’s still reported that there is no IS in any of the prototypes. One design change that has apparently been seen is a fully internal zoom function, we’re not sure if that is with all the prototypes.</p>
<p>I won’t even hazard a guess as to when it will be announced, though it was suggested it has been pushed back on various occasions.</p>
<p>I can see the collective eye rolls about this post already. I post about 2% of the stuff that comes in about this lens, I understand you’re all sick of reading about it.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/264304-USA/Canon_8014A002_Zoom_Wide_Angle_Telephoto_EF.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296"><em>The Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L at B&H for $1249</em></a></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[Fleetie]

More information has trickled in about the “thorn in my side”, aka the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS II.
It’s still reported that there is no IS in any of the prototypes.

Yet you've imbued it with IS !!

 

[canonian]

One design change that has apparently been seen is a fully internal zoom function, we’re not sure if that is with all the prototypes

I really hope a version with fully internal zoom makes it to market. That would rock!

I just want this lens to be available soon. My first version has been extreeeemely unreliable even after being calibrated a few times. I finally sold it a couple months ago anticipating the new version.

 

[bigblue1ca]

CR - No keep em coming, well at least interesting ones like this. I'm certainly looking to buy the II when it comes out, whether that's this spring or next spring. Right now I don't need it in my collection, but I certainly do want it, so I can wait. The internal zoom would be very nice, people always pay more attention / get distracted when they can see a lens zooming.

 

[traveller]

Same focal length range, no IS... This lens had better break all resolution records if it's to justify the $2000 they're going to ask for it. As customers, we might be better off if they simply made the existing lens to tighter tolerances, as the people who get a 'good copy' seem to be pleased with it.

 

[kapanak]

If it has IS, it will not be a Mark II, and if it has a Mark II, it will not has IS. That's just how Canon's naming works.

 

[canonluvr]

You guys are talking about this lens like it is a Sigma!
Is this a gamble quality control wise?

I have one on order, already payed, just waiting for mkII news this month and then i'm getting the old one if nothing pops up.

 

[JR]

Definitly keep them coming Graig but this feels like we are not even close to seeing this lens afterall. At least not before March maybe? We were all hoping for a January announcement but I guess if you dont have more firm info at this point, we must be several months away... :-[

Internal zoom would be a nice feature though!

 

[Picsfor]

i'll say it then -

it's going to be announced with the actual release of the 1DX, and will be become available as a kit lens for this lovely new body.

It will have internal zoom, because that's the best way of weather sealing it - and improved optics to bring it up to date with modern snesors.

I would have thought it would be about the same size as a 24-105 in wide mode...

Price - more than i can afford any time soon!

 

[00Q]

Same focal length range, no IS... This lens had better break all resolution records if it's to justify the $2000 they're going to ask for it. As customers, we might be better off if they simply made the existing lens to tighter tolerances, as the people who get a 'good copy' seem to be pleased with it.

+1

I was stupid enough to sell my beloved 24-70 before xmas based on rumours. When f-all was announced on 3rd Jan, I realised I was a fool. Lesson learnt.

guess what? Its myfavourite lens. So....I bought it back. Well obviously not the same one I sold, but it bough it back. And now Im never gonna sell it. I use it all the time. Its my baby. Never gonna make that mistake again.

If the MK II comves out, the price will be really large. Unless its got IS (which I dont think so as it will reduce the canon 24-105 f4 Is lens sale to zero, and canon isnt stupid to do that), I will stay with my current lens.

why?

because pros use this lens to shoot portraits. My photos are far from good. Im not gonna rely on a better equipment to try to take better photos. The pros using this this lens reminds me that its whats behind the lens that needs improving.

 

[willrobb]

[/quote]

+1

I was stupid enough to sell my beloved 24-70 before xmas based on rumours. When f-all was announced on 3rd Jan, I realised I was a fool. Lesson learnt.

guess what? Its myfavourite lens. So....I bought it back. Well obviously not the same one I sold, but it bough it back. And now Im never gonna sell it. I use it all the time. Its my baby. Never gonna make that mistake again.

If the MK II comves out, the price will be really large. Unless its got IS (which I dont think so as it will reduce the canon 24-105 f4 Is lens sale to zero, and canon isnt stupid to do that), I will stay with my current lens.

why?

because pros use this lens to shoot portraits. My photos are far from good. Im not gonna rely on a better equipment to try to take better photos. The pros using this this lens reminds me that its whats behind the lens that needs improving.
[/quote]

I've always felt the 24-70mm f2.8L was my favourite all round lens, I'm sure a new version when it eventually comes out it'll be pretty awesome, but until my 24-70mm gives up the ghost it'll be my go to lens. I blogged about my love for recently and have a lot of pics to back up my claims to it's greatness:

http://www.willrobbphotography.com/2011/08/canon-24-70mm-f2-8l-the-best-all-round-canon-lens/

It's been on my cameras solidly for a fair few years now and has paid for my rent all that time. I bow down before this lens in thanks.

 

[nikkito]

it's going to be announced with the actual release of the 1DX, and will be become available as a kit lens for this lovely new body.

Dude, 1D cameras are sold Body Only. No way that could ever happen

 

[D.Sim]

Internal zoom wouldn't be a big selling point for me... other than perhaps better dust/weatherproofing that comes with it. Hopefully the optics are a lot better though, and if prices of the current one drops nicely for it, I'm gonna get the old one.

If the IQ is massively better though...

 

[Caps18]

Let's just make the perfect lens. 18mm-105mm f/2.8 (f/2 ? ). Internal zoom, IS, and ultrasonic focus.

 

[DavidD]

I can see the collective eye rolls about this post already. I post about 2% of the stuff that comes in about this lens, I understand you’re all sick of reading about it.</p>

Methinks you worry too much Craig.

If we wanted fully established facts about Canon equipment
we'd visit Canon's website daily like I do this site.
(Canon's site gets my visit about once a year.)

I read this website to learn about conjecture, fantasy
and faint hope of magical equipment.

I'd rather hear more rumors than less. ;D

This is a respectful request that you increase the rumor reporting
on the 24-70 (and everything else) from 2% to 50 percent.

Seriously.

with my best wishes.
David

PS Since you probably don't hear it enough -

THANK YOU Craig for your tireless efforts to
keep us informed.

I am grateful -- daily.

 

[photophreek]

Internal zoom would be nice, but that does not give you sharp images. The Mk II of this lens better be noticeably sharper in all FL for me to part with my tack sharp 24-70 f/2.8.

 

[jasonsim]

If it is true that they are still deciding on a prototype, then I'd caution to say that we won't be seeing a new 24-70 any time soon. Congratulations to the folks that got the present 24-70mm at such a great price from BH and Adorama during the holiday season. I think they too fell for the rumors.

 

[bigblue1ca]

Internal zoom would be nice, but that does not give you sharp images.

Can you or someone else elaborate on this? I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and it certainly takes sharp images with its internal zoom mechanism, what am I missing?

 

[D.Sim]

Internal zoom would be nice, but that does not give you sharp images.

Can you or someone else elaborate on this? I have the 70-200 2.8 IS II and it certainly takes sharp images with its internal zoom mechanism, what am I missing?

what photophreek means is that internal zoom has nothing whatsoever to do wtih sharp images on the 24-70. or your 70-200 for that matter, or any other lens.

Internal zoom is just... internal zoom. Not gonna be overly hard on the 24-70 to be honest, what with it extending as it zooms out anyway, when the hood is on its almost like an internal zoom, just without the internal. if you get where I'm going


Anyway, basically he's implying its the optics he's waiting to see - not this feature.

 

[lennywood]

maybe i am old school, but i will not buy a lens that is not internal zoom. that is why i have waited to buy a Canpon lens in this range all these years. external zooms, to me, make the lens look cheap and amateur, not to mention all the weather and dust issues. i would gladly pay a reasonable amount more to have all the movement happen inside the barrel.

i own the 70-200 2.8 II and the 16-35 2.8 II. but the 24-70 2.8 always seemed rinky-dink to me, regardless of how good the image is.

of course, i am not saying make the lens less sharp to make it an internal zoom, i am just saying, keep the sharpness, but enclose the darn thing. olympus does it with their beautifully sharp 14-35 (28-70 equivalent on the 4/3 format), why can't you?

please, Canon, don't let me down on this...