New EF 24-105 f/4L IS Replacement Coming With 5D Mark IV [CR3]

[Eldar]

I am very fond of my 24-70 f2.8L II and I will clearly not part with it. However, ever since I sold the 24-105 f4L IS, I have missed the versatility of that lens. Its focal range makes it a great general purpose walk around lens. Version 1 is not anywhere near the 24-70 in optical quality, but having seen what they did to some of the new releases, I have high hopes for this one.

The question is: will it have the IQ of the 24-70 f/4L IS (and presumably therefore be quite heavy to cover 71-105 with good resolution), or will it simply be a modernized Mk II of the 24-105L we know today -- same IQ but put on a diet weight-wise, a lock switch added, better IS, etc.

Prediction: It won't be as sharp as the 24-70 f/4L and get considerably lighter than the current 24-105L. It will be one or the other. I don't see both happening given the FL multiplier difference.

- A

Could be, but what´s the purpose of releasing that focal length again, if it was not for a significant improvement? Improved IS, a lock switch and a few grams saved is (in my view) not enough. I think we will see a significant boost in performance and a significant boost in price.

 

[Maximilian]

...

I recognized nUSM as a not so powerful and not so fast solution of USM. (no personal experience)
And I realized that linear motors are not always good with optical elements, see the reviews of Lens Rental here about Sony linear drives.
If I am wrong and Canon did it mechanically right, I'd take back this constraint.

Here's what Canon has to say:

[quote author=Rudy Winston, Canon DLC]
Nano USM gets its name from the incredibly compact size of this motor. (The name has nothing directly to do with the type of vibrational energy it generates to drive a lens’s focus elements.) In this initial application, the motor itself is small enough to fit on the first joint of a model’s finger...

AF speed during still-image shooting rivals what users have come to expect from high-end lenses with Canon’s powerful ring-type USMs. It’s brisk and nearly instantaneous — an almost perfect match for the new AF system in the EOS 80D. Most users will doubtless agree that it’s a clear step forward from what we’ve come to expect in affordable lens focus, whether we’re referring to the previous Micro USM focus motors used in many such lenses, or the recent STM versions.

Worth noting that he references nanoUSM as a big imprevement for 'affordable lenses' which I take to mean non-L lenses. Is the tiny motor that is 'small enough to fit on the first joint of a model’s finger' big enough to drive the larger focusing groups found in many L-series lenses?
[/quote]
Thanks, Neuro, for pointing that out more precisely than I could today in the morning.
So nUSM beeing more or less a superior substitution for STM and no high performance AF for high performance L lenses.

 

[unfocused]

I found the current 24-105 to be painfully soft. The images I got out of it required extra work to fit in with the rest of the images from events shot with other lenses...

This surprises me. I wouldn't claim that the 24-105 is as sharp as the 24-70, but if the softness is that evident I wonder if the lens is faulty.

 

[ahsanford]

I found the current 24-105 to be painfully soft. The images I got out of it required extra work to fit in with the rest of the images from events shot with other lenses...

This surprises me. I wouldn't claim that the 24-105 is as sharp as the 24-70, but if the softness is that evident I wonder if the lens is faulty.

Agree, the 24-70 f/4L IS is sharper, but not tremendously so. Only at 24mm is it a night and day difference.

Kevl, if you have to stop your lens down to f/6.3 or something to net a useably sharp shot, you might want to have it looked at, or possibly try out another copy side by side in a store that will allow you to test it.

- A

 

[RGF]

I am very fond of my 24-70 f2.8L II and I will clearly not part with it. However, ever since I sold the 24-105 f4L IS, I have missed the versatility of that lens. Its focal range makes it a great general purpose walk around lens. Version 1 is not anywhere near the 24-70 in optical quality, but having seen what they did to some of the new releases, I have high hopes for this one.

+1 but in the end I needed to buy back the 24-105 (when my 24-70 F2.8 II feel and had to be repaired) I need a mid-range zoom quickly so I got the 24-105

Nice thing about the 24-105 is the 77mm filter size. Let's hope Canon sticks with this filter size and does not increase the filter size to 82mm.

 

[j-nord]

I am very fond of my 24-70 f2.8L II and I will clearly not part with it. However, ever since I sold the 24-105 f4L IS, I have missed the versatility of that lens. Its focal range makes it a great general purpose walk around lens. Version 1 is not anywhere near the 24-70 in optical quality, but having seen what they did to some of the new releases, I have high hopes for this one.

+1 but in the end I needed to buy back the 24-105 (when my 24-70 F2.8 II feel and had to be repaired) I need a mid-range zoom quickly so I got the 24-105

Nice thing about the 24-105 is the 77mm filter size. Let's hope Canon sticks with this filter size and does not increase the filter size to 82mm.

Im happy to take 82mm if thats what it takes to increase the IQ. The sigma 24-105 is 82mm. I suspect Canon will go to 82mm if they overhaul the optical formula.

 

[CANONisOK]

I found the current 24-105 to be painfully soft. The images I got out of it required extra work to fit in with the rest of the images from events shot with other lenses...

This surprises me. I wouldn't claim that the 24-105 is as sharp as the 24-70, but if the softness is that evident I wonder if the lens is faulty.

Agree, the 24-70 f/4L IS is sharper, but not tremendously so. Only at 24mm is it a night and day difference.

Kevl, if you have to stop your lens down to f/6.3 or something to net a useably sharp shot, you might want to have it looked at, or possibly try out another copy side by side in a store that will allow you to test it.

- A

This is the other great hope I thought of after my first post. Canon lately has a fantastic reputation for less copy to copy variation. This was one of the biggest problem with the original.

We'll just have to wait and see.. but again.. this is sounding more and more like an expensive kit. Anyone care to throw out an estimate? Is this a $4.5k USD kit? ~3300 body + 1200 lens.

 

[FramerMCB]

My prediction: the Canon 5D Mk IV will come in at the same price or within $200.00 of the Mk III at introduction. The new 24-105mm f4L II will come in at around $1,399 - $1,499. In kit form the combo will be about $4,399 - $4,799.

 

[wallstreetoneil]

As a 5DSR owner, who has stopped using his Canon 24-70 F2.8 II, and who sold his 50L, 85L II, his 135L all because they don't have IS, and then purchased the Sigma 24-105 F4 OS, Tamron 45 VC & 85 VC, I can pretty much predict that this lens is a must release for the big megapixel cameras that are coming in 2017 - i.e. it looks like we are jumping to 75Mpix. I wonder if this disproves the recent 24Mpix, which made no sense, 5D4 sensor size, and that we will instead be seeing the earlier rumoured 28-30 and thus a new IS lens can get marketed well. I still think there is something to Tony Northrupt's rumor that we are going to see the 6D_II first - and that the 5D4 is next year at 75Mpix.

 

[ahsanford]

As a 5DSR owner, who has stopped using his Canon 24-70 F2.8 II, and who sold his 50L, 85L II, his 135L all because they don't have IS, and then purchased the Sigma 24-105 F4 OS, Tamron 45 VC & 85 VC, I can pretty much predict that this lens is a must release for the big megapixel cameras that are coming in 2017 - i.e. it looks like we are jumping to 75Mpix. I wonder if this disproves the recent 24Mpix, which made no sense, 5D4 sensor size, and that we will instead be seeing the earlier rumoured 28-30 and thus a new IS lens can get marketed well. I still think there is something to Tony Northrupt's rumor that we are going to see the 6D_II first - and that the 5D4 is next year at 75Mpix.

We can talk MP all day and I'll skip that topic. BUT, if you consider:

1) In the last 5 years, Canon has never released two FF rigs simultaneously* (unless it's a AA filter related like the 5DS/5DSR) that could steal business from one another. They announce / build-buzz / take pre-orders / ship / get reviews published / etc. for just one FF rig and then they slide over to a similar cycle for another brand. This protects the sales of higher priced items as the only 'new' thing on the market at that time.

(*Yes, 1DX and 5D3 slightly overlapped, but that was not by design -- that was earthquake related)

2) We've heard 10x more about the 5D4 this year (rumor-wise) than the 6D2.

3) The 5D4 is 4+ years old now and is falling behind prior 5D refresh timing

4) An announcement of a 6D2 before a 5D4 will undoubtedly steal units to the 6D2 from the more expensive 5D4.

...all conventional wisdom would imply that we won't hear a thing from the 6D2 until the 5D4 is fully released.

- A

 

[unfocused]

...i.e. it looks like we are jumping to 75Mpix. I wonder if this disproves the recent 24Mpix, which made no sense, 5D4 sensor size...
...I still think there is something to Tony Northrup's rumor that we are going to see the 6D_II first - and that the 5D4 is next year at 75Mpix.

We can talk MP all day and I'll skip that topic. BUT, if you consider:

1) In the last 5 years, Canon has never releases two FF rigs simultaneously*...

2) We've heard 10x more about the 5D4 this year (rumor-wise) than the 6D2.

3) The 5D4 is 4+ years old now and is falling behind prior 5D refresh timing

4) An announcement of a 6D2 before a 5D4 will undoubtedly steal units to the 6D2 from the more expensive 5D4.

...all conventional wisdom would imply that we won't hear a thing from the 6D2 until the 5D4 is fully released.

- A

I would agree and add some additional thoughts.

I don't see that the 6D II really "needs" a quick refresh. It is the entry level full frame body and is filling that niche very well. I suspect that in some ways it could be the T3i of the full frame world – a relatively low-cost product that just keeps selling and selling.

It has a very good sensor with better low-light performance than the 5D III (because of the megapixel count). The autofocus receives complaints from those who treat specs as holy grails, but most users seem to feel it is better than they expected and that it meets their needs.

There are things that could be added and updated, but it's not as though any lack of features is hurting sales. (It is currently Amazon's second best selling full frame camera -- behind the 5DIII and ahead of the Nikon D750. For most of its life it was well ahead of the 5DIII.)

So, in addition to all the external clues ahsanford mentions, there does not seem to be the pent-up demand for a refresh that there is for a 5D IV.

As for a 75mp sensor, particularly in a 5D IV – I think that's something Tony Northrup threw out there just for click bait.

 

[ahsanford]

I would agree and add some additional thoughts.

[truncated]

As for a 75mp sensor, particularly in a 5D IV – I think that's something Tony Northrup threw out there just for click bait.

And a 75 MP 5D4 is entirely against the identity of the 'do everything well' part of the 5D# brand. The 5D3 represents the 'Sure, I can do that' professional rig -- low light, track moving subjects, silent at weddings, decent burst, great video, etc. -- and a much much higher res sensor would hamstring the 5D4's ability to keep on doing that. Consider: a 5D4 with a 75 MP sensor would only put through maybe 4 fps with the kingly 1DX2 as a bar for throughput (which the 5D# line has never been given).

I am not 100% opposed to an MP bump with the 5D4, but it simply can't come at the form of an fps reduction or low light takeaway from the 5D3. Save that super high res rig for the next 5DS/5DSR and keep it away from the 5D4.

- A

 

[PeterAlex7]

Since there is already a 24-70 f4L IS, and a 24-70 f2.8 VR from nik, could it be a 24-70 f2.8L IS USM?

Because i don't see any possible reason to invest some money on another 24-70 or 24-105 f4-ish. Just dont make sense to me. Note that sigma will come with a stabilized 24-70 f2.8 art soon

 

[NancyP]

The 6D is great for some people. It does a fine job for landscape and macro photography. AF has little relevance in most photos of these genres. I don't have the computer yet for slinging around ginormous files that I am only going to print to 13 x 19 at most. 20 MP is fine. With a really fast computer, I might consider the 5DSr, but until I get more wall space, I am still stuck at 13 x 19.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

weird I though the 24-70 f/4 IS was the replacement

 

[ahsanford]

Since there is already a 24-70 f4L IS, and a 24-70 f2.8 VR from nik, could it be a 24-70 f2.8L IS USM?

Because i don't see any possible reason to invest some money on another 24-70 or 24-105 f4-ish. Just dont make sense to me. Note that sigma will come with a stabilized 24-70 f2.8 art soon

I will never buy a 24-105 lens, but even this forums' biggest 24-70 f/4L IS fan (hint: me) would concede that some people truly value reach over best possible IQ. There is a large pent-up 24-105 market that wants something better than a plasticky non-L lens.

And you don't ever kit a $2k+ showpiece like a 24-70 f/2.8 IS with a body. That will drive down the price. Kit lenses need to be reasonable +20-30% add-ons to the body price, so in the case of the 5D4, that means roughly a $750-1,200 lens. A 24-105 f/4L IS II with some kind of better video functionality (like power zoom compatibility) would seem to fit the bill.

- A

 

[YuengLinger]

Since there is already a 24-70 f4L IS, and a 24-70 f2.8 VR from nik, could it be a 24-70 f2.8L IS USM?

Because i don't see any possible reason to invest some money on another 24-70 or 24-105 f4-ish. Just dont make sense to me. Note that sigma will come with a stabilized 24-70 f2.8 art soon

I will never buy a 24-105 lens, but even this forums' biggest 24-70 f/4L IS fan (hint: me) would concede that some people truly value reach over best possible IQ. There is a large pent-up 24-105 market that wants something better than a plasticky non-L lens.

And you don't ever kit a $2k+ showpiece like a 24-70 f/2.8 IS with a body. That will drive down the price. Kit lenses need to be reasonable +20-30% add-ons to the body price, so in the case of the 5D4, that means roughly a $750-1,200 lens. A 24-105 f/4L IS II with some kind of better video functionality (like power zoom compatibility) would seem to fit the bill.

- A

What are sales of the 24-70mm f/4 IS compared to 1) 24-105mm and 2) 24-70mm 2.8 II?

 

[douglaurent]

Obviously many members of this forum have no vision that every new EF-mount lens, and each existing EF mount lens can be a less clever future investment like the Sony A-mount is now, if Canon decides to use a new mount with their coming large sensor mirrorless cameras. You then will have to sell your EF mount lenses or you will never have the mirrorless advantages.

On a different note, the 5D4 might show how stupid it is not to be able to attach EF-S lenses on full frame bodies, if the 4K video mode will be 1.3x like on the 1DC or 1DX2. The Sigma 18-35/1.8 and 50-100/1.8 for example are beautiful lens options for the 1DX2 4K video mode that cover the used sensor area.

Just the whole Canon crop lens lineup doesn't work, and all Canon full frame lenses of course will have a 1.3x crop and turn a 24-105 kit lens into a pretty strange 32-136mm focal length, which is simply not wide enough.
If Canon would be innovative, they should find a way to makie it possible to use EF-S lenses on the 5D4 as well!

Alternatively, Canon could implement crop modes like Sony did on the A7R2, which gives you 24-105mm, 36-158mm and in 4K video mode even 72-315mm with one single 24-105 kit lens. To repeat the facts: right now the old 24-105/4 is a 32-136/4 on the Canon flagship DSLR, and a 24-315/4 on an A7R2 when you do video. With a speedbooster adapter it even could be an f2.8 lens. Aside from releasing new lenses, Canon should also stop limiting what you can do with them.

 

[ahsanford]

What are sales of the 24-70mm f/4 IS compared to 1) 24-105mm and 2) 24-70mm 2.8 II?

Undoubtedly low, but none of us have hard figures for this. One would assume the 24-105L to be a top 2 or top 3 selling EF mount lens, perhaps behind only the 50 f/1.8 II (and perhaps the new 50 f/1.8 STM). But it's impossible to back out how much of this is due to the value proposition that lens vs. the massive impact of kitting it with camera bodies. Were it never kitted and only available for the $999 it's being sold for now, the sales numbers would be nowhere near as high.

Amazon best sellers for lenses at this moment (out of all lenses for any mount / sensor size):

24-70 f/2.8L II = #28
24-105 f/4L IS = #38
24-70 f/4L IS = not in the top 100

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Obviously many members of this forum have no vision that every new EF-mount lens, and each existing EF mount lens can be a less clever future investment like the Sony A-mount is now, if Canon decides to use a new mount with their coming large sensor mirrorless cameras. You then will have to sell your EF mount lenses or you will never have the mirrorless advantages.

1) You presume Canon's FF mirrorless will have a new mount. There a great number of reasons that Canon may not do this, and instead possibly opting for a full-blown EF mount on their future FF mirrorless. And even if they do go with a new mount, they would be fools of the highest order to not have a perfect/seamless step-up adaptor to the EF mount.

2) Why would folks invest in Sony glass that is so often focus-by-wire? That's a step down for many users accustomed to full time (mechanical) manual focusing.

3) Canon could, I suppose, offer the crop modes you are referring to any time it likes. The fact that it doesn't do that today is hardly the lens' fault.

4) Then there's that small bit that Canon glass works on a Sony just fine. Good luck trying that the other way around.

I welcome the mirrorless future, I do. But I actually rate the EF mount as quite possibly the safest optical investment I could make.

- A