Patent: EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS

[WillThompson]

what's wrong with 18-55 IS? :

No "L"!

 

[Marsu42]

what's wrong with 18-55 IS? :

No "L"!

Which unfortunately means the ef-s isn't sealed - L is not only about having a prestigious red ring, but a sturdy lens - avoiding a couple of repairs due to water or sand leaking into the lens will more than make up for the price difference.

I learned this the hard way after my 100mm non-L macro broke twice, while the L version doesn't twitch in whatever situation I use it in.

 

[M.ST]

I see the IS version in the range 2.199 up to 2.499 bucks and the Version II without IS from 1.699 up to 1749 bucks.

 

[Eldar]

To me, the requirement some seem have for IS on the 24-70 is somewhat difficult to understand and I wonder if it is based on real world experience or just theoretical thinking. When I first bought it, it replaced my 24-105 f4 IS as my standard walk-around lens, and I thought I would miss both the 70-105 range and IS. The truth is I don´t. I have a very low threshold for buying the latest and greatest, but I don´t see how IS on this lens would tempt me.

About 2/3 of my shots with my 24-105 are taken below the 1/f rule, and I have taken shots as slow as 2-seconds handheld with that lens. I normally consider 1/10th to be my limit at 105mm and 1/2 second at 24mm. Which would you rather have, 1/2 second, ISO 800 or 1/30th ISO 12800 with the same motion blur?

Then we use them differently. I normally take pictures of things in motion, so to freeze that I need a decent shutter speed. I rarely go slower than 1/30s. And if I do, I normally use a tripod. So for me, IS is not important for this lens. If I did video I would think differently. If I did indoor, handheld, low light stills, I would think differently.

 

[Sabaki]

Just a thought but as the original 24-70's launch was followed by that of the 24-105, could the 24-105 mkii be the next standard zoom we see?

And if yes is the answer, would it be a f/4.0 IS or a f2.8?

 

[Eldar]

Just a thought but as the original 24-70's launch was followed by that of the 24-105, could the 24-105 mkii be the next standard zoom we see?

And if yes is the answer, would it be a f/4.0 IS or a f2.8?

I doubt it will be 2.8. Today that is probably the most important walk-around lens for the FF community. At 2.8 it would become too big.

 

[cliffwang]

I see the IS version in the range 2.199 up to 2.499 bucks and the Version II without IS from 1.699 up to 1749 bucks.

If the IS version is around 2.5K, I would buy one. For current 24-70 MK2 price plus IS feature is the right price.

 

[Loswr]

*yawn*

More evidence that Canon has ceased to be a leader when it comes to lenses.

If Canon were smart they would bring out this lens at the 24-70/2.8II price and drop the price of the non-IS v2 lens by $600 or so.

Then everyone that bought the non-IS version would sell their current lens and buy the new one.

Great way to get everyone to buy two lenses :->

Then again, they may not need to drop the non-IS v2 lens price by that much...

And WHY might they not need to drop the price of the non-IS MkII by that much? Well, because it's a stellar lens that seems to be selling just fine. More evidence that Canon is a leader when it comes to lenses. :

 

[Marsu42]

And WHY might they not need to drop the price of the non-IS MkII by that much? Well, because it's a stellar lens that seems to be selling just fine. More evidence that Canon is a leader when it comes to lenses. :

+1 - Canon made the correct choice from a sales & usage scenario point of view, though many enthusiasts with deep pockets may miss "THE" lens...

... today I again shot outdoor action scenes (Berlin's yearly grocery fight between two city quarters ) with my meager 60d+70-300L. Apart from some poor fellows with Rebel gear everyone else was using 5d3 cameras with some 70-200L and the rest, yes, you guessed it: 24-70L2. I didn't see any Nikons, btw

 

[GMCPhotographics]

*yawn*

More evidence that Canon has ceased to be a leader when it comes to lenses.

If Canon were smart they would bring out this lens at the 24-70/2.8II price and drop the price of the non-IS v2 lens by $600 or so.

Then everyone that bought the non-IS version would sell their current lens and buy the new one.

Great way to get everyone to buy two lenses :->

Then again, they may not need to drop the non-IS v2 lens price by that much...

Lol...talk about a biased and opinionated attitude. Canon's lens catalog is the finest there is. Ranging from the only full frame fisheye zoom, the sharpest 24-70L on the planet, the sharpest 70-200 on the planet and even their 10-20 year old primes are still top drawer performers...topping off the best and lightest long tele's on the planet. Other marques have individual lenses which can match them but no one else has so many class leading performers.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

They easily could have made the 24-70 2.8 II an IS lens to begin with, which we all wanted and expected,

not all

many wanted and expected something with prime-like performance on a FF at 24mm and amazing f/2.8 center across the range in a reasonably small (smaller and lighter than before) package. And we got that.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

The IS-version is (like the version II with no IS) not a parfocal lens and delivers the ugly 18 rays from small light sources with an aperture of 16, 22 and so on.

umm the 24-70 II has been widely praised for having some of the BEST sunstars around, those rays you diss are a PLUS

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Just a thought but as the original 24-70's launch was followed by that of the 24-105, could the 24-105 mkii be the next standard zoom we see?

And if yes is the answer, would it be a f/4.0 IS or a f2.8?

we already have the 24-105 f/4 IS II it is the 24-70 f/4 IS

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The IS-version is (like the version II with no IS) not a parfocal lens and delivers the ugly 18 rays from small light sources with an aperture of 16, 22 and so on.

umm the 24-70 II has been widely praised for having some of the BEST sunstars around, those rays he diss are a PLUS

Yep, for landscape work, 9 blade apertures is far more better then the 8 found in the 24-105L and 24-70L mkI. As you said, the sunstars are far more attractive and brilliant. None of the 24-70L designs from any marque are parafocal, Canon, Nikon, Tamron, Sigma. So i dont know what this op is ranting about. The 24-70IIL is the sharpest and best lens of it's type ever. Please remmebr that Canon's mkI was the first of it's type from any brand and it lasted for well over 10 years. Nikon have only realease theirs a few years ago, where their 28-70L was the nearest competitor previously. The canon mkII version eclipses all over versions by a noticable margin. The only dissapointments are the price and a little more focal breathing at min focus distance. Thie good news is that the price will come down with time, it's already dropped a lot her in the UK over the last year.

 

[M.ST]

No doubt, that the 24-70 2.8 II is the best lens until today.

But the new IS version nearly delivers the image quality of the version II and has all the advantages of an IS lens. I am sure, that a lot of photographers are willing to buy the IS version if the lens hits the market. The version II was my favorite standard zoom for a long time. Now it´s the IS preproduction 24-70 lens.

You can all like the rays from the version II. I don´t like the rays and I don´t like the plastic body of the lens.

 

[RVB]

*yawn*

More evidence that Canon has ceased to be a leader when it comes to lenses.

If Canon were smart they would bring out this lens at the 24-70/2.8II price and drop the price of the non-IS v2 lens by $600 or so.

Then everyone that bought the non-IS version would sell their current lens and buy the new one.

Great way to get everyone to buy two lenses :->

Then again, they may not need to drop the non-IS v2 lens price by that much...

Sorry but I can't take this comment seriously,I use Leica,Nikon and Hasselblad as well as Canon so no fanboy here.. but Canon has a fantastic collection of glass. the MPE-65mm is completely unique,the best 24-70 and 70-200's on the market,amazing super teles the best TS lenses... the 8-15mm fisheye zoom is another unique lens... and we can be sure that more great glass is on the way... As for the 24-70is,well I don't need the i.s but wedding snappers and event guys will like it..

 

[candyman]

No doubt, that the 24-70 2.8 II is the best lens until today.

But the new IS version nearly delivers the image quality of the version II and has all the advantages of an IS lens. I am sure, that a lot of photographers are willing to buy the IS version if the lens hits the market. The version II was my favorite standard zoom for a long time. Now it´s the IS preproduction 24-70 lens.

You can all like the rays from the version II. I don´t like the rays and I don´t like the plastic body of the lens.

Would that be a Canon marketing proposition? A little less IQ than the 24-70 MKII? Will its pricing therefor be more in the level of the Tamron?

 

[Marsu42]

I don´t like the plastic body of the lens.

Me neither, same thing with the 100L - but was Canon seriously thinking about releasing a metal body, or are they set on releasing plastic lenses from now on?

 

[Eldar]

I don´t like the plastic body of the lens.

Me neither, same thing with the 100L - but was Canon seriously thinking about releasing a metal body, or are they set on releasing plastic lenses from now on?

I had the same thought when it was released, but after I had used it for a while I realized that it is a very solid body. High quality plastic does have some advantages also.

 

[RVB]

I don´t like the plastic body of the lens.

Me neither, same thing with the 100L - but was Canon seriously thinking about releasing a metal body, or are they set on releasing plastic lenses from now on?

These plastic shells are very strong and will last as long as you will,Nikon has also started to use this technique ..