Updated 24-105 f/4L IS - II ... WHEN??? or WHY NOT???

[RustyTheGeek]

Gonna throw this out there and see what happens...

I love the quality of my 24-70 f/2.8L - II. I really love the quality of my 70-200 f/2.8L IS - II !!

But honestly, my first love (and first L lens way back) was the 24-105 f/4L IS. And I still use that lens all the time. It's a very versatile zoom FL and the IS is very useful. It's a great value of an L lens. It's a great single lens walk around solution and it works pretty well on both APS-C and FF cameras.

So when will they come out with a 24-105 that has updated tech and upgraded quality like the other new L lenses??? And for all those that say, "They never will!", why not?

FWIW - my vote is in the #1 or #2 range. In spite of what some think, I like this lens and would love a new version. I wouldn't wait very long unless it was way over priced. That might put me off a while.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I doubt that I'd buy one for 3X the price. The one out there now is great.

The selection of options does not give this choice, there would have to be a infinite number of detail reasons listed to cover everyone.

It is a simple yes or no question to me, we all know the price would be $1500 and you can get the current version for under $600 most of the time.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I doubt that I'd buy one for 3X the price. The one out there now is great.

The selection of options does not give this choice, there would have to be a infinite number of detail reasons listed to cover everyone.

It is a simple yes or no question to me, we all know the price would be $1500 and you can get the current version for under $600 most of the time.

I changed the selection options to be more simple. Think that works better?

As for price, let's keep in mind that the current version (while it's pretty good) is heavily discounted due to the saturated market and large supply. Plus it's been out for a long time and is still popular. Retail price is around $1000 which is realistic. A new version at $1300 - $1500 starting out isn't abnormal with the price dropping back to around $1200 after a while. That's to be expected.

 

[drob]

It's a great lens. Definitely a workhorse on my camera too. I also wonder why not update this lens. I'd actually like Canon to go one step further an offer a 24-105 F2.8. How sweet would that be?

 

[j-nord]

The 24-105L is a kit lens so they go for pretty cheap in the used market. I think the $1k msrp (currently, on b&h) is very steep. I believe the 24-70 f4 IS started at $1500 and is now going for $900 new even though it's undoubtedly a better, newer lens. Some argue the 24-70 f4 IS is the mkii version of the 24-105L being that its better across the board however, the huge drop in price in a few years means it isnt selling well. Between the 24-105 and 24-70 f4 I think the market is extremely saturated for such a lens. It would have to be an exceptionally sharp lens at a good price to convince mki or 24-70 f4 IS owners to upgrade. For these reasons, I doubt they will put out a 24-105ii any time soon.

That being said, Id definitely be interested in one if its noticably sharper than the 24-70 f4 IS and I can get one for around $1000. I got the 24-70 f4 IS for $800 after rebate a year ago.

 

[j-nord]

It's a great lens. Definitely a workhorse on my camera too. I also wonder why not update this lens. I'd actually like Canon to go one step further an offer a 24-105 F2.8. How sweet would that be?

Unlikely since it would closely compete with the 24-70 f2.8 ii but would be even more expensive.

 

[wsmith96]

The 24-105L is a kit lens so they go for pretty cheap in the used market. I think the $1k msrp (currently, on b&h) is very steep. I believe the 24-70 f4 IS started at $1500 and is now going for $900 new even though it's undoubtedly a better, newer lens. Some argue the 24-70 f4 IS is the mkii version of the 24-105L being that its better across the board however, the huge drop in price in a few years means it isnt selling well. Between the 24-105 and 24-70 f4 I think the market is extremely saturated for such a lens. It would have to be an exceptionally sharp lens at a good price to convince mki or 24-70 f4 IS owners to upgrade. For these reasons, I doubt they will put out a 24-105ii any time soon.

That being said, Id definitely be interested in one if its noticably sharper than the 24-70 f4 IS and I can get one for around $1000. I got the 24-70 f4 IS for $800 after rebate a year ago.

+1

I haven't tried the 24-70 f/4, but from what I've read it gets soft around 50mm. Maybe earlier productions were affected and that's been fixed now. Does anyone who has the lens agree? Beyond that, the reviews say it's really good at 24 and 70mm and the macro feature is handy to have, so I agree this is your mkII version of the 24-105.

I bought a 24-105 when the white box market dropped to $500 so I haven't felt the need to try the 24-70. I agree that a new variant would need to provide compelling optics upgrade with a reasonable price tag for me to consider switching. There was a rumor not too long ago that we may be surprised at an upgrade of an existing lens...who knows if this one may be it.

 

[midluk]

This would be the perfect kit lens for a 5D series camera. So it might be released together with the 5D4. Or we have to wait a few years for the 5D5.

This at least would ease the decision whether to get a 24-70 or 24-105 when I go FF.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

This would be the perfect kit lens for a 5D series camera. So it might be released together with the 5D4. Or we have to wait a few years for the 5D5.

This at least would ease the decision whether to get a 24-70 or 24-105 when I go FF.

Yes, you are correct! It would be the perfect kit lens for a 5D series camera! Which is why it WAS the kit lens for the 5D Mark II. In fact, that's how I obtained mine back in early 2010. A friend purchased the 5D Mark II + 24-105 Kit and I purchased the 24-105 from her because she already had that lens.

I think the 24-105 is more versatile than the 24-70 but I also understand that the challenges in IQ improvement increase with larger FL zoom ranges. So I think I understand why the 24-105 isn't promoted as much/given the same love as as the 24-70. But in a perfect world, I would love to see a 24-105 f/2.8 IS with the IQ of the 24-70 f/2.8 - II. I know that's not going to happen but I would settle for top notch IQ in a 24-105 f/4 IS - II. It would go well with the 16-35 f/4 IS and 70-200 IS all using a 77mm filter. And image isolation/bokeh aside, I can usually get away with f/4 using the newer camera sensors.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

OK, not sure how I missed the similar 24-105 thread (started by Nitroman) that was started a couple weeks ago. I actually did look before I posted! D'Oh! :

 

[Maximilian]

Hi Rusty!

Good Poll! I feel tha same like you! I really love that lens and I would like to see it improved to todays standards.
So you know what I've voted for.

But honestly I believe - like others - that the successor in the eyes of Canon is already there and called 24-70/4.0 L.

But I reallyreallyreally hope that that's not Canon's last word on that.

 

[jd7]

I haven't tried the 24-70 f/4, but from what I've read it gets soft around 50mm. Maybe earlier productions were affected and that's been fixed now. Does anyone who has the lens agree?

My 24-70/4 IS has no problem at 50 mm. I might be able to convince myself it is ever so slightly less sharp at 50 mm than at other focal lengths, but if there is a difference it is splitting hairs. Basically it's the same throughout the whole focal length range.

That said, my copy was very poor at 50 mm, and almost as poor at 35 mm, when I first bought it. I nearly returned it, but instead I got it calibrated by Canon.

 

[LoneRider]

I think you need a 4th option, well maybe. I am transitioning from crop to FF, and with that I need to replace the 28-135 lens that came with the 50D. It is most definitely a budget lens.

Anyway, it is likely going to be replaced with a Sigma 24-105 F4 in the coming weeks for summer vacations. And of course the 7D is likely to be replaced by the 5D-iv.

 

[jd7]

I think the 24-105 is more versatile than the 24-70 but I also understand that the challenges in IQ improvement increase with larger FL zoom ranges. So I think I understand why the 24-105 isn't promoted as much/given the same love as as the 24-70. But in a perfect world, I would love to see a 24-105 f/2.8 IS with the IQ of the 24-70 f/2.8 - II. I know that's not going to happen but I would settle for top notch IQ in a 24-105 f/4 IS - II. It would go well with the 16-35 f/4 IS and 70-200 IS all using a 77mm filter. And image isolation/bokeh aside, I can usually get away with f/4 using the newer camera sensors.

Hi Rusty
I agree with most of that, except perhaps about a 2.8 version. In theory I would love it, but in practice I think it would be so much bigger and heavier that it would cease to be a good walk around lens ... and at least for me that is what you I want in the context of that focal length range. I suppose Canon could make both a 2.8 and a 4, but then where would that leave the 24-70 2.8? And I assume it's not easy in any event - the extra focal length range of a 24-105 compared with 24-70 would make it harder to design a lens with the same IQ.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I think the 24-105 is more versatile than the 24-70 but I also understand that the challenges in IQ improvement increase with larger FL zoom ranges. So I think I understand why the 24-105 isn't promoted as much/given the same love as as the 24-70. But in a perfect world, I would love to see a 24-105 f/2.8 IS with the IQ of the 24-70 f/2.8 - II. I know that's not going to happen but I would settle for top notch IQ in a 24-105 f/4 IS - II. It would go well with the 16-35 f/4 IS and 70-200 IS all using a 77mm filter. And image isolation/bokeh aside, I can usually get away with f/4 using the newer camera sensors.

Hi Rusty
I agree with most of that, except perhaps about a 2.8 version. In theory I would love it, but in practice I think it would be so much bigger and heavier that it would cease to be a good walk around lens ... and at least for me that is what you I want in the context of that focal length range. I suppose Canon could make both a 2.8 and a 4, but then where would that leave the 24-70 2.8? And I assume it's not easy in any event - the extra focal length range of a 24-105 compared with 24-70 would make it harder to design a lens with the same IQ.

Yep! I agree. Just make a new 24-105 f/4 with top notch IQ and new IS Tech. Super Macro would be nice too (like the 24-70 f/4 IS). In other words, I wish they had just made the current 24-70 f/4 IS a 24-105. :-[

 

[The Supplanter]

Would anyone be interested if the lens in the link replaced the current 24-105 f4 IS?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27308.0

 

[dak723]

You missed this option to vote for:

I have the existing lens - am happy with it - and don't see any reason to update it as it already has IS. It does the job and there would be no reason to spend money on a newer version.

 

[davidmurray]

I've already got good longer focal length lenses for when I want the very best and I have the time to play around with swapping lenses. The gap in my bag is wide to short telephoto constant f2.8 that I can leave on my 5D3 as a general purpose take everywhere lens that doesn't require a gym membership to handle.

F4 is not quite fast enough in a number of circumstances where a flash would be too intrusive.

 

[jd7]

Would anyone be interested if the lens in the link replaced the current 24-105 f4 IS?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27308.0

Personally, no. I wouldn't want the max aperture to be slower than 4, and I'd be willing to forgo the extra focal length range to have that.

 

[rcarca]

I loved the 24-105 when I bought my 5Diii. It was largely replaced by my 24-70 and 70-200 both 2.8. And then it was stolen and I have mourned its passing! I am even contemplating getting a new one because of its versatility. But an updated version would be perfect and will come out approximately 2 months after I push the button on acquiring the existing one!