All that’s needed is a spark sometimes
I received an email in response to the report the November 24, 2009 announcement day had been pushed back until January.
“Yes, it has been delayed until January now, this is the second time this has happened although this time not due to a technical issues but more marketing. If everything goes to plan (which hardly happens to be honest), January will be a killer month for announcements:
1Ds Mark IV together with the new duo of high end lenses. The 70-200 2.8 IS II and of course the 24-70 II IS.”
CR’s Take
The lenses I’m not shocked by, they’ve sort of become the lenses that will always be replaced. I’ll be taking a wait and see approach.
However, a 1Ds4 announcement already? I thought the 1D4 was early…. this would be crazy.
cr
|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
Makes sense, the Ds is always the announced shortly after the 1D. I’m looking forward to seeing some kick ass zooms from Canon. the current 24-70, while a good lens, doesn’t zoom worth a crap on account of its design, i hope that is addressed.
24-70 II IS sounds sweet.
Ho yeaaaah,
24/70 2.8 IS should just and simply kick asses if they keep the sharpness of the first released model, and just allow more speed (IS) on top of perfection….
Regarding 70/200 2.8 IS II, i already have the first release of that lens… which just ROCKS… but it might interest a lot of people…i guess
Anyway, let’s now hope Canon will “come back” against nikon both in terms of annoucements and product quality.
100-400L twist zoom already. =)
CR1 guys!
is 1Ds cr1 too ?
“24-70 II IS” doesn’t fit into Canon’s usual naming scheme. The lens would most probably be called “24-70 II” or “24-70 IS”, depending on having IS or not.
Boring!! how do will CR Guy make money if there are no rumors..
Come on Canon
How about a 100-400 lens (or 200-400 zoom with f/4.o like the Nikon). This would give all “cross-point” sensors in the 1D Mk IV.
Right!
By the way: Who needs a stablizer for such a short focal lenght. 5 Step IS to use half a second for images of peaple in the style of the 19’th century? Improved optics without IS would also be fine.
Since the ISO levels increased I would expect some zoom with a long range like “EF 70-280 f/4 IS L” or “EF 80-400 f/4-5.6 IS L”.
Any rumor about the Zeiss Macro 50mm f/2 for CanonEF ? The MTF charts are very impressive for macro and normal use as well and distotion is small compared to other 50mm lenses I know the distortion from.
I’ll be there soon, just you wait and see!
If you don’t believe me, listen to Pope Paul on dpreview, he’s always spot on with advice on when new cameras will appear.
“By the way: Who needs a stablizer for such a short focal lenght.”
Oh christ, the luddites are out again.
The debate over the “short lens” focal range not needing or deserving “IS” is long squashed. Canon is putting IS in just about everything that they are making now, and I believe it has a lot to do with people using the EF lenses on 1.3 and 1.6x bodies also, which will put this lens at a 91mm/112mm equivalent on the long end, so for the overall marketing of the “IS” it makes sense to put it in the 24-70 f/2.8 II. I mean think here, they put it in the so “undeserving” EF-s 17-55 f/2.8, and it is one of the best lenses in Canon’s lineup for croppers, and only has the equiv of the 28-90mm.
Also if you consider that sensor resolution is only going to go up, but people will continue to hand hold at somewhat marginal shutter speeds, IS even in a normal focal length range can have value.
I think a 1DsIV announcement sooner than later makes sense as the 1DIV, while not FF, comes close to the MP count of the DsIII, which has probably also lost a fair amount of appeal due to the 5DII. And the D3X is excellent… and the A900 is a bargain… It will be interesting to see if Canon does anything special with video capability, such as higher than 1080P…
24-70 IS wouls be amazing for video. It’s extremely hard to shoot handheld with a non IS lens.
Yes, he is right. Whosoever has studied laws of physics and optics knows that IS for short focal lengths is meaningless.
If you truly believe it’s “meaningless”, then it is your freedom, nay right, to let Canon know in the strongest possible terms. By not buying one.
Meanwhile, people without ridiculous prejudices against new technology (or the proliferation of existing technology) will continue to receive genuine benefits from it, and the Earth keeps turning.
could’ve sworn the earth stopped, must be me…
The rumour of the delay to Jan makes sense to me. Consumer products get announced and distributed for Christmas buying, but these two are higher end lenses and so other marketing factors would aquire far more weight in determining the timing.
If Paul Pope is wrong I hope his supporters remember it and not only remember his ‘hits’ but also his ‘misses’.
cheers,
Chris
I constantly use the 24-70 2.8L and the 17-55 f2.8 IS with a 50D for event shooting. Both lenses are excellent and highly recommended. But 24-70 needs IS so when the flash gets turned off I’ll have a bit of help to steady a shot. And that little bit of help goes a long way.
Thats annoying… I been getting all excited about the new lens next week. Even skipped buying my girlfriend birthday present last week so I can save for this lens. lol kidding…
The 24-105mm f/4 L IS has IS for 24mm which is a short focal length.
That’s what happens when you add IS to a short focal length lens like this.
LOL
The A900 sucks. That’s why it’s a “bargain”.
Even my die-hard-sony-fan buddy says the A900 sucks. LOL
I believed this till I saw “for marketing reasons”. The incessant need to blame marketing is the telltale sign that this person doesn’t know what they are talking about.
Not for me, I can’t afford it yet, so if it’s released in Jan I can afford it (that means I can pre-order it as soon as it’s announced).
LOL
Ahaha
No canon needs the extra delay time to test the camera more and more and more to make sure the autofocus works.
Video is really only worth shooting on a tripod – IS makes no difference unless you are really steady and you’re videoing something that doesn’t move. I video’d a male grouse trying to impress the ladies last weekend at my cabin, but I had left my tripod behind and it was not great (my stills were much better) Also, IS adds very noticeable noise, akin to the noise of the moving tape in my old handycam!
For video, I’d love to see Canon come out with a new lens that is properly designed for manual focus – I’m not against AF lenses, but it would be nice to have better focusing rings that are silky smooth. I MF about 30% of the time.
can’t really state a fact like that based on only your experience.
everyone uses the equipment differently and for different purposes.
for me IS makes a huge difference, i shoot with the current 24-70 and the 70-200 2.8L IS on the 7d. on the 24-70 every single slight movement is apparent, on the 70-200 i can actually get usable footage handheld. noise isn’t a problem for me, i would never use the built in mic for anything critical.
if you still think IS makes no difference, try shooting a clip with it on and then shoot a clip with it off. then come tell us there’s no difference.
I need IS on 24-70 for filming. Much smoother
And the list goes on…
15-85mm IS
17-55mm IS
17-85mm IS
18-55mm IS
18-135mm IS
18-200mm IS
24-105mm IS
28-135mm IS
28-300mm IS
There must be people out there who think that Canon should design lenses like the 15-85mm so that the IS only works in the 71-85mm range. That would be a hot seller, I’m sure.
Canon in New Zealand just announced a release date for the 1D Mark IV today – First week of December.
Why is everyone looking forward to a revision of the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens? I thought it was already a great lens!
I don’t handhold my 300 f/2.8 and I can’t see handholding a 200-400 f/4 so, if I have to use a monopod, I vote for a 200-500 f/2.8-4.
I have studied both and I can confirm that you are talking rubbish. IS is imperative in this day and age.
Nope, as soon as the rumours came out about the new one there was a clear reduction in the quality of pictures coming from the existing 70-200mm lens – hence a new one is required to fix this.
I wont think about this lense unless it has IS… Im waiting to see if it comes out or i will just go out and get the 24 105.
I was hoping for the 60D in january, but he didn’t write anything about that. Well it’s still a rumor so…
I dont know about “Imperative”… it is certainly very useful. And it most certainly isnt useless. But imperative?
There is no rumour on that.
What I meant was that the statement that it is the 1Ds that is going to be released in january that is the rumor. So it may still be that it is the 60D instead. But I can understand that it could be missunderstood. English is not my first language. :)
You have no idea how much marketing dept controls canon’s product designs and specs.
The 24-70 2.8 has been out of stock in Canada for at least a few weeks now, I ordered mine 3 weeks ago and I even tried to get it at different stores, same story.
IS of shorter focal length lenses wasn’t needed in the days of 3mp cameras, but, as the number of pixels increase, the motion blur accross adjacent pixels becomes more and more of a issue, because you do not get the full benefit of the higher resolution.
The Canon 17-85 IS lens has now been out for about 3 years, and it is a huge improvement over the 24-70 for hand held shooting. Even though the lens itself it not quite as sharp, images tend to be better whenever the camera is handheld.
I sold my 24-70 lenses (I’ve had 5 of them) due to motion blur on the 40d. I bought 17-55 for the crop and 24-105 for the 5D MK II. What a improvement IS makes.
1DS mark IV + 70-200mm ?? what a strange combination that is…
the 1ds is mainly a studio art camera that is mostly matched by prime and short focal lenght zooms.
the 70-200mm F2.8 is geared more toward the sport photographers which means that it is more suitable for the 1d.
Having said that, The only reason to join them in one announcment is to cut the costs…
I had both the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS. The IS definitely helps in low light. I kept the Canon and returned the Tamron (for my 40D).
1Ds mark IV first yeah it would be awesome but quite strange from canon. I can’t wait more!!
I don’t why but I really think canon will disappoint me one more time…
The 17-55 2.8 IS is an excellent lense. Wish they made the zoom action smoother and feel a bit better, but the photos are sharp and the IS is about as good as it gets.
Google Video for canon 7D. You’ll find IS on and off clips. IS makes a big difference for Video. You need an external mic for sound in either case
actually the 70-200 works really well in studio, 70 mm is great for portraits from a reasonable distance and it is a tack sharp lens, one of the best in canon’s line-up, so it sorta does make sense matching a high resolution camera with a lens that can match the resolution
IS makes an incredible difference for hand held video. Anyone with two second’s experience with this application would know this.
I agree with Alex. 70-200 has many really great portrait focal lengths. 85, 100, 135, even 200 is excellent good for fashion. If the 70-200 ups the ante on resolution it will be an instant classic for the studio set.
Hmm, you’re right, my phrase, “no difference” was probably too inflammatory and didn’t communicate well. What I was thinking of was not so much the difference between IS and non-IS, but rather the difference between handheld (IS or not) and tripod. Perhaps then my meaning would be clearer. The original poster was talking about the difficulty of shooting handheld video, and I would still say that even with IS it is still quite difficult, at least with my 5DII – I haven’t studied the 7D much. I like the IS, but it won’t solve all your problems.
Another 7D review – http://photo.net/equipment/canon/eos-7d/review/
The “is” works pretty darn well on the 17-55mm ef-s is 2.8. So my opinion says it that it does work.
As a company auditor, I actually have a lot of knowledge about the role marketing plays in a business’s operation decisions. Very low.
Hi everyone, do you think the 135mm f2 L is an amazing lens that Smashes the 70-200 (all versions) in terms of sharpness, color, bokeh, focus speed, build quality, etc.
My other question is, would I be able to obtain the 70-200’s range easily with the 135 if I’m not really confined to tight spaces, I shoot closeups and full body shots in huge forests, cities, and beaches.
I am not surprised of the news 1D and I think that there will also be a new “5D” “sooner than we would have expected” which be like the 7D but fullframe. When the 5d markII went out it was obvious it was an “unfinished” product (I think it was only to sell the remaining all parts in stock).
I agree, I will only buy if it has IS
I have the 14LII, 24LII, 35L and 85L II…wish they all had IS too but Canon seems to have difficulty putting IS in fast primes :( hope they find a way soon as it will increase their usefulness incredibly
If I would wish for anything in my 5d mark II. It would be to have a good focus system like the 7d and an 5fps speed. Having said that, none is critical for my work. I don’t think a 5d mark III will be coming anytime soon.
agreed.
What are you smoking? The A900 is a sweet camera. Have you ever used it? I have, the quality at ISO 100-400 is outstanding, plus you’ve got some of the best glass in the world! I shoot with Canon but you’ve got to give respect where its due.
Oh yes it is imperative… Imagine the outcry of the public at large when a lens does NOT have IS… That instantly makes it a bad one (or so is claimed). Imagined value is what sells, real value is just nice.
I was told not too buy the Canon Mark 5D II because canon was releasing a new 5D in January to compete with the new Nikon ISO capabilities. Has any one heard this or have any details???
Many people have alos become fans of Paul Smith Shoes since they came into the market. I also one of them , I very like Paul Smith Wallets and <a Paul Smith Belts,It designs very good.
The MTF from Nikon are very impressive, Canon has to improve the lenses 24-70 F/2.8 and 70-200 F/2.8
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af-s_70-200mmf_28g_vr2/index.htm
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/zoom/af_zoom24-85mmf_28-4d_if/index.htm
1dm4 = Runtime-Error
1dsm4= CANON SALVATION
And then
Nikon D4 = Canon Scratching heads again
Nikon D4x = Canon we have no answer.
I’m still a believer that megapixels mean nothing especially when you don’t need them. I can make near identical prints with a 12mp sensor than I can with a 24mp sensor.
Kevin, that’s a good maths you’ve done here! Unfortunately you’re right, in 2009 Nikon is rocking the place.
Can anyone tell me by the way, why would Canon have 1.6, 1.3 and a FF sensors… when Nikon is offering either 1.6 budget DSLRs or professional FFs…
So today I can buy D3s for the same price as 1D MarkIV
But Nikon is a FF DSLR, and Canon would give a 1.3 crop sensor.
Doesn’t it sound like a ripoff from Canon to you?
Canon is not ripping off their customers. Their listening to their customers.
First off, NUMEROUS Nikon boards posted how FF sensors are a waste of time, due to less DOF, greater zoom, and lighter equipment. FF was claimed to be a thing of the past. Like Medium Format Sensors. They ripped on Canon offering FF sensors and Nikon just didn’t need them. Where are these posters now? Well, those benefits are exactly why a 1.3x sensor exists.
There are advantages to a smaller sensor. The 1D customer usually doesn’t make a print larger than 13″x19″ Because of that, Canon decided to shrink their sensor and increase pixel density to give them more reach. Now that 70-200 on a 1D is actually a 91-260. Compared to the Nikon D3 which is still a 70-200. The Canon photographer will have a tighter zoom and less cropping to do and will get a sharper sports picture than the D3 equipped photographer. Why not use a 7D/50D or D300S? Well, they don’t have the same autofocus or weather sealing. The D3 or 1D series camera are VERY tough.
It’s not why does canon offer a 1.3x sensor. It’s why doesn’t Nikon? You get better noise performance than a 1.6x sensor and more reach+DOF than a full frame. Win-Win for a sports photographer.
It’s not like it matters. The weakest component of any photography system is the one behind the viewfinder. Both Nikon and Canon make systems that are way better than any of us can shoot anyway. Too much talking. Going out to photograph something. That’s a better use of my time.