24-70 f/2.8 IS

[Lone Rider]

Does anyone think this day is ever going to come.....:confused:

24-70 f/2.8L IS

Received my first bit of info about such a lens today.

It comes from a Canon employee that advised someone to “wait a bit” before buying the existing version of the lens.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/08/this-and-that/

[phreeky]

I think it will, Canon will probably eventually put IS in almost all their lenses. With the zoom/hood design this lens has going for it I can only suspect it's a lens design too hard to integrate IS into and will probably end up in a complete redesign.

Honestly though it's the sort of FL I wouldn't bother with IS. Most people would shoot people with it and therefore want 1/100s+ to prevent motion blur, and at 1/100s+ you wont need IS at those focal lengths.

[Lone Rider]

This lens has just had its 8th birthday, and I can't understand why Canon are doing nothing...

[mikeassk]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=84

[Dylanlewis2000]

The link in your first post dates back to August.

[jra]

This has been discussed for years. Three years ago, many believed it was "right around the corner"....well it hasn't happened. The future may bring one fairly quick or it may be many be years down the road....if at all. If you want/need the FL, I would say to go out and get it. No sense in waiting on what may no happen :)

[Jahled]

Going to be large, and probably white if Canon pull it off, which might just defeat the point

[mikeassk]

Going to be large, and probably white if Canon pull it off, which might just defeat the point

Canon has not made a white lens that does not extend to at least 200mm. Why would they start now?

The white is to prevent overheating in outdoor shooting in sunlight, more often the environment for telephoto lenses.

[Jahled]

Canon has not made a white lens that does not extend to at least 200mm. Why would they start now?

The white is to prevent overheating in outdoor shooting in sunlight, more often the environment for telephoto lenses.

Thought about the size of this lens? Just figured it might warrant a bit of white all over

Nikon obviously haven't lashed on to this :rolleyes:

[HyperYagami]

I can bet $500 Canon/Nikon/etc already have some kind of 24-70 f/2.8 IS in R&D, just they're not ready for prime-time for whatever reason (too big, too costly, low yield, etc etc).

I can't understand why Canon are doing nothing...

May I ask what gives you that idea?

[Doostur]

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/09/ef-24-70-f2-8l-replacement-cr2/

"Stop teasing me!
I know, I know. We keep talking about it and nothing happens. 99% of the stuff that comes in regarding this lens I put to the side.

However, a great source has finally spoken up in regards to a replacement. I’m not putting CR3 on it because I don’t have a specific date.

What I am told is the lens is coming “sooner rather than later”. There’s 2 possible announcement dates.

It sounds like it will be launched alone like the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II was. It’ll either be announced before the end of the year, OR just before WPPI which starts February 17, 2011.

It’s not confirmed it’s going to be an IS lens, though if it wasn’t. I’d be completely shocked.

This is officially the best confirmation I’ve received in regards to this lens.

You will know more the second I know more.

cr

Tags: 24-70"

[JonSC]

This lens has just had its 8th birthday, and I can't understand why Canon are doing nothing...

8 years is nothing for a lens, honestly. Canon probably can do something but does not feel a need to. They actually don't really need a 24-70 IS.

[JelleVerherstraeten]

8 years is nothing for a lens, honestly. Canon probably can do something but does not feel a need to. They actually don't really need a 24-70 IS.

If they bring out one, their sales will go up in no-time. Every pro photog has a 24-70 and will likely upgrade to the new version.
Just my 2c

[05Xrunner]

Thought about the size of this lens? Just figured it might warrant a bit of white all over

Nikon obviously haven't lashed on to this :rolleyes:
doubt the size would change at all..do you see any real size difference between the 70-200 IS and non IS the 24-105 isnt big and has IS..i would bet the size change would be negligible at all. Also I am sure someone will bring up weight..thats another thing I doubt would change much at all..maybe 1-2oz more

[HyperYagami]

If they bring out one, their sales will go up in no-time. Every pro photog has a 24-70 and will likely upgrade to the new version.
Just my 2c

until Nikon comes up with a better one, then everyone will be "wtf canon".

i'm sure there are business factors involved. you don't bring it out unless there's business need for it. just look at the real reason they introduced 70-200 II.

[azpix]

If they bring out one, their sales will go up in no-time. Every pro photog has a 24-70 and will likely upgrade to the new version.
Just my 2c

thats probably a stretch...I am fine with the lens as is.

this rumor has been floating forever. to let it die.

[sc300jz]

If they bring out one, their sales will go up in no-time. Every pro photog has a 24-70 and will likely upgrade to the new version.
Just my 2c

That would be nice, then the prices of the 24-70 will go down and i'll finally be able to pick that up!

[Fidelity]

I have a big gaping hole in my FL range for my 1D Mark IV. I have a 16-35 II and a 70-200 f/4 IS. No standard zoom. Am waiting on a new 24-70 IS or, better yet, a new 17-55L. The current 17-55 trounces the 24-70 in IQ, but won't work on a 1.3x crop. Will patiently wait for something new ("L" class) in the std zoom range that's at least as good optically as the current 17-55.

[LostInInaka]

That would be nice, then the prices of the 24-70 will go down and i'll finally be able to pick that up!

haha +1!

[azpix]

I have a big gaping hole in my FL range for my 1D Mark IV. I have a 16-35 II and a 70-200 f/4 IS. No standard zoom. Am waiting on a new 24-70 IS or, better yet, a new 17-55L. The current 17-55 trounces the 24-70 in IQ, but won't work on a 1.3x crop. Will patiently wait for something new ("L" class) in the std zoom range that's at least as good optically as the current 17-55.

why won't the 17-55 work on a 1.3?
I'm not familiar with this lens? do you have examples
comparing the IQ?

[Fidelity]

why won't the 17-55 work on a 1.3?
I'm not familiar with this lens? do you have examples
comparing the IQ?

The 17-55 is optimized for 1.6x crops. It won't fit 1.3x or FF bodies. I don't own a 24-70. I've seen wedding photos where one shooter used a 24-70 and I used a 17-55, both on 40D's. No contest. Even when the 24-70 was on a 7D, and the 17-55 on a 50D, no contest. 17-55 wins hands down. I'd show you the photos, but they belong to the other photographer who was contracted to do the weddings. The superiority is not only in sharpness, but contrast and color. Another league. If they only made an L version, my 1D Mark IV would be happy. Barring that, I'd pounce on an optically-improved 24-70 (with IS).

[concrete jungle]

I'm thinking about buying the 24-70. Would it be wise to wait and wait for the new version?

[MOkoFOko]

That would be nice, then the prices of the 24-70 will go down and i'll finally be able to pick that up!

Hah! Not likely! The 28-70L that was replaced by the 24-70L has been discontinued for 8 years now... and still goes for $800-$900 used!!

[PLLphotography]

Hah! Not likely! The 28-70L that was replaced by the 24-70L has been discontinued for 8 years now... and still goes for $800-$900 used!!

and even though it's discontinued, some will still swear that it's sharper than the current 24-70.

YMMV. if they ever do bring out the next 24-70 mark II or whatever it may be called, you may look at it and say "heck, the old 24-70 produces better, sharper photos than this piece of junk". :lol:

[Fidelity]

Not judging by Canon's latest lens updates. I'm sure the new one will be better in every way but price.

[hieu1004]

I'm thinking about buying the 24-70. Would it be wise to wait and wait for the new version?

Can you wait long enough? Are you not able to take the photos you want without it? Only you can answer that question. Just buy it now and you can re-sell it later and upgrade. Write it off as a "rental fee"

[cccc]

http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/01/more-5d-mark-iii-1d-mark-v-lenses-cr2/

[Mundty]

I'm not really concerned about it to be honest. I love my 24-70L, is pretty sharp across the whole frame, has a very fast/accurate AF, and has no trouble shooting in low-light, and has outstanding bokeh.

If they came out with a sharper improved version, I might consider upgrading. But it would be at the bottom of my list... behind a 70-200mm MkII, TS-E 45mm, 8-15mm f/4 Fisheye, and a couple Zeiss Primes.

[Indecent Exposure]

That's a disappointing rumour update. 24-70L with IS, at this stage of the game, seems like such a logical next step.

[alwaySleepy]

That would be nice, then the prices of the 24-70 will go down and i'll finally be able to pick that up!

+1 !!!!!

[drumsfield]

I'd rather see a 24-105 f/2.8

[nonick]

If there is no IS on the 24-70L II, i really have less reason to upgrade to FF. 17-55/2.8IS on 7D is performing excellent except I dont get the bokeh of true 2.8 DOF.

[xcrezyx]

I'd rather see a 24-105 f/2.8

I second this post.

[seoul4korea]

I wish they would give us some info on this..... I'd really like to know.

[Staszek]

I'd rather see a 24-105 f/2.8

True story. As well as a 17-55L and a 15-85 f/4 L :lol:

[ching]

I'd rather see a 24-105 f/2.8

I third this post.

[Eiro]

I third this post.

FINE!!!! I will fourth post!

[tkbslc]

You guys must like giant lenses.

[Staszek]

You guys must like giant lenses.

Go big or go home!

[pbelarge]

With the 5DII, I have very little issues of low light shooting and this lens. I will handhold this lens for some pretty low light, then I put it on the tripod when I have to. It is not only a sharp lens, the color and contrast is very hard to beat. It is a match for the 5DII that was meant to be.

I will say, that I have become very good at holding my breath though when shooting with this lens...:lol:

**just to add, I am not shooting people with this lens.

[mrmarks]

Something coming in April? http://www.canonrumors.com/

[Tommydigi]

OMG this canonrumors guy is a joke, I feel like I have seen this post about 50 times now. I guess 1 day he will have to be right. Its like going to the track and betting every horse.

[Katalyst]

Only if it features the infamous 4 stop IS and remains as sharp as the copy I have... Only then I would MAYBE consider upgrading, but seriously... My copy seems to be insanely sharp and I absolutely love it!

[HyperYagami]

My copy seems to be insanely sharp and I absolutely love it!

thats what people said about 70-200mm f/2.8 IS v1. lo and behold.

[mr peas]

Time to encroach on those non-IS models!!

[PLLphotography]

Time to encroach on those non-IS models!!

I sold mine a few weeks ago for $1,225...now it looks like the average price hovers around $1,050-1,100.

Either people are selling it because they find they don't use it much, or they are trying to sell now in anticipation if the mark II ever becomes a reality and don't want to be stuck with "last year's model".

[bexi20]

I'm still waiting.

[PLLphotography]

maybe Canon will make everyone happy and come out with the 5D III kit, with 24-70 II f/2.8 IS kit lens :lol:

I'll still be happy with my 5D II and non-IS lenses.

[Katalyst]

thats what people said about 70-200mm f/2.8 IS v1. lo and behold.

Absolutely, but my 70-200 2.8 IS wide open was nowhere near my 24-70 2.8 wide open at any given focal length! :lol:

[DeaconG]

OMG this canonrumors guy is a joke, I feel like I have seen this post about 50 times now. I guess 1 day he will have to be right. Its like going to the track and betting every horse.

At this point I don't think even HE wants to hear about it any more...:lol:

[Indecent Exposure]

Is it April yet?

[Buylongterm]

Just picked up the 24-70mm tonight. Good news is I can return it no questions asked after 2+ months. So, if the rumor FINALLY comes true, I can get a full refund. :)

[Invertalon]

In many industries, this type of news that flies around the "grapevine" may not be far from the truth. Sure, CR may have had this same information going around for a while now, but in reality, Canon may have been playing with the release of this lens for as long as these rumors have. If they are not happy with it in a current state, there may be more design adjustments and tweaks being done before finally announcing it. Since Canon is so tight-lipped, the "insiders" may be not far from the truth, only forwarding information along as they hear about it.

Just my .02 though, just because it has been floating around for quite a while does not mean it has not been close to be announced the past year or so. It just may kept of being pushed off.

I look forward to this lens, but I don't think I will splurge on this one unless it has IS and stays under $1800 or so... Without IS, I will keep my 24-105 for sure.

[mrmarks]

In many industries, this type of news that flies around the "grapevine" may not be far from the truth. Sure, CR may have had this same information going around for a while now, but in reality, Canon may have been playing with the release of this lens for as long as these rumors have. If they are not happy with it in a current state, there may be more design adjustments and tweaks being done before finally announcing it. Since Canon is so tight-lipped, the "insiders" may be not far from the truth, only forwarding information along as they hear about it.

Just my .02 though, just because it has been floating around for quite a while does not mean it has not been close to be announced the past year or so. It just may kept of being pushed off.

I look forward to this lens, but I don't think I will splurge on this one unless it has IS and stays under $1800 or so... Without IS, I will keep my 24-105 for sure.

Well said. I have the same plan for my 24-105 as well.

[pbelarge]

maybe Canon will make everyone happy and come out with the 5D III kit, with 24-70 II f/2.8 IS kit lens :lol:

I'll still be happy with my 5D II and non-IS lenses.

Sounds like around $4500 - $5000

The longer rumours float around, the more anticipation develops......

[tjbrock42]

The lack of this lens in Canon's lineup is what would prevent me from my upgrading to FF with my next body purchase. For now, I would rather have the 17-55 IS (or rumored 15-60) and a 7D or another similar body. I'm playing the wait and see game for body and lens announcements before I make any changes.

[Csae]

I hate my 24-70.

I use it a ton, but i still hate it.

a v2 would be most welcomed even without IS.

AF / Focus is just not up to snuff, no matter how much i MfA, i can't keep it sharp from 24 to 70.

My 17-40, was sharper, but had other issues for CA n whutnot.

[jdizzle]

I'm looking forward to the MK III which has a constant aperture of f/2. :p Seriously, I would buy one if Canon releases a MK II.

[Lone Rider]

Someone posted that IS on a L lens is around $600. If the rumour they will produce this lens is true then one would expect to pay $2,000.

If this eventuated I wouldn't sell my current 24-70L to get it anyhow.....

[tjbrock42]

$2000... ouch!

[S.Horton]

Their strategy is to increase margin. Look at what happened with the II series of primes.

So if they think it would make more money, they will do it. The fact that they have not in years of opportunity says it is not a high priority.

[mikeassk]

Lets not forget that while sure, technically the 24-70 is a version (1). The reality is that it was a focused redesign of the 28-70mm L 2.8 which was discontinued.

The 24-70 was optically designed to better the previous design and also give a few more (mm) on the wide end (in my opinion here) to strengthen the stay of the current 1D (non s) model.

All that said, the 24-70 2.8 had a suggested retail price of 2,100$ in 2002.

If you make it better and sharper or whatever and add "IS" I could see a tasty little 2600$ tag

[S7000]

OMG this canonrumors guy is a joke, I feel like I have seen this post about 50 times now. I guess 1 day he will have to be right. Its like going to the track and betting every horse.

If you say it before every announcement you'll get it right once!

[kent andersen]

OMG this canonrumors guy is a joke, I feel like I have seen this post about 50 times now. I guess 1 day he will have to be right. Its like going to the track and betting every horse.

Well, he was right about 7D... on all the other rumors, he will be right in the end. Before 2020 all of the rumors from last year will be fulfilled.

But on all the others, it has mostly been obvious rumors on stuff that are comming all the time. Like, there is a new rebel every winther and a new pro camera every 2 year wich comes in the autom.

But a new 24-70 is definently not a difficult horse to bett on. It will come one day. And probably together with a new 5D.

[mrmarks]

The recent multiple disasters in Japan will add at least 1/2 to 1 year delay to any announcement. So, enjoy what you have for now...

[Indecent Exposure]

The recent multiple disasters in Japan will add at least 1/2 to 1 year delay to any announcement. So, enjoy what you have for now...
Hopefully not. Nikon just announced a new camera (and their experiences with the tsunami were comparable to Canon's) and Canon has already said they expect to be back to full capacity by the end of next month.

[mikeassk]

Hopefully not. Nikon just announced a new camera (and their experiences with the tsunami were comparable to Canon's) and Canon has already said they expect to be back to full capacity by the end of next month.

When someone comes to a full stop on the freeway, the effect they cause lasts for much longer than the time they actually stopped.

It takes time for things to resume as normal in the entire industry even though they claim to be back to operations in a month.

[HeadShotBoom]

How many peeps would want the IS? Who would say no if it was offered, why?

[mikeassk]

How many peeps would want the IS? Who would say no if it was offered, why?

no, cost and weight.

[tkbslc]

How many peeps would want the IS? Who would say no if it was offered, why?

Every time the add IS to an L zoom, the cost literally doubles.

[Indecent Exposure]

If finances don't allow you to take advantage of a new 24-70mm (which will undoubtably cost more than the current model, regardless), that's unfortunate. But progress will continue with upgraded focussing mechanisms (people who are fine with MF will probably see this as an unessesary expense, too), upgraded optical formulas (people who don't mind the weight of the older model will no doubt balk at spending extra money to save a few ounces) or IS (people who've convinced themselves a stabilized standard zoom is more a luxury than a necessity will piss and moan about being dragged into the future), and all will continue to argue that their style of photography is the standard that everyone should conform to.

No matter what, expect to pay a lot more for an updated 24-70mm. Nikon asks nearly $2000 (currently) for their unstabilized standard zoom. Canon should be able to (not accounting for upgrades and advancements in the tech that could reduce the price of the IS mechanism) shoehorn an IS spec into the current 24-70mm and still come in at less out-of-pocket to the consumer.

If Canon releases it with IS, I'll pick it up whatever the cost. For those that don't want the extra expense it's not like the current model will perform any less once an updated one releases. And if Canon wants to add nails to Nikon's video coffin, expect the updated 24-70mm to have IS.

[tkbslc]

I didn't say I didn't think they should make it, but the person above said why would someone say no to this lens. The estimated $2000+ price tag would be hard to swallow for many of us. They should offer a stabilized f2.8 standard zoom though, really. It's a no brainer.

[Indecent Exposure]

I didn't mean to single you out. That argument is a common (and good) one. I was more addressing the general complaint of cost that we've been hearing for a while (and, of course, we hear it no matter what is being upgraded or proposed).

[tkbslc]

The success of the new 70-200, even at $2500, shows that there are plenty willing to pay if you can provide a stellar product. If Canon could get near L-prime sharpness and add IS, people would pay similar amounts for that 24-70. A 2 lens do-everything kit for full frame, for $5000. :)

[sebasr]

Hopefully not. Nikon just announced a new camera (and their experiences with the tsunami were comparable to Canon's) and Canon has already said they expect to be back to full capacity by the end of next month.

Many of canons lenses have been delayed though, and 24-70 with IS would be very popular. I bet it would sell out quickly, especially if it is as good as the 70-200 II IS.

[Lone Rider]

Every time the add IS to an L zoom, the cost literally doubles.

Then theres no point Canon moving in this direction. Theres no point developing a lens like this if only 5% of the market is going to buy it.

[Lone Rider]

Anyone heard any movement in the IS version of this lens?

[Indecent Exposure]

Anyone heard any movement in the IS version of this lens?
There are apparently 5 or so versions of the 24-70mm replacement lens currently in the hands of Canon's field testers, 2 of those have IS.

There is hope.

[mrmarks]

There are apparently 5 or so versions of the 24-70mm replacement lens currently in the hands of Canon's field testers, 2 of those have IS.

There is hope.

That's good to know. Thanks

[tjbrock42]

There are apparently 5 or so versions of the 24-70mm replacement lens currently in the hands of Canon's field testers, 2 of those have IS.

There is hope.

I don't mean to be rude or inappropriate, just curious, how do you know this?

[seoul4korea]

^^^ Was thinking the same thing the other day.

[Indecent Exposure]

I don't mean to be rude or inappropriate, just curious, how do you know this?
A few places have mentioned the test mules and that some of those mules have IS. I think CanonRumors mentioned them a few months ago, and also mentioned the IS models.

EDIT: Found it (http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/04/a-random-roadmap-lenses-body-cr1/).

[TheBrick3]

I wonder why no one ever clamors for a 135 f/2 IS. But what Canon really needs to do to bring the 135 back into vogue is make it a f/1.4. I realize that would give it a similar cost and weight to the 200 f/2.

[HyperYagami]

A few places have mentioned the test mules and that some of those mules have IS. I think CanonRumors mentioned them a few months ago, and also mentioned the IS models.

EDIT: Found it (http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/04/a-random-roadmap-lenses-body-cr1/).

you mean, the same site that talks about 24-70 IS for the past 4+ years?

[Indecent Exposure]

Yes, the site that has talked about the 24-70mm IS for the past 4+ years.

[Lone Rider]

This is not validated anywhere, but I'm thinking if Canon is going to release an IS version they'll do it with the 5D III or 7D II......now wouldn't that knock the opposition over.

[RobDickinson]

No way would they release it with the 7DII.

5DIII or 1Ds4.

7D II theyc an release the 14-55f2.8IS

[tjbrock42]

I agree... 24-70L replacement doesn't make as much since with a crop body.

7D II and 17-55 IS replacement seems more logical to me.

[MadTony]

I want a better and more awesome full frame answer to the 17-55. 2.8 and is on this range would be sweet, and I'd get one. No is on the version ii, I'd be on the fence at best.

[Lone Rider]

No Mark II (IS) rumours = nothing for 2012 :(

[Fidelity]

I agree... 24-70L replacement doesn't make as much since with a crop body.

7D II and 17-55 IS replacement seems more logical to me.

I'd buy one for the (crop) 1D Mark IV. Hoping like heck it has IS.