Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 06 Feb 2012 (Monday) 23:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

OFFICIAL: 24-70L II, 24 2.8 IS, 28 2.8 IS

 
benesotor
Goldmember
1,827 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Mar 2009
     
Feb 07, 2012 11:52 |  #256

Can somebody actually tell me why Canon wouldn't put IS in this lens? It's not like they were looking to cut costs here.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Feb 07, 2012 11:55 |  #257

Stone 13 wrote in post #13842290 (external link)
I disagree, these lenses are relatively slow compared to much cheaper primes in this price range and have IS. Great for recording video with a relatively small DOF and IS helps with the inherently unstable VDSLR form factor.

They definitely seem better suited for video than general photography. I'm sure they'll produce excellent results either way....

Thats how i see it

For still photography, they're too slow for primes at f/2.8 considering you can get a lot of very good very sharp zoom lenses around the same cost..I'm simply not seeing a large reason to drop my money on them....

Ok they're small, Lovely, So is the 28mm f/1.8 which is half the cost and actually really sharp at f/2.8....

Someone mentioned the economy, Kay, Thats not an excuse when Sigma and Tamron who are also in Japan and deal with Japanese currency, Not to mention Nikon, seem to be having no problems producing lenses at reasonable prices for the US market

The only thing I'm wondering is if Canon's costs havnt flown through the roof because their manufacturing capability got wrecked due to the recent disasters in various companies... I know Nikon said they took some heavy losses to flooding

Before someone says "WELL THEY ARENT FOR YOU" Actually they are, I've been looking for a nicer APS-C Standard Equivalent, So I'm interested in just about any prime that pops out in the 28-35mm range, Its just a sad shame Canon has priced these at such a high amount or I actually might have bought one -despite- them being only f/2.8


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wookiee2cu
Senior Member
614 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Seattle, WA.
     
Feb 07, 2012 11:55 |  #258

Only thing I can think of is to cut down on weight.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Feb 07, 2012 11:55 |  #259

benesotor wrote in post #13842351 (external link)
Can somebody actually tell me why Canon wouldn't put IS in this lens? It's not like they were looking to cut costs here.

Well..theoretically what if the IS version would have cost $2800...


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,740 posts
Gallery: 59 photos
Likes: 655
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Feb 07, 2012 11:58 |  #260

benesotor wrote in post #13842351 (external link)
Can somebody actually tell me why Canon wouldn't put IS in this lens? It's not like they were looking to cut costs here.

My guess is probably size and weight, They actually managed to make it lighter then the original so I am guessing IS would have increased the weight and size quite a bit.

Its just a sad shame Canon has priced these at such a high amount or I actually might have bought one -despite- them being only f/2.8

My guess is the prices of these will settle closer to $600. Canon's list prices are always very high


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Fuji X100F • Canon EOS R • 5DII • 7DII • G7XII • 35 1.8 RF • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Giorgos
Senior Member
Avatar
271 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2011
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:00 as a reply to  @ KenjiS's post |  #261

i was debating between a new camera or lens. in my case i may go for a 5dmkii or a mkiii? who knows will see.. these canon guys really... man thats damn overpriced imo


5D MKIII / 550D / Σ 35 / Σ 17-50 / 24-105 f/4L is usm / 70-200 f/2.8L is usm ii
Gunman.gr (external link) I build LEGO :)
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pixel_junkie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,008 posts
Likes: 143
Joined May 2007
Location: Southern California
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:02 as a reply to  @ Tommydigi's post |  #262

I haven't seen so much grief, moaning and crying since the Kennedy assassination. It's a stupid lens dudes with alternatives galore ...:lol:


Website (external link) | Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dgrPhotos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,501 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 51
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Illinois
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:08 |  #263

pixel_junkie wrote in post #13842414 (external link)
I haven't seen so much grief, moaning and crying since the Kennedy assassination. It's a stupid lens dudes with alternatives galore ...:lol:

and it's a mid-range zoom...ugh




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hhuy888
Goldmember
Avatar
1,002 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Mar 2010
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:09 |  #264

yeah, such an (un)exciting lens line up from Canon this year. Hopefully, there will be more interesting announcements from Canon soon.


hhuy
_______________

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
5Dmaniac
Goldmember
Avatar
1,303 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:10 |  #265

Just vote with your wallet - Canon is not immune to revenue drop-offs. It is the ONLY way they will ever listen to their customers/




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DavidG.
"My name is Rumpelstiltskin​"
Avatar
201 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2008
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:11 |  #266

Here's a quote made yesterday by prominent wedding photographer, Tony Hoffer. This is in regards to a new 24-70. He said, "No need for IS... Cameras go to like ISO 40 million now..."

In my experience, it's effectively true.


Canon 5D Mark III | Canon 7D | 17-40 f/4L | 24-70 2.8 L | 70-200 f/4 L | 70-200 f/2.8 L IS | 580 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sonnyc
Cream of the Crop
5,160 posts
Likes: 33
Joined Jun 2005
Location: san jose
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:11 |  #267

tgara wrote in post #13841719 (external link)
My thoughts exactly. I paid less than $1000 for my 24-70 f/2.8 about 4 years ago (new from B&H with a rebate). I sent it to Canon last summer for a "tune up" and it came back sharper than when it was new. It's the lense I use about 75% of the time.

If the new model had IS, the choice for me would be more difficult, but as it stands, the marginal performance gain of the MkII and the slightly reduced weight (145g) are not significant enough to offset the lack of IS and larger filter size requirement.

Same here... I'm poor so I've been collecting "classic" versions of L lenses hahaha.. I currently have 16-35 mki, 24-70 mki, 24L mki, 15 FE v1, 300 f2.8 is mki, and the soon-to-be mki, 35L, hahah :D ...in a few years the 70-200 MKII will get upgrade and I have another classic too.


Sonny
website (external link)|Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cesium
Goldmember
1,967 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2009
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:13 |  #268

KenjiS wrote in post #13842366 (external link)
For still photography, they're too slow for primes at f/2.8 considering you can get a lot of very good very sharp zoom lenses around the same cost..I'm simply not seeing a large reason to drop my money on them....

What zoom lens has full frame 24mm coverage, f/2.8, USM and IS? The newly-announced Tamron is the only one I can think of. I'm sure it will have a lot more barrel distortion at the wide end than a prime.

Doesn't really qualify as "a lot".


These lenses do have a place. Again, I think most are upset because they don't fit their specific wants.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lester ­ Wareham
Moderator
Avatar
29,726 posts
Gallery: 3045 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 23086
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:25 |  #269

Tommydigi wrote in post #13842259 (external link)
I think size is a big factor, with a lot of people looking at 4/3 etc I think this could be a pretty cool lens. I can see using a rebel with the new 24 over a 4/3 camera. If I didn't have the 24L I would be very interested but still I am somewhat curious to see this one. I really could use a small portable option but I wish they did a new 35 over the 28.

I agree size is a factor, but the 28/1.8 is fairly small making an alternative to the fairly chunky and expensive 24L and 35L (this was my logic for getting it). I just hope they don't retire the 28/1.8 etc.

Clearly adding IS to a f1.8 would make the front element huge. However, digital bodies, even the smaller crop ones, are quite big compared to the old FD film bodies, so below a certain limit it's probably not that important.

Presumably this is also why the 24-70 II does not have IS (I seem to remember this being a wish list for some), but price wise it would have been easier to absorb.

Most people want a prime to be fast though, specially in this focal length range. I just don't see the application however for these quite expensive f2.8 primes. Video perhaps.


My Photography Home Page (external link)
Gear List
FAQ on UV and Clear Protective Filters
Macrophotography by LordV
flickr (external link) Flickr Home (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lester ­ Wareham
Moderator
Avatar
29,726 posts
Gallery: 3045 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 23086
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
     
Feb 07, 2012 12:34 |  #270

DavidG. wrote in post #13842473 (external link)
Here's a quote made yesterday by prominent wedding photographer, Tony Hoffer. This is in regards to a new 24-70. He said, "No need for IS... Cameras go to like ISO 40 million now..."

In my experience, it's effectively true.

This true, IS is becoming less relevant for a given application due to ISO improvements, but it would open up new applications. I think the real reason would be the increase in the front element size being impractical in weight and cost terms. Notice the larger front element on the 100L IS macro compared to the 100 USM macro.

I did expect the 24-70 II to grow a bit of longer focal length, the 24-105 is a very flexible range, I though they may stretch the new 24-xx to say 24-85 or 24-90. I suspect that would have been a good sales getter.

But whatever we think Canon must feel there is a good market for these lenses, they are not stupid and will have done the market research even if it does not always look like it.


My Photography Home Page (external link)
Gear List
FAQ on UV and Clear Protective Filters
Macrophotography by LordV
flickr (external link) Flickr Home (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

76,258 views & 0 likes for this thread
OFFICIAL: 24-70L II, 24 2.8 IS, 28 2.8 IS
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is john4938
667 guests, 275 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.