24-70 vs. 24-70 II

tancanon58 wrote in post #14540965
Is it really a "delay?" Maybe they will put IS on the lens to challenge with Tamron VC.

And then charge another $500.

RobDickinson wrote in post #14541315
Hopefully the mkII doesnt have the design flaw which causes the mk1 to fail after a bit of use.

Can you tell us more in detail?

marcosv wrote in post #14540265
That's good to know. Doing a quick check, Amazon doesn't have it in stock and its 3rd party vendors are quoting $1800. Adorama has it for $1700.

It does make it harder to rationalize going for a mk II over a new mk I though. OTOH, it makes it easier to go for a new mk I vs. a Canon refurb.

They artificially raised the price on version I once they announced the version II. 24-70 I was selling for $1350 brand new before that.

The jump in price is soo ridiculous. I was in the market for a Mark I, but it's hard justifying the cost when it was ~ $3-400 cheaper a few months ago. Needless to say I will hold off on buying it.

hanjolee wrote in post #14544637
Can you tell us more in detail?

Maybe he's referring to the Lens Rental article that pointed to how older 24-70s have a greater than normal tendency to have focus issues due to worn/missing screw collars around screws associated with extending the lens barrel.

http://www.lensrentals​.com …0/the-limits-of-variation

keyframe14 wrote in post #14544734
They artificially raised the price on version I once they announced the version II. 24-70 I was selling for $1350 brand new before that.

Naturally Aspirated wrote in post #14545809
The jump in price is soo ridiculous. I was in the market for a Mark I, but it's hard justifying the cost when it was ~ $3-400 cheaper a few months ago. Needless to say I will hold off on buying it.

*sigh* Thanks for giving me motivation/strength to resist buying a 24-70 Mk I right now.

Hopefully when I rent a 24-70, I'll learn that for my particular needs I don't need a 24-70 and can live with my 24-105, and primes.

marcosv wrote in post #14546106
Maybe he's referring to the Lens Rental article that pointed to how older 24-70s have a greater than normal tendency to have focus issues due to worn/missing screw collars around screws associated with extending the lens barrel.

http://www.lensrentals​.com …0/the-limits-of-variation

Yep, a lens that breaks during normal use like that (and I wouldnt call it normal wear either) is not good. Costing a friend in NZ $1000 to get his fixed right now.

RobDickinson wrote in post #14546258
Yep, a lens that breaks during normal use like that (and I wouldnt call it normal wear either) is not good. Costing a friend in NZ $1000 to get his fixed right now.

jeeze, might as well sell it as is with disclaimer, that's ridiculous, that's the price I paid and sold my 24-70L.

Its a no-brainer for most here in the UK. The 24-70 is £1100 ($1700) and the mk2 is £2300 ($3600!!!).

Canon's UK pricing has become plain offensive over the last couple of years.

Wait a bit and the new one will drop from RRP. Cant compare a years old lens price to the RRP of a new one.

70-200mkII was $5k rrp when launched here, dropped to the old mk1 price in less than a year.

Naturally Aspirated wrote in post #14545809
The jump in price is soo ridiculous. I was in the market for a Mark I, but it's hard justifying the cost when it was ~ $3-400 cheaper a few months ago. Needless to say I will hold off on buying it.

Yup I'm in the same boat as you. Finally got approval after over a year of convincing and now they're 400 more!?... Waited this long might as well wait a little longer, definitely not pulling the trigger at this price, and not shelling ou $1200 for a used one either.

Sprout Crumble wrote in post #14546499
Its a no-brainer for most here in the UK. The 24-70 is £1100 ($1700) and the mk2 is £2300 ($3600!!!).

Canon's UK pricing has become plain offensive over the last couple of years.

I know a lady in the UK who's husband travels to NYC here in the states once or twice a year just to buy camera equipment. The money he saves covers the trip and then some. That is very sad. (and I'd love to see his collection too! lol )

I've been waiting for the second version of the 24-70, but the price is obscene. How does Canon justify that price? I sure can't and will not be entertaining owning this lens unless the price is below 2K.

As for answering the OP, I would pass on either lens.

I am considering going with the Tamron.

Photozone has their review of the tamron up now.

It does OK. Its not perfect but then none of these lenses are.