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 News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions 
Thread started 11 Nov 2013 (Monday) 07:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8 New Canon Lenses in 2014!

 
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,107 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1125
Joined Dec 2006
     
Mar 06, 2014 11:56 |  #61

Buckeye1 wrote in post #16738958 (external link)
Still waiting for my 24-105 F2.8 IS :p I would pay $1500 for this lens!

Too bad it would be priced at $2500




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Buckeye1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,368 posts
Gallery: 55 photos
Likes: 273
Joined May 2005
     
Mar 06, 2014 12:06 as a reply to  @ gonzogolf's post |  #62

They can price it at $2500 all day long....I am only paying $1500 :p

They know they won't make this lens because that would mean losing all sales for the 24-70L.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,107 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1125
Joined Dec 2006
     
Mar 06, 2014 12:12 |  #63

Buckeye1 wrote in post #16738980 (external link)
They can price it at $2500 all day long....I am only paying $1500 :p

They know they won't make this lens because that would mean losing all sales for the 24-70L.

Its not just that. Taking the 24-105 to 2.8 would probably come close to doubling its weight. You would most likely have to get bigger filters, and of course it would cost a lot more to make.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,634 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5694
Joined Sep 2007
     
Mar 06, 2014 14:53 |  #64

gonzogolf wrote in post #16738960 (external link)
Too bad it would be priced at $2500

that might be worth it


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 106
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 06, 2014 18:31 |  #65

Charlie wrote in post #16739381 (external link)
that might be worth it

a 4x zoom that's 2.8 w/ a 4 stop IS? Easily worth 2000.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 06, 2014 19:23 |  #66

gonzogolf wrote in post #16738989 (external link)
Its not just that. Taking the 24-105 to 2.8 would probably come close to doubling its weight. You would most likely have to get bigger filters, and of course it would cost a lot more to make.

f2.8 in that focal range would certainly increase the weight and cost




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Buckeye1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,368 posts
Gallery: 55 photos
Likes: 273
Joined May 2005
     
Mar 06, 2014 19:42 |  #67

I agree, but not an additional $1800 since the current model sells for less than $700 new.

watt100 wrote in post #16740004 (external link)
f2.8 in that focal range would certainly increase the weight and cost




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smythie
I wasn't even trying
3,680 posts
Gallery: 30 photos
Likes: 617
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Sydney - Australia
     
Mar 06, 2014 22:54 |  #68

sure it would. The Mk2 24-70/2.8L started at over $2500 (and was worth it) and you expect a similar IQ with a much longer focal range AND IS to cost less? Dreaming.

Trying to compare to the excessively discounted 24-105/4L IS is ludicrous


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 07, 2014 10:58 |  #69

smythie wrote in post #16740382 (external link)
sure it would. The Mk2 24-70/2.8L started at over $2500 (and was worth it) and you expect a similar IQ with a much longer focal range AND IS to cost less? Dreaming.

Trying to compare to the excessively discounted 24-105/4L IS is ludicrous

true but I suppose "worth it" is subjective




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,107 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 1125
Joined Dec 2006
     
Mar 07, 2014 11:02 |  #70

smythie wrote in post #16740382 (external link)
sure it would. The Mk2 24-70/2.8L started at over $2500 (and was worth it) and you expect a similar IQ with a much longer focal range AND IS to cost less? Dreaming.

Trying to compare to the excessively discounted 24-105/4L IS is ludicrous

Yeah, I think those who desire the 24-105 2.8 dont really appreciate that it would be a different class of lens than the existing one. If they were able to make such a lens without compromising (note that the 24-105 vignettes on the wide end @f4, imagine the issue to overcome at 2.8). It would be heavy for a walkaround lens. The 24-70 is called "the brick" for a reason, and it would be lighter than the proposed lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 106
Joined Mar 2013
     
Mar 07, 2014 12:21 |  #71

watt100 wrote in post #16741281 (external link)
true but I suppose "worth it" is subjective

IMHO, the only way to evalute "worth it" would be to evaluate it to it's closest peers. If brand X starts making a canon mount 50 f/1.4 that's similar in performance to canon's 1.4, then it would be "worth it" if they sell it around 200$ easily, but if they tried to sell it at 400$ then no.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Buckeye1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,368 posts
Gallery: 55 photos
Likes: 273
Joined May 2005
     
Mar 07, 2014 12:36 |  #72

May be the 24-70L II was worth $2500 or more to you, but it may not be for others; likewise for this 24-105L II (if canon ever makes it). If you can't tell people are just having fun in this thread, then get out and go get some anger management. Your opinion is fine for what you think, but don't knock others down who thinks differently than you.

On a side note, I wonder how many people here paid $2500 or more for the 24-70L II.

smythie wrote in post #16740382 (external link)
sure it would. The Mk2 24-70/2.8L started at over $2500 (and was worth it) and you expect a similar IQ with a much longer focal range AND IS to cost less? Dreaming.

Trying to compare to the excessively discounted 24-105/4L IS is ludicrous




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ginga
Senior Member
Avatar
370 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Jokkmokk - Sweden
     
Mar 07, 2014 13:16 as a reply to  @ Buckeye1's post |  #73

We are almost at Q2 of 2014, and still none of the 8 new lenses in sight.. Not a single one of them!

I'm starting to think that this so called "year of the lens" is just a fairytale, made up by Canonrumors.com. :lol:

Oh well, I'm quite happy with what I have.


Sony A7R * 70-200 2.8L II * 24-70L II * Samyang 14
Recently sold: 5DIII * Sigma 35 *

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Eyal
Senior Member
569 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Mar 08, 2014 05:07 |  #74

We will see. There are still more than a few shows coming up.
Before lenses, I'm still waiting for canon's answer to the D800E.


5DMarkIII+Grip | Extender 1.4x III / 2x III
16-35mm F/2.8L II | 24-70mm F/2.8L II | 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II
Σ 50mm F/1.4 | 85mm F/1.2L II | 100mm F/2.8L IS Macro | 135mm F/2L | 300mm F/2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smythie
I wasn't even trying
3,680 posts
Gallery: 30 photos
Likes: 617
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Sydney - Australia
     
Mar 08, 2014 06:20 |  #75

Buckeye1 wrote in post #16741482 (external link)
May be the 24-70L II was worth $2500 or more to you, but it may not be for others; likewise for this 24-105L II (if canon ever makes it). If you can't tell people are just having fun in this thread, then get out and go get some anger management. Your opinion is fine for what you think, but don't knock others down who thinks differently than you.

On a side note, I wonder how many people here paid $2500 or more for the 24-70L II.

over reaction much?


Gear List

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

32,556 views & 0 likes for this thread
8 New Canon Lenses in 2014!
FORUMS News & Rumors Lens Rumors and Predictions 
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 James Kim
397 guests, 300 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.