Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II Delayed Again!

It appears that Canon has delayed the delivery of this lens yet again! It appears if they keep this up I will never own another fast medium range zoom again. Sold my Mark I in anticipation of the original delivery date of April. It's been so long since I put in my pre-order I can't even remember when that was.

There now saying September but I bet there is no year associated with now.
Any good suggestions on what to do in the interim? Buy a crop body and a 17-55mm? A used 7D and 17-55mm would be about the same price and I would even get IS!

Tried a Tamron in the local store but was unsure of what it's resale value would be. Also, it didn't appear to focus as fast as my original 24-70 Mark I. Anyone taken the plunge and happy with their choice?

Do you think Tamron would be willing to help Canon get their act together?

If it gets here in September that will be fine for fall volleyball and basketball. However, the repeated delays of introduction for all the Canon lenses is getting annoying. Canon should delay announcing the products until they can have it coincide with product availability.

It almost reminds of the way Ford reintroduced the Thunderbird. By the time it arrived, it was already old!

swldstn wrote in post #14684759
Any good suggestions on what to do in the interim?

My advice would be to use one of your 4 zoom lenses or your 11 primes!!! Seriously, your kit bag is a camera store - I can't imagine you will miss out on any shots in the interim...

kobeson wrote in post #14686274
My advice would be to use one of your 4 zoom lenses or your 11 primes!!! Seriously, your kit bag is a camera store - I can't imagine you will miss out on any shots in the interim...

I know, your right but really planned to unload the 24L, and 50L since for some reason I prefer the flexibility of the zoom in that FL range. Been hanging on to the 35L for niight time work when even a f/2.8 won't cut it. Also, you can't travel easily with all this. Lenses like the 14L, 15FE, TSE, and the two Macros are used only sparingly.:o

Also, it's amazing what you will accumulate when you don't own a boats or fancy car at my age.

Haha yeah im hearing ya, and I for one am jealous!!

Keep the 24 and 50 for a few more months, then trade them for a new 24-70 II and some decent change. That's what I would do.

It is interesting you feel the need for a zoom to cover all your primes - I am constantly work out prime vs zoom, and I was set to buy the 24-70 II until this delay (only own 100L & nifty fifty) but I can't wait that long and will grab a 35L instead, and see if I would rather add a Sigma 85 and another 600EX or the 24-70 II later on (next year I would presume now, won't be purchasing two big lenses for remainder of this year).

What do you shoot that you need a zoom instead of primes for? Keen to get a grasp of your decision making, based on your extensive kit!

Maybe the same story like the 200-400? Appears that Marketing works a lot faster than Research and Production.

Well, for many of the film years I had just 3 lenses. 28-85, 50mm, 80-200. As I went digital still kind of had the same with a 24-85 which I switched up to a 28-135 IS, 100-300mm and 50mm. Then all heck broke loose and I jumped to L's with a 17-40, 24-105 IS, and 70-200 IS all f/4L and Sigma 85mm f/1.4.

Then I added a 50mm f/1.4 Sigma to these and thought OK, lets add one prime in the middle of each so I also added the 135L, swapped the two Sigma primes for their bigger L brothers (always buying used). Then someone showed me a f/2.8 24-70 and 70-200 IS so I sold all the f/4 and got f/2.8 versions. Now Im not sure I would do this again since I think the f/4 set is a great set to own and would recommend it to anyone and when i think of owning primes and zooms I still think this is a very good pairing. Lighter, flexible zooms, and fast primes of 35, 85, 135.

My zooms are primarily for sports, soccer, rugby lacrosse, basketball, football, etc. So today I used just two zooms while taking pictures at a Rugby tourney, 70-200 and 70-200 with 1.4x on my 1D Mark IV for on field play and 24-105 on my 5D Mark III for the players around the sidelines and when they were up
close to me.

I also love portraits so I use the 85 and 135 get used for that. The 14, 24 are for the landscapes. As I mentioned I plan the sell the 24L since I prefere the TSE-24L II for landscapes over the normal 24L
The 35 and/or 50 are for night shots walking around. For me the 24 is too wide on my FF for that but I know a lot of people love it.

Other lenses have shown up for specailty work or since I buy used 80% of the time its because I found a good deal, too good to pass up, and thought I would try it. Or its from an earlier line-up I just haven
t had the time to sell yet. The 200mm f/2.8 is like that. I bought it, because it was a great deal, to use with my 70-200mm f/4L to have a f/2.8, together they were cheaper than any of the 2.8L 70-200mm.
But as I said I eventually traded up to the 70-200mm f/2.8L II which pretty much performs as well at 200mm so I really should sell it off but having a long black lens sometimes does have its uses.

Primes vs. Zooms, I believe they both have their uses so I own both. The zooms are primarily for sports or events like graduations and weddings. The primes, when I have a little more time to think and compose or when shallow DOF are a must have or at night.

Thanks for the lengthy post Steve, your point about lighter f4 zooms kitted with primes certainly makes sense. But you have been shooting for a lot longer than I have, so all your lenses definitely is clearer to me now.

I'd love to get the 24 TSE one day, would go to that ahead of the 24L also I think - I'm still unsure if I will go for the f4 70-200 or not, I can't see myself owning more than 5 lenses for my 5D because they are so expensive, so I will make that decision later on. Would love to have all of those to choose from though, so awesome!

Cheers

On the plus side... Maybe they're postponing it to add IS. That would be ideal and I would be in line to buy one ASAP!

http://www.cameraegg.c​om …0mm-f2-8l-is-lens-patent/

same here, if they add IS on that 24-70 I will definitely find ways to fund one. Go Canon, please make our dreams come true. IS patent is all over the canon rumors blog site.

But it is a different patent though isn't it?!? I don't Canon would announce a lens, with a price and full specs, and then delay it to add in IS - especially when you consider any lenses they have added IS to usually double the price (or thereabouts) over the non IS versions.

kobeson wrote in post #14689848
But it is a different patent though isn't it?!? I don't Canon would announce a lens, with a price and full specs, and then delay it to add in IS - especially when you consider any lenses they have added IS to usually double the price (or thereabouts) over the non IS versions.

Here's my thoughts though. The lens was already at IS prices and everyone was confused to say the least when the biggest complaint about the mkI was not addressed in the mkII. To me it would be odd but not unrealistic for Canon to do it and given it would sell that many more lenses it would make commercial sense. IS is their main point of popularity loss with the 24-70 and why so many people save money and for with the 24-105. If you're not shooting action there isn't a huge gain to be had with the 24-70 L lens over the 24-105 given they balance out in many cases for stills and you get a cheaper price point and more focal length with the 24-105. Granted, that last part was all opinion on my part but I think there's validity to it.

Adding IS would be the appropriate response to nearly everyone's complain with the current 24-70 and given the current price point is over $2,000usd I really feel like it should have IS at that price. Otherwise there's no real benefit to retiring your mkI or 24-105.


Just my $0.02

I would sell a kidney to fund the 24-70 IS if it's true

I have been waiting for the 24-70mm f.2.8L II for months. I bought a Tamron SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di because I needed this focal length due to a trip to Italy and France in June and July. The Tamron was satisfactory but there is a difference from the AF 70-200mm Ff/2.8L II and the 17-40mm f/4.0L lens I am using with my 5D Mk II. The resale value drops from the US$500 to around US$170 trade-in or used. Thats life. I think the 24-70mm f/2.8L II will be worth waiting for despite having to buy larger 82mm filters for it. The IS on the new 24-70 would be nice, but not really necessary. I use a Canon 15x50 IS UD 4.5 degrees binoculars and the IS is mandatory!

Well it's been so long since April that I keep wondering if the Mark II will ever come out. I ended up rebuying a 24-70mm f/2.8L Mark I here on the forum. Will definitely hold on to it this time until B&H let's me know that the Mark II is ready to ship. This lens has always been good but I'm hoping the II will be a world beater. The 82mm filter is a little bit of a pain but I'm already using 82's on my 16-35mm mark II and TS-E 24mm f/3.5L Mark II. So hopefully in two months we'll all know if the wait was worth it.

Steve