24-70f4 IS...b&h prices...

Can anyone remember the last time Canon had an f4 non-super telephoto for $1,500?

I don't foresee great things in Canon's financial future...Nikon's about to pwn them on so many fronts.

LowriderS10 wrote in post #15212666
Can anyone remember the last time Canon had an f4 non-super telephoto for $1,500?

I don't foresee great things in Canon's financial future...Nikon's about to pwn them on so many fronts.

Yes, the 8-15mm f/4 fisheye retails for $1499 But that was a rather niche lens and not a walkaround like this one is intended to be.

The recently released Nikon AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 VR (kit lens for D600) is no slouch optically and costs 1/3 as much as this lens, and it has a longer zoom range. Sure, it's variable aperture, but f/3.5-4.5 is not that different from constant f/4, and we are talking about the difference between $500 and $1500...

If this 24-70 f/4 IS is really going to be the kit lens for the 6D, then the 6D is really going to be a tough sell against the better-spec'd Nikon D600. I saw a D600 with 2-lens kit (24-85 VR, 70-300VR, plus a free wireless adapter) today at Costco for something like $2899, which is going to be a lot less than what the 6D is going to cost with just the 24-70.

3 years ago I bought a sigma 24-70 IF EX DG HSM, that by the way wasn't that bad.
Bought it, because I didn't had anything in that focal range at the time, was 2.8 and even then I had the funds to buy the Canon 24-70 L I, bought this instead for it's compactness.
I do a bit of everything, but my main area is weddings and events, used it first on a 5d II, great lens nailed focus, not Canon accurate or quick, but good enough until I started using 70mm, then the train went overboard, misfocus, backfocusing, hunting you name it, replaced for another in my local dealer, same problem (not as bad), 3 times to sigma with the body, once come even worse.
So last summer traded it for a 24-105, since I'm starting using video for my business, great lens, not that bulky, but bigger than the sigma, and the most "annoying" thing I find in this lens apart from some distortion is not being able to focus close enough(0.45m) isn't close enough some times.
So now I've seen the new 24-70 f4 L IS, and even losing 35mm, it's appeal to me for, it's size, 77mm filter thread, "macro" 0.7x magnification is very good, L lens weather sealing, sigma and tamron (on the manual they say humidity proof or seal) don't have, canon accurate and fast af and the IS thing just sold it completely, I own a 100mm L, and that thing IS is amazing.
So the price, I think so it's a bit elevated, should have been at least 200-250$ less, but if it's as good as the MTF charts present it, I'll sell my 24-105 for it, even losing 35mm.
So selling my 24-105 for 700$ (give or thake), 800$ isn't a bad price.

996gt2 wrote in post #15212693
Yes, the 8-15mm f/4 fisheye retails for $1499 But that was a rather niche lens and not a walkaround like this one is intended to be.

The recently released Nikon AF-S 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 VR (kit lens for D600) is no slouch optically and costs 1/3 as much as this lens, and it has a longer zoom range. Sure, it's variable aperture, but f/3.5-4.5 is not that different from constant f/4, and we are talking about the difference between $500 and $1500...

If this 24-70 f/4 IS is really going to be the kit lens for the 6D, then the 6D is really going to be a tough sell against the better-spec'd Nikon D600. I saw a D600 with 2-lens kit (24-85 VR, 70-300VR, plus a free wireless adapter) today at Costco for something like $2899, which is going to be a lot less than what the 6D is going to cost with just the 24-70.

Haha...oops, forgot about that...but yeah, you're right it was a very specialized lens...kind of like how the TS-Es don't really follow the pricing norm for other primes of their FL haha...

Couldn't agree with you more on the 6D/D600 stuff...that's going to hurt Canon bad and I have a feeling it'll be a decent-sized market.

Will have to weigh up the increase in IQ over the Tamron 24-70, coupled with the extra stop less aperture - not as excited about this now I've seen the price.

Crazy prices.
24-105 costs $800. You lose 35mm, $500 and what yo get? IS that might be useful sometime and a bit of a sharpness probably.
IS will keep your lenses stand in place, extra 4-stops, but it won't freeze all the subjects you shoot. For any photo witth people it is not that useful.

35/2 IS -same.
I got 35L for 1300. Truly one of the best canon lenses.
I'd pay extra $500 for a true-stop of light and L quality anytime.

True: someone at canon must be sniffing glue...

$1500? Nope, I'd rather spend just spend $850 and get a used 24-105 and keep the extra money.

just to be somewhat positive (it is so hard sometimes with these kind of decisions)
but they are only other lenses so far that has the hybrid IS besides the 100 L IS.
yup...
not much there....
but I said it!

i need one new lens 10-400mm f/1.8
because i want my bag small

NG8JGFX wrote in post #15212404
Maybe the new lens cap will spur some new sales.........
As for the new 24-70 f4 IS...Why o Why...24-105 all the way over that... I'll never even touch one of those 24-70's..
I'd prefer a 24-105 II see what Canon can do with that, perhaps make it a 2.8..

The way it goes, if a 24-105 f2.8 L IS ever comes, it will be $4000.

Where do people rank the following:

Canon 24-70
Canon 24-70 II
Tamron 24-70
Sigma 24-70

And (assuming the Canon 24-70 f4 has similar optics to the 24-70 II) where would this new 24-70 f4 sit in your opinion?

I think Canon missed an incredible opportunity to lure people to get into canon FF , make happy their costumers and steal potential Tamron and Sigma buyers.
I am sure these tw lens will be very nice, but these prices are out of touch. IMO

UK Price £1499 (This includes VAT/Sales Tax at 20%).

Can someone explain to me (maybe it was discussed in another thread), why would one go for the 24-70IS over the much cheaper 24-105? Is the 24-105 being discontinued?