Why not much talk about the 24-70 IS F4 ?? Experience ?

Why is there not much talk about the 24-70 IS F4 ??
Ok, so it's smaller cheaper lighter and has IS but is F4..
Anyone using this lens? Experiences? How does it compare to the none IS 2.8?

Thanks in advance..

I don't know how anyone else thinks, but for that kind of money the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC is a no brainer. One more stop of light and $300 extra in my pocket? Ok. Give me the Tamron.

I Love Cats wrote in post #16511662
I don't know how anyone else thinks, but for that kind of money the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC is a no brainer. One more stop of light and $300 extra in my pocket? Ok. Give me the Tamron.

Ummmmm yeah you could be right, but reviews say AF is slower, image quality and build are not as good and the zoom ring is arse about face..

because the 24-105 exists for $6xx dollars.

i cannot think of any reason for this lens to exist.

Jerobean wrote in post #16511695
because the 24-105 exists for $6xx dollars.

i cannot think of any reason for this lens to exist.

Good point...

Jerobean wrote in post #16511695
because the 24-105 exists for $6xx dollars.

i cannot think of any reason for this lens to exist.

I Love Cats wrote in post #16511662
I don't know how anyone else thinks, but for that kind of money the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC is a no brainer. One more stop of light and $300 extra in my pocket? Ok. Give me the Tamron.

These two reasons. If you want f4, you can get the 24-105 which has more range and is cheaper.

If you want a 24-70, you can get the Tamron version which is f2.8 and costs the same (after rebates, normally its even cheaper).

Nick_Reading.UK wrote in post #16511639
Why is there not much talk about the 24-70 IS F4 ??
Ok, so it's smaller cheaper lighter and has IS but is F4..
Anyone using this lens? Experiences? How does it compare to the none IS 2.8?

Thanks in advance..

I hired a 24-70 f/4L for a while and it's clearly sharper than the 24-105 and has less distortion. The IS works better (4 stop compared with 3) and it's 70g lighter. As compared with the 24-70 f/2.8 tests show that the 24-70 is sharper but if you need f/2.8 then the f/4 version won't be suitable. The 24-70 f/4L's sharpness for landscapes, for example, is similar to my old 24-70 f/2.8L which I sold because it was just too heavy and attracted attention on holidays and days out.

I'm tempted to buy the 24-70 f/4 but own a 35mm f/2 IS USM and wonder if a 100mm macro may be a better option. I also noticed that the focus shift issue affecting macro mode near MFD is true in practice for the 24-70 f/4L.

Martyn

The 24-70 f/4 is a total mystery to me. Why not upgrade the 24-105 instead? Sure the 24-70 is better but then it's a 7 year newer lens. Why not come out with a 24-105II?

gjl711 wrote in post #16511956
The 24-70 f/4 is a total mystery to me. Why not upgrade the 24-105 instead? Sure the 24-70 is better but then it's a 7 year newer lens. Why not come out with a 24-105II?

Given that the 24-105 has more distortion at 24mm than the 24-70 lenses, can this be adequately corrected in LR5 or DxO 9.1? Even on my old 40D I noticed that the 24-105 (owned for 5 years) showed noticeable barrel distortion at 24mm and quite strong colour fringing.

Perhaps the 24-70 f/4L is a marketing exercise? The price has fallen since its release and white box versions are appearing on eBay for around £600, though customs and VAT would be payable...

I'm not claiming that the 24-105 is better than either 24-70, but it might be if updated using better optics and a better IS. 24-105 is just such a nice range on a FF camera.

gjl711 wrote in post #16511991
I'm not claiming that the 24-105 is better than either 24-70, but it might be if updated using better optics and a better IS. 24-105 is just such a nice range on a FF camera.

I agree, Canon could have given the 24-105 4 stop IS and better CA control with a UD element. Do you think 24-70 is restrictive on full frame?

Not at all, but Canon already updated the 24-70 with the 24-70II so it just seemed to me that the 24-105 was a natural for an update.

gjl711 wrote in post #16512056
Not at all, but Canon already updated the 24-70 with the 24-70II so it just seemed to me that the 24-105 was a natural for an update.

I guess the concern is that Canon may discontinue the 24-105 as there's no obvious reason to continue with an old design, especially when the 24-70 f/4 offers a macro mode.

MartynV wrote in post #16512069
I guess the concern is that Canon may discontinue the 24-105 as there's no obvious reason to continue with an old design, especially when the 24-70 f/4 offers a macro mode.

for the price difference I would buy the 2.8 ii everytime over the f4 is.

the 2.8 has been 1699 after rebates multiple times lately.

Seems pretty obvious to me, the 24-70 f4 is going to be the new kit lens for full frame bodies. The 24-105 will be discontinued and there's been rumors of a 12-24 coming out. Then the L zoom lineup would be 12-24, 24-70 f2.8 and f4, 70-200 f2.8 and f4, and 200-400... Nice and neat with no overlap (I know, we all like overlap, but canon doesn't.... Need to buy a new lens if you want the added reach)