24-70 f/4 @ $999? Really?

Any else seen this?
http://www.usa.canon.c​om …up/ef_24_70mm_f​_4l_is_usm

I went to the refurb page, hoping for $799. Sure enough! It's there.
http://shop.usa.canon.​com …mm-f4l-is-usm-refurbished

Very tempting!

it's finally come down to a more realistic price...even at this price, i'm not sure how well it will sell...

second hand 24-70 2.6 mk1? not sure I personally care much about IS in that range...

I do have a 17-55 2.8 IS, I do love it, even more than my 24-70 2.8. As long as im on a APS-C that's what im sticking with.

I have the 35 IS, and think it was worthwhile to move up from the old 35. My zoom is currently the 28-75 f/28. The one thing I don't like about it is no IS. I find the 24-70 f/4 quite tempting at $799. The residual spherical aberration (RSA, focus-shift) scares me a bit, though. I was hoping Canon would fix it.

While this reduced price is much more reasonable, I still prefer the extra reach of the 24-105L for a slower f/4 general purpose zoom.

The prices have not moved yet up here.

http://www.cameracanad​a.com …/product.asp?pi​d=6313B002

Can you order online, directly from Canon. Or maybe just cross the river. I'm not sure about import duties, though.

Scott M wrote in post #17128357
While this reduced price is much more reasonable, I still prefer the extra reach of the 24-105L for a slower f/4 general purpose zoom.

And you can still get that lens cheaper than the 24-70 f4 model.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17128262
Any else seen this?
http://www.usa.canon.c​om …up/ef_24_70mm_f​_4l_is_usm

I went to the refurb page, hoping for $799. Sure enough! It's there.
http://shop.usa.canon.​com …mm-f4l-is-usm-refurbished

Very tempting!

Zero interesting in an F4 constant lens at these focal lengths. On a 70-200, it's good. But at 24-70? No. Then again, F2.8 at those focal lengths is also too slow for my use.

This is one of the most generalized lenses you could use. Which to me, is not great, for $1k. To me, that lens is a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 70mm lens. But all at F4. F4 at 24~50mm has very little DOF control. It's a little better at 70, but still not a lot of control.

If I had this lens, it would be a landscape lens.

I'd never use it for portrait, or walk around. Too big. Too slow. For me.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #17128412
Zero interesting in an F4 constant lens at these focal lengths. On a 70-200, it's good. But at 24-70? No. Then again, F2.8 at those focal lengths is also too slow for my use.

This is one of the most generalized lenses you could use. Which to me, is not great, for $1k. To me, that lens is a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 70mm lens. But all at F4. F4 at 24~50mm has very little DOF control. It's a little better at 70, but still not a lot of control.

If I had this lens, it would be a landscape lens.

I'd never use it for portrait, or walk around. Too big. Too slow. For me.

Very best,

All good reasons to keep my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. I wish it were IS, though.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17128420
All good reasons to keep my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. I wish it were IS, though.

Yea,

For $800, I'd rather have two cameras with two primes.

Very best,

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17128420
All good reasons to keep my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. I wish it were IS, though.

why not save for the tamron VC version then?

DreDaze wrote in post #17128488
why not save for the tamron VC version then?

$1,300 and not significantly better than the 28-75, optically. The 24-70 distorts worse, but that is correctable. It is also large and heavy compared to the 28-75. I am trying to stick to primes (have 35, 50, 100, want a 24) on my 6D, but do appreciate the versatility of a zoom.

Somewhere in the back of my closet is an old 28-135 that I don't use anymore. I liked it on the 5D, but I think the higher pixel count of the 6D shows its flaws more. The 24-105 would certainly be an improvement over that.

Like I said, I'm all over the place on this one. If I sold my 60D, 15-85, 28-135, 28-75 and 60 2.8, I'd could afford a 24-70 2.8 VC. Maybe I should post a package deal for sale.

MalVeauX wrote in post #17128412
Zero interesting in an F4 constant lens at these focal lengths. On a 70-200, it's good. But at 24-70? No. Then again, F2.8 at those focal lengths is also too slow for my use.

This is one of the most generalized lenses you could use. Which to me, is not great, for $1k. To me, that lens is a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 70mm lens. But all at F4. F4 at 24~50mm has very little DOF control. It's a little better at 70, but still not a lot of control.

If I had this lens, it would be a landscape lens.

I'd never use it for portrait, or walk around. Too big. Too slow. For me.

Very best,

I agree. I use mine at 24 or 70 and little between.

This tells me I need a 24/35/50/85 setup... all at 1.4

Talley wrote in post #17128587
I agree. I use mine at 24 or 70 and little between.

This tells me I need a 24/35/50/85 setup... all at 1.4

I think this is a better idea. I already have the 35, 50 & 100. Sure would love a 24L II.