Can someone tell me why Canon does not put a 24-70mm 2.8L IS lens to compliment the 70-200?
Thanks!
dP
patricdj Hatchling 9 posts Joined Oct 2006 More info | Jul 08, 2007 20:29 | #1 Can someone tell me why Canon does not put a 24-70mm 2.8L IS lens to compliment the 70-200?
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tdp Member  84 posts Joined Feb 2007 More info | Jul 08, 2007 20:37 | #2 patricdj wrote in post #3509724  Can someone tell me why Canon does not put a 24-70mm 2.8L IS lens to compliment the 70-200? Thanks! dP Last thread I saw about this, someone said the size and weight would be a bit out of hand.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
tdp:
LOG IN TO REPLY |
liquefied Goldmember  1,160 posts Joined Oct 2006 More info | Jul 08, 2007 20:41 | #4 The 24-70L is already LOL HUEG for a normal zoom which is why I don't plan on ever owning it. Just imagine how big and heavy it would be with IS.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
metalman1010 Goldmember  1,272 posts Joined Dec 2006 Location: Lakewood, CO (Finally moved!) More info | Canon probably will have an IS version of every lens eventually at the rate they are releasing them. http://crossczech.smugmug.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
incendy Goldmember  2,118 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Orange County More info | Jul 08, 2007 20:59 | #6 yeah, I think there will be one eventually, although I have always thought of it as a people shooter and wouldn't not really care if it had IS or not Canon 5d with 35mm 1.4L, 24-70mm 2.8L and 135mm 2.0L
LOG IN TO REPLY |
AeroSmith Goldmember  More info | If you don't mind loosing a stop there is always the 24-105 f/4L IS......sorry to state the obvious. Josh Smith
LOG IN TO REPLY |
PetKal Cream of the Crop  11,141 posts Likes: 5 Joined Sep 2005 Location: Nizza, Italia More info | Jul 08, 2007 21:01 | #8 patricdj wrote in post #3509724 Can someone tell me why Canon does not put a 24-70mm 2.8L IS lens to compliment the 70-200? Thanks! dP Because the 70-200 receives enough compliments from the users even in the absence of the image stabilized brick. Potenza-Walore-Prestigio
LOG IN TO REPLY |
JoeW Senior Member  619 posts Joined Nov 2006 Location: Alabama More info | I'd think they could make one with IS not too much heavier. They did it with the 70-200 f4 IS. Don't really care if they do (though it would be an ideal lens) because I'm not planning on getting rid of my current non-IS version. Gear: 5DII, 40D, 24-105 f4L, 100-400L; 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 f4 IS L, 17-40 f4 L, 50 f1.4, 550 EX (& a 10D w/ a broken shudder & an Elan IIe that still works)
LOG IN TO REPLY |
AeroSmith Goldmember More info | Jul 08, 2007 21:07 | #10 PetKal wrote in post #3509926 Because the 70-200 receives enough compliments from the users even in the absence of the image stabilized brick. 
Josh Smith
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in 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!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is Thunderstream 2099 guests, 97 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
