hk300 wrote in post #8330019
I am not sure ... i would guess perhaps only 10% more. See for instance the 18-55IS and 55-250IS ... you practically get the IS for free.
If the new version (with IS) will replace the old 24-70 at a 50-60% higher price, Canon will lose a lot of business to Sigma, because assuming this 50-60% higher price tag, you would be able to buy 3x Sigma 24-70HSM ... not very likely.
I have seen comparisons between the Canon 24-70L (using 1Ds3) and the Zeiss 24-70 (using Sony A900) and it shows that the Canon is no longer best in its
I don't think that Canon are that fussed about the Sigma lens pricing, the previous Sigma model was a LOT cheaper than the canon version optically is was it's equal, maybe even eclipsing the Canon in some areas, but it never sold in the qualtities as the Canon. If they add 40% to the current 24-70L's price, it will still be a lot cheaper than the Nikon variant.
Bare in mind that the canon 24-70L is THE original 24-70/2.8 lens and therefore the oldest and the one that every one wants to beat. It's been ahead of the crowd for a long long time. The competion has just caught up, but it's still a great lens (as it always has been). We are not talking night and day difference here, just that the Nikon and CZ lenses are a wee bit better in the corners. Sure you can measurebate over it...but the proof is in the pictures and there's a lot more top pictures that have been shot with the Canon 24-70 than both of the other two lenses put togther. Put 20 large prints on my desk taken with all three lenses, taken by top photographers...I probably couldn't spot the difference between these lenses. But i would see the differnent photographer's style bursting through the pictures...what's more important to you? It's about the photography, not the measurebating