24-105L f/2.8

If Canon were to build a 24-105mm L f/2.8 based on current designs:

• How heavy would it be?
  
• What filter size would it likely take?
  
• What would it cost? (assuming current pricing structure)?
  

It would be heavy

It would take a larger filter most likely, prob 77 - 82, and it'd be ridiculously expensive.

•How heavy would it be? - Too heavy!•What filter size would it likely take? - Too big!•What would it cost? (assuming current pricing structure)? - Too much!

Whatever dimensions it has, it wont be any larger than the 70-200/2.8 series...

200/2.8 needs more glass than 105/2.8...simple.

Twister286 wrote in post #11111332
Whatever dimensions it has, it wont be any larger than the 70-200/2.8 series...

200/2.8 needs more glass than 105/2.8...simple.

Not really, because the diameter also equates to the vignetting. That's why even for lenses like 17 mm F4 or 14 mm F2.8 have humongous glasses, even though theoretically they only need very small opening for the aperture.

The reason the wide angles are so big is that are retrofocus (inverted telephoto type) designs & not true wide angle lenses.
Years ago Canon made a standard design 19mm f3.5 & later a retrofocus version.
You can see the difference here:
Standard one http://www.canon.com …/data/19-85/fl_19_35.html where most of the lens is inside the mirror box so you can't see through the viewfinder. Needs a separate viewfinder attached to the hot shoe.
Retrofocus one http://www.canon.com …data/19-85/fl_19_35r.html
You'll notice the enormous difference in the size & weight of the two lenses.
FL19mm f3.5, diameter=65mm, length=18mm, wt=150 grams.
FL19mm f3.5R, diameter=82mm, length=65mm, wt=500 grams.