Just released: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

rhommelrhommel Registered Users Posts: 306 Major grins
edited February 8, 2012 in Accessories
So Canon released 3 lenses today...
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/07/Canon_24-70mm_F2p8_II_24mm_f2p8_IS_28mm_f2p8_IS#press

Canon 24-70 F2.8L II
Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM

I am surprised that the put IS on the primes and not on 24-70L

I am still buying it though
Toronto Photographer

Comments

  • cmasoncmason Registered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    Disappointed that the 24-70 isn't IS. Makes you wonder why they bother even updating it, unless its age is beginning to show in the new high MP cameras they are shipping.

    On the other hand, given that IS adds at least $700+ to either the 70-200 f/4 L or the 70-200 f2.8 L, adding $700 to this lens would put it over $2,000, so I would never buy the IS version anyway. ne_nau.gif
    Photos
  • mjordanphotomjordanphoto Registered Users Posts: 88 Big grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    cmason wrote: »
    Disappointed that the 24-70 isn't IS. Makes you wonder why they bother even updating it, unless its age is beginning to show in the new high MP cameras they are shipping.

    On the other hand, given that IS adds at least $700+ to either the 70-200 f/4 L or the 70-200 f2.8 L, adding $700 to this lens would put it over $2,000, so I would never buy the IS version anyway. ne_nau.gif

    Price: $2,299

    Honestly, if it's "as advertised" it's going to be worth the cost for a lot of people. The IQ and sharpness is said to be stunning, and I'm very interested in seeing some sample images and get some real-world feedback. That being said, I bought my 24-70 less than 2 years ago for around $1300... for me, I can't justify the upgrade when, even after selling my current version, I'd be looking at another $1,300 to make the purchase.
    Website - Smugmug Galleries - Facebook - Twitter
  • rhommelrhommel Registered Users Posts: 306 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    If I had not dropped my 24-70, I wouldn't be thinking of upgrading... good thing I waited and did not buy another 24-70 (1st version).
    Toronto Photographer
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    Looks like I"ll be staying with my 24-70I and/or checking out the new Tamron. I can't afford the Mk II at this point anyway, and unless it is SPECTACULAR, without IS it would take a lot to get me to switch just because it's the newer version.

    And why IS for wideangle primes????? Is there some specific application for those where IS would be helpful?? This is slightly baffling headscratch.gif

    ETA: Nearly double the price of the existing lens. HUH??? (I had previously seen the rumour of $1800 and only now saw the official $2200 price tag) Unless the new zoom has the IQ of the 135L throughout its range at 2.8 and also makes coffee and washes the dishes....
    facebook | photo site |
  • cmasoncmason Registered Users Posts: 2,506 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    OH in Canon corporate office today: " [Facepalm] No! I said IS on the 24 to 70, not the 24 28, you idiot!!"
    Photos
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,133 moderator
    edited February 7, 2012
    divamum wrote: »
    ... And why IS for wideangle primes????? Is there some specific application for those where IS would be helpful?? This is slightly baffling headscratch.gif

    ...

    Prime lenses with stabilization will have the same utility as zoom lenses with stabilization. I suspect that video applications will be a considerable enticement.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    cmason wrote: »
    OH in Canon corporate office today: " [Facepalm] No! I said IS on the 24 to 70, not the 24 28, you idiot!!"

    rolleyes1.gifrolleyes1.gif

    Ziggy, I was wondering if video might have something to do with it - since even I can handhold a 24mm lens at 1/20ish (and I am NOT steady-handed), it does seem a redundant feature on these particular lenses for the average still shooter. I wonder if this indicates the 5dIII (or whatever it will be called) is going to be pushing more for the video market? ~muses~
    facebook | photo site |
  • NikolaiNikolai Registered Users Posts: 19,035 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    cmason wrote: »
    OH in Canon corporate office today: " [Facepalm] No! I said IS on the 24 to 70, not the 24 28, you idiot!!"
    rolleyes1.gifroflrolleyes1.gif
    thumb.gif
    [FB Like] [G+ +1]
    "May the f/stop be with you!"
  • kdogkdog Administrators Posts: 11,681 moderator
    edited February 7, 2012
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    Prime lenses with stabilization will have the same utility as zoom lenses with stabilization.
    Apparently even more so, judging from this announcement. headscratch.gif
    Moderator of Landscapes forum
    Link to my Smugmug site
  • rhommelrhommel Registered Users Posts: 306 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    i was just looking at the Tamron's 24-70 Nikon version.. looks pretty good too, too bad it's only Nikon mount
    Toronto Photographer
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    It's not the fact they've put it on a prime, but they've put it on a wideangle prime which typically can be handheld at very low shutter speeds anyway. I just don't get it ne_nau.gif
    facebook | photo site |
  • OverfocusedOverfocused Registered Users Posts: 1,068 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    I've been waiting for the 24-70 IS for years as have many many photogs. What the heck Canon?
    www.overfocused.com
  • rhommelrhommel Registered Users Posts: 306 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    does this mean that they will stop selling the 1st version?
    Toronto Photographer
  • OverfocusedOverfocused Registered Users Posts: 1,068 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    Tamron is releasing one with image stabilization. If it has good enough optics I'll jump all over that!

    http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/02/tamron-24-70-f2-8-vc-announced/
    www.overfocused.com
  • tenoverthenosetenoverthenose Registered Users Posts: 815 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2012
    divamum wrote: »
    It's not the fact they've put it on a prime, but they've put it on a wideangle prime which typically can be handheld at very low shutter speeds anyway. I just don't get it ne_nau.gif

    Maybe so I can take handheld shots of waterfalls at 2 seconds.
    www.patrickpike.com | twitter | facebook
  • OverfocusedOverfocused Registered Users Posts: 1,068 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2012
    tenoverthenose wrote: »
    Maybe so I can take handheld shots of waterfalls at 2 seconds.


    nod.gif

    Honestly, I think it'll mostly benefit the video side of things way more than the still side. Video shake is much easier to spot no matter the focal length, so it'd help a ton if you don't have a steadicam-type device.
    www.overfocused.com
  • DeVermDeVerm Registered Users Posts: 405 Major grins
    edited February 8, 2012
    This all makes me love my 24-105mm f/4L IS USM even more. It's IS gives 3 stops room which, if you want to believe that, makes it faster than a f/2.8 non-IS and at way under half the price too.

    It will be interesting to see how much the Mk.II will improve on the Mk.I and if that is worth the extra expense. There will be a crowd upgrading to the new version anyway, just like there will be a crowd picking up the Mk.I's and I doubt that I will see the difference in the pictures they take.

    ciao!
    Nick.
    ciao!
    Nick.

    my equipment: Canon 5D2, 7D, full list here
    my Smugmug site: here
Sign In or Register to comment.