Canon 24-70mm f2.8 II Announced

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by Postman158, Feb 6, 2012.

  1. Postman158

    Postman158 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2011
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Manteca, CA
  2. EIngerson

    EIngerson Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,544
    Likes Received:
    1,647
    Location:
    San Diego, California
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I think the one I have is just fine.
     
  3. Tony S

    Tony S Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    2,094
    Likes Received:
    598
    Location:
    Eatonville, Washington
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I'll keep my original one... shoot, I wouldn't want to have to buy a new CP filter just because they decided to make it with a ring thread size of 82mm. Better work a lot better than the old one.
     
  4. o hey tyler

    o hey tyler Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    9,783
    Likes Received:
    2,723
    Location:
    Maine
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I think IS is next to useless on focal lengths shorter than 100mm.

    What do you think?
     
  5. Postman158

    Postman158 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2011
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Manteca, CA
    You're all presenting with very valid points! I just got my 24-70 f2.8L, and I love it, so I'm not too worried about number II yet.
     
  6. analog.universe

    analog.universe TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    330
    Location:
    Vermont
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I think Canon would not have released 24mm and 28mm primes with 4-stop IS if everyone thought as you do.

    I can think of a few situations where I wanted IS on a short lens, but just a few... nowhere near enough to justify a max of f/2.8 in a prime. Seems cool to me on something like a 17-55 or 24-70 though, if you shoot the right subjects for it.
     
  7. bentcountershaft

    bentcountershaft Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    1,061
    Location:
    Southern Indiana, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I don't understand the point of new/updated 2.8 primes in those focal lenths. I wanted a new 28 1.8 and maybe a new 20mm 2.8 but no.

    As far as the new 24-70 not having IS, I'm fine with it. If it's as big a jump in IQ as the mark I vs. mark II 70-200 2.8 IS was then I'll probably upgrade eventually. Not right away though.
     
  8. o hey tyler

    o hey tyler Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    9,783
    Likes Received:
    2,723
    Location:
    Maine
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Well, I for one will not be buying those lenses. The inclusion of IS is just money down the toilet. I'd rather shoot a short fast prime on a tripod, especially if you're going to be hand holding at shutter speed SLOWER than 1/20s. If you're hand holding a full frame camera for 6/10ths of a second with a 28mm prime lens, you're going to have movement blur of everything else in the photograph (depending on the subject matter). I'd much rather crank my ISO and use a faster shutter speed.

    You can think of a few instances where you wanted IS on a short lens, maybe to you that's worth the extra coinage to buy a lens with IS that's <100mm in focal length with IS for those specific few instances... To me, it's not. It's a waste.

    Heck, 18-55mm kit lenses don't even need IS. I turned mine off on my T1i's kit lens when I had it, and never looked back.

    This is just my personal opinion obviously... But every photographer got along just fine without IS, OS, or VR for longer than digital photography has been around.
     
  9. Jeremy Z

    Jeremy Z No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,179
    Likes Received:
    32
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I don't think IS is useless on less than 100 mm. Generally speaking, you could hand hold a 24mm at 1/30s. With ID, you could do it at 1/8s, allowing lower sensitivity and higher IQ.

    True, it won't stop action, but that's only half of the equation.
     
  10. GeorgieGirl

    GeorgieGirl No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    324
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    So...I axe ya...why did Canon put the IS on the 17-55?
     
  11. o hey tyler

    o hey tyler Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    9,783
    Likes Received:
    2,723
    Location:
    Maine
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Marketing ploy I'd reckon.
     
  12. GeorgieGirl

    GeorgieGirl No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    324
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit


    Does anyone think that $2,299 for this lens is rich?
     

Share This Page