24-70L f4 IS

The macro mode seems the most obvious difference, perhaps superior sharpness aswell?

Doesnt seem like a good fit for a kit lens at that price though.
 
Last edited:
£1499 mrp. Will be interesting to see what it settles out at and whether or not it is bundled with the 6d as the kit lens.
 
24-70 f4 will have to be one hell of a performer to justify the price if anything it needs to be cheaper than the 24-105 as your loosing a lot of length.

Interested in the new 35 f2 though depending on reviews and price it could be competition for the new sigma 35mm f1.4
 
a1ex2001 said:
24-70 f4 will have to be one hell of a performer to justify the price if anything it needs to be cheaper than the 24-105 as your loosing a lot of length.

Interested in the new 35 f2 though depending on reviews and price it could be competition for the new sigma 35mm f1.4
Click to expand...

£799 mrp. Again, will have to see what it comes out at. At launch price it is a little close to the 1.4l.
 
If it's got good optics and reasonably priced people will buy it. Think 70-200 F2.8 IS vs the F4 IS, though in that case there's a more obvious size difference too. It's still considerably smaller than both the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-105 IS. If it's £799 launch it'll hopefully be sub £500 after a year or so.

Also my guess is that they're retiring the 24-105.
 
Last edited:
RedTele said:
If it's got good optics and reasonably priced people will buy it. Think 70-200 F2.8 IS vs the F4 IS, though in that case there's a more obvious size difference too. It's still considerably smaller than both the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-105 IS. If it's £799 launch it'll hopefully be sub £500 after a year or so.

Also my guess is that they're retiring the 24-105.
Click to expand...

799 is for the new 35mm, the 24-70 f4 is set to be 1499!

Interesting point about retiring the 24-105 that would make this new lens make sense but would be a real shame as the 24-105 is such a versatile walk about lens.

If they wanted a new kit lens for the 6d I would have thought a high quality variable aperture 28-70 or similar would have been a better option. A simple update of the classic 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 with usm would have been very interesting.
 
a1ex2001 said:
Interesting point about retiring the 24-105 that would make this new lens make sense but would be a real shame as the 24-105 is such a versatile walk about lens.
Click to expand...
Certainly it's a versatile range but the 24-105 is probably Canon's worst L lens, optically speaking, if one disregards the niche 28-300L.

Bob
 
Yes it will be good to see the reviews and real world tests.

Knowing Canon it'll be early next year before it's available. So add another 18 months on for the price to drop to something more reasonable.

Could be a super alternative to the 24-70/2.8 II.
 
Also remember that the new lens has a pinch cap so that adds £299 to the RRP :D

p1247829918-3.jpg
 
Last edited:
I've not been massively impressed with my 24-105mm f4/L since picking it up with my 5D3.

Came from a 40D with EF-S 15-85mm IS USM and the 15-85mm seemed quicker in terms of AF with less hunting for focus in low light, the IS system was quieter, it allowed me to hand hold for longer exposures, and there was less distortion to the image.

Not saying the 24-105mm is bad by any means, but there is definitely room for a higher quality 24mm upwards zoom lens IMO. The 24-70mm f/2.8 II is supposed to be extremely sharp for a zoom lens so if they can match it in that regard then there will be a market for it I'd think.
 
Canon Bob said:
Certainly it's a versatile range but the 24-105 is probably Canon's worst L lens, optically speaking, if one disregards the niche 28-300L.

Bob
Click to expand...

It's hardly bad though really is it, would much rather a slightly tweaked 24-105mm f4L mkII than this new lens even if it is super sharp it's far to expensive. I think Nikon took a more sensible approach when making the new kit lens for the d600.

If they do retire the 24-105 that would make this lens the kit lens for both the 5dmkIII and the 6D meaning that canon are still lacking a differentiator in this sector. They could make the 6D a much more attractive package with a cheaper but still high quality kit lens but sadly canon seem to have been ignoring their full frame none L zooms of late.
 
Last edited:
a1ex2001 said:
It's hardly bad though really is it, would much rather a slightly tweaked 24-105mm f4L mkII than this new lens even if it is super sharp it's far to expensive. ......
Click to expand...

Designing a 4+x retro-focus zoom is always going to be an optical challenge and maybe a sub 3x offering will allow the improvement in quality that people seem to want.

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
Designing a 4+x retro-focus zoom is always going to be an optical challenge and maybe a sub 3x offering will allow the improvement in quality that people seem to want.

Bob
Click to expand...

Well me no understandy that.

In Ingrish please Bob :help:
 
bigrob said:
Also remember that the new lens has a pinch cap so that adds £299 to the RRP :D

p1247829918-3.jpg
Click to expand...
FINALLY! time to throw away my cheap ebay/Nikon caps for this. kept dropping the standard Canon cap, and can never find the latches.

as for 24-70 f4, I thought they were going to release it cheaper than 24-105 f4 and as a future kit lens. keeping the 24-105 as upgrade to it.
 
bigrob said:
Well me no understandy that.

In Ingrish please Bob :help:
Click to expand...

The design constraints at the 24mm end conflict with the 70 or 105mm end, and the bigger the range the worse that conflict becomes. You go from needing a retrofocal design (lens longer than focal length) to telephoto (lens shorter than focal length) The casualty is image quality, size or price.
 
It'd better be sharp as the new Zeiss primes across the field. For the price really both are insane. 35mm non L for £800 is totally ridiculous. I hope their customers including me will force these two back their throat by not buying any! I had never considered nikon so seriously as after the announcement; guess who sells all the affordable nice primes.
 
daugirdas said:
It'd better be sharp as the new Zeiss primes across the field. For the price really both are insane. 35mm non L for £800 is totally ridiculous. I hope their customers including me will force these two back their throat by not buying any! I had never considered nikon so seriously as after the announcement; guess who sells all the affordable nice primes.
Click to expand...

I found myself wincing audibly at the price of the 35/2 IS when I saw it on AP's twitter feed. :eek:

Fortunately, I already have one, but the SRP of the old 35/2 is £319, so that's moving the price point up by over 250% for four stops of image stabilisation.

If they're dropping the existing 35/2 with the introduction of the IS version (which it looks like) are Canon deliberately trying to get rid of their cheap, compact and decent primes?

Makes me feel more convinced I'll be buying a decent CSC for my next body and won't be replacing my 5Dc. :cautious:

The Oly OM-D with in-body IS, I'm looking at you... *

* edit: Sony and Olympus are starting to make lens-based IS systems look like an expensive and pointless luxury. The argument was compelling in the days of film, but far less so today when you can shift the sensor instead of the glass.
 
Last edited:
Canon Bob said:
Designing a 4+x retro-focus zoom is always going to be an optical challenge and maybe a sub 3x offering will allow the improvement in quality that people seem to want.

Bob
Click to expand...

Maybe we will see the same (or close) performance as the 24-70L f2.8 II has. It definitely is going to be interesting to see how this lens will do in reviews/tests. :)
 
daugirdas said:
It'd better be sharp as the new Zeiss primes across the field. For the price really both are insane. 35mm non L for £800 is totally ridiculous. I hope their customers including me will force these two back their throat by not buying any! I had never considered nikon so seriously as after the announcement; guess who sells all the affordable nice primes.
Click to expand...

I can assure one of their customers (me) would love to own that 35mm F2 IS but will most defiantly not be spending anything near £800 on it. It would have nothing short of to be amazing for me to spend more than half that!
 
The 24mm IS is around £600 now, having launched at £749 and the 28mm IS is £569, down from £729. The price will improve but whether it will get to a 'good' price for a 35mm f2 lens is another matter!

I guess you can also go grey import and save more money that was as well but apparently canon have now decided not to give lenses worldwide warantees!
 
kokakaste2 said:
Switching over to Nikon will most probably cost you more than buying one of the lenses. :shake:
Click to expand...

If I did it the wrong (the high street) way then yes. I need to upgrade my bodies soon, while glass won't lose any money. A used D3x and D700 combo and used Nikkor glass about a year later could be a very cost effective solution.

RichardtheSane said:
I can assure one of their customers (me) would love to own that 35mm F2 IS but will most defiantly not be spending anything near £800 on it. It would have nothing short of to be amazing for me to spend more than half that!
Click to expand...

So would I. 35mm would be lovely for weddings, but if I am spending the other side of £500 I am definitely getting a 35L (probably used, thus starving Canon of cash)

menthel said:
The 24mm IS is around £600 now, having launched at £749 and the 28mm IS is £569, down from £729. The price will improve but whether it will get to a 'good' price for a 35mm f2 lens is another matter!

I guess you can also go grey import and save more money that was as well but apparently canon have now decided not to give lenses worldwide warantees!
Click to expand...

Still ridiculous for non-L slow primes :puke:

Anyone remember Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC USD? Maybe it's built like a toy but the price...!
 
daugirdas said:
but if I am spending the other side of £500 I am definitely getting a 35L (probably used, thus starving Canon of cash)
Click to expand...

Not necessarily as the person selling may use the money to buy a new lens which they couldn't afford otherwise.

On the other hand..they could (insert anything here).
 
It could be a great walk about lens with a 5D3.

We now have 4 to 6 weeks to wait and see.
 
daugirdas said:
If I did it the wrong (the high street) way then yes. I need to upgrade my bodies soon, while glass won't lose any money. A used D3x and D700 combo and used Nikkor glass about a year later could be a very cost effective solution.
Click to expand...

Yeah high street is bad idea. I was more thinking of getting second hand stuff. Actually had idea to switch to D800, but ended up with 5D3. Still would loose quite bit of money, but as you said in long run it could actually be cost effective. :)
 
I guess you can also go grey import and save more money that was as well but apparently canon have now decided not to give lenses worldwide warantees!


Have you got a reference for that please?
 
menthel said:
£1499 mrp. Will be interesting to see what it settles out at and whether or not it is bundled with the 6d as the kit lens.
Click to expand...

Clearly in a world of austerity doubling the price of your products for the newer model makes perfect sense! :wacky:

They can't possibly justify it as double the cost to make and again the treasure island principle continues for those on the UK $1800 = £1500 at an exchange rate of $1.60 :thinking:

I am trying to figure out why you wouldn't buy a new 24-70mm f2.8 mark 1 or the 24-105mm f4.

This seems to fall between both stools and if money is no object, wont the 24-70mm II be a better option?

Canon marketeers: do your homework and don't treat your customers as suckers!

Rant over....
 
corny said:
.....They can't possibly justify it as double the cost to make and again the treasure island principle continues for those on the UK $1800 = £1500 at an exchange rate of $1.60 :thinking:
Click to expand...

The difference is far more modest when the effects of taxation are removed. Strip out the VAT and import duty and the base price drops to £1180 ($1864) as opposed to the base US price of $1730
(I used an ex rate of 1.58)

Bob
 
Understood Bob, fair point, still way over priced even in USA terms IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top