Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2011 · Is it time yet ?
  
 
ohsnaphappy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Is it time yet ?


I know both of these lenses are currently wonderful, but so was the 70-200 2.8L IS, and look how much Canon improved that lens when they released the MK II! I'm hoping the 35 and the 24-70 will be a similar story.


Dec 11, 2011 at 06:48 AM
Fr3d
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Is it time yet ?


A 35mm with sealing and current coating is very interesting to me.
The 24-70 only if it is lighter had less field curvature and was somewhat better on the long end.
However I would prefer a 135 f/2.0 L with sealing and maybe IS.
Lots of bad weather where I live



Dec 11, 2011 at 08:43 PM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Is it time yet ?


I'm OK without IS just make it lighter and sharper.


Dec 12, 2011 at 12:10 AM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Is it time yet ?


AGeoJO wrote:
Without IS it would be pretty much an ordinary lens, regardless how much of an improvement the optical part would be. If Nikon felt necessary to put in a VR in their 16-35mm lens, it would be a major omission for Canon not to put in IS in a new 24-70mm lens, soon or later. Period.


Did Nikon put VR in their new 24-70Z? Did Sigma put OS in their new 24-70?

Maybe Canon could differentiate themselves, but Sigma is hardly taking huge number of sales from the to need to differentiate themselves. If it's as good of an improvement as the 70-200L mk II then it'll sell like hotcakes.



Dec 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



RobertLynn
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Is it time yet ?


Pixel Perfect wrote:
Did Nikon put VR in their new 24-70Z? Did Sigma put OS in their new 24-70?

Maybe Canon could differentiate themselves, but Sigma is hardly taking huge number of sales from the to need to differentiate themselves. If it's as good of an improvement as the 70-200L mk II then it'll sell like hotcakes.


This times a billion.



Dec 12, 2011 at 01:37 AM
AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Is it time yet ?


Pixel Perfect wrote:
Did Nikon put VR in their new 24-70Z? Did Sigma put OS in their new 24-70?

Maybe Canon could differentiate themselves, but Sigma is hardly taking huge number of sales from the to need to differentiate themselves. If it's as good of an improvement as the 70-200L mk II then it'll sell like hotcakes.



Nikon introduced the 24-70mm in 2007 after Canon alright but that was 4 years ago. The Nikkor 16-35mm VR was introduced in 2010, a few years later. I will refrain from commenting about any Sigma product. Yes, even without IS the lens will sell if the optical improvement justifies it but why stop there? Rather than just making a great lens, why not make an all around superb lens with all the features that make it more desireable?



Dec 12, 2011 at 02:45 AM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Is it time yet ?


We won't be able to afford either one of them.


Dec 12, 2011 at 02:59 AM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Is it time yet ?


Repeat after me...it's only money it's only money..it's only money .

Jeff Nolten wrote:
We won't be able to afford either one of them.




Dec 12, 2011 at 03:11 AM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password