skibum5 wrote:
well the 28 1.8 has pretty mediocre IQ and if you don't really need more than f/2.8 who would buy the old 28 1.8?
that said I'd have updated the 50 1.4 with real USM way before I bothered with the 28, the 24mm and 50mm were the two most critical IMO.
It would be nice if the 35 f/2 had USM and/or IS also. USM being the main update needed...
skibum5 wrote:
but the 24 2.8 and 28 1.8 and 24-105 and so on have even more
the zeiss 25 and canon 24 T&S II have low CA though
Well that's nice, but the Zeiss is manual focus only and the TSE cost $2000. Both are different animals than a fast, sub $500 AF prime. I'm not saying the 28/1.8 is perfect, but for the price it's decent.
My biggest concern with the 28 and 24 F2.8 IS lenses will be the price. I'm not sure that adding IS to these lenses will be worth it to a lot of people.
Ralph Conway wrote:
@ cineski:
I am sure they did. :-)
But it does not matter. like you said: This lense is useless for anybody doing video. And the big sales did not come from people like us, doing a pic. What do you think why 5D - 5D II, 7D where so successful and why Nikon jumped on the train? Selling DSLRs into the video market is a challenge and promises highest sales without any further costs.
24-70 2.8 II without IS is just as stupid than no follow up. There will be a IS-version as soon as in 70-200. Else I think japanese company heads are as stupid as those all over the world. They are not, of course. Tamron just introduced 24-70 IS. Must be a Canon daughter. Do it! Sell as much as possible! Then we bring out the "L". ...Show more →
Ralph Conway wrote:
Yes! They are cool. Presenting an image that hides the truth and surprising all of us by making it lighter, better and more comfortable (IS) too. How would they be able to ask for 50% price add on else?
I do not think they think their customers are stupid.
It will turn out as "Outsch, we did a mistake, sorry. It is no 24-7ß 2.8 L II It is an 24-70 2.8 L IS of course!
Also it makes no sense that they would release a 24 prime with IS and the 24-70 II with no IS. We will find out real soon ... maybe in a couple of days.
Canon want as many as possible to upgrade to a 24-70 2.8 L II without IS first. Simultaneously they show a couple of wide primes with IS, so that we can buy two or three lenses two cover this focal range optimally. Then, after the sales have ceased, they will release a 24-70 2.8 L IS, and we will upgrade once more. 4 lenses sold instead of 1. Easy decision. If it only worked that way
hah, it may be why they also first updated all the L primes and then waited to do the EFs
As good as the image of the "new" 24-70mm looks, I think it's just a clever mock up. Here's my reasons why I think this;
Where's the description of the lens alongside the red ring at the front? I can't remember any other L lens from the last 15-20 years that doesn't have this.
I can't see Canon abandoning the reverse type zoom it has used so successfully on the 28-70mm and 24-70mm.
I can't see any reason why it should be an 82mm filter thread.
The switches just don't look right.
So I don't think our juices should be flowing just yet!
stargazer78 wrote:
I'm not entirely sure why so many people are complaining about the new primes.
The current EF 24mm f/2.8 is 24 years old. The current EF 28mm f/2.8 is 25 years old. They're so old, they don't have USM because they pre-date that technology. Their optical formulas are so outdated, they're easily outperformed by modern zoom lenses. Hopefully these primes will actually outperform the L-zoom lenses like they should.
Canon is finally getting around to updating their non-L primes for full frame, something many people thought we'd never see. Updated versions of the 20mm, 35mm, and 50mm are no longer out of the question.
Producing consumer-level, cheap lenses for full frame is indicative of where Canon intends to take the full frame format. It looks to me like Canon is bracing for full frame to become more affordable in the near future.
Adding I.S. to these particular lenses show that Canon will not rule out adding I.S. on non-telephoto lenses.
mco_970 wrote:
It would be nice if the 35 f/2 had USM and/or IS also. USM being the main update needed...
yes the 35 needs USM and/or IS so I'd certainly update that one too but at least it has decent IQ unlike the 24 and 28 and doesn't break every three seconds like the 50, but yeah an updated 35 f/2 with real USM would be pretty special, a great bargain street lens, in fact I might finally get a 35 prime if they do that (don;t shoot this way enough to justify the 35L)
deepbluejh wrote:
My biggest concern with the 28 and 24 F2.8 IS lenses will be the price. I'm not sure that adding IS to these lenses will be worth it to a lot of people.
Agree about the price concern. But we really don't know how much of the price is going to be because of the upgrade, and how much because of the IS. Remember the cheap 18-55 IS II kit lens also is an IS lens.
Sir_Loin wrote:
As good as the image of the "new" 24-70mm looks, I think it's just a clever mock up. Here's my reasons why I think this;
Where's the description of the lens alongside the red ring at the front? I can't remember any other L lens from the last 15-20 years that doesn't have this.
I can't see Canon abandoning the reverse type zoom it has used so successfully on the 28-70mm and 24-70mm.
I can't see any reason why it should be an 82mm filter thread.
The switches just don't look right.
So I don't think our juices should be flowing just yet!
I agree with this more than anything else posted in the thread. I don't understand how everyone takes the rumor sites so seriously. Every time something pops up there it makes for pages and pages of debate about what might it be, what it should have been, why it will or will not sell, and countless other pointless debates. Why not just wait until its actually announced and has real specifications
Sir_Loin wrote:
As good as the image of the "new" 24-70mm looks, I think it's just a clever mock up.
Something else: ULTRASONIC is printed with silver letters, instead of red or gold. I know just one Canon USM zoom lens with silver letters - Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6
ciprian.trofin wrote:
Something else: ULTRASONIC is printed with silver letters, instead of red or gold. I know just one Canon USM zoom lens with silver letters - Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6
Sir_Loin wrote:
Where's the description of the lens alongside the red ring at the front? I can't remember any other L lens from the last 15-20 years that doesn't have this.
I have to agree on this point, the total lack of lens info near the front element (except for 82mm) seems to be odd.
Maybe it's a prototype that doesn't include it? Seems fishy though.
.