p.4 #1 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
anandnvi wrote:
Is anybody even seriously considering buying a slow prime wide-angle non-L $700+ lens?
.
You would be shocked to hear what people pay for a used Leica 28 mm 2.8 with manual focus and of course without IS, only to get better image quality than the current 24-70 L.
p.4 #3 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
anandnvi wrote:
Is anybody even seriously considering buying a slow prime wide-angle non-L $700+ lens?
Those who can afford it will always go L. In this FL range, that's the 24-70L or the 24 TS-E or the 24 1.4.
Those more on a budget are not going to drop $700 for a non-L prime. More attractive would be the 28-135IS or the 24-105L IS or L v1 prime second-hand.
p.4 #4 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
> You would be shocked to hear what people pay for a used Leica 28 mm 2.8 with manual focus and > of course without IS, only to get better image quality than the current 24-70 L.
These would be the same ones splurging on first-hand Ls i.e. you're reinforcing my point. Top $ does go to build quality and sheer optics (taken with the Leica Summicron 28mm 2.0.)
Feb 07, 2012 at 01:31 PM
Guest
Guest
p.4 #5 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
Lars Johnsson wrote:
Snopchenko,
There is nothing wrong with buying 20 year old lenses or discontinued lenses.
But it's wrong to compare those used prices against brand new lenses and their prices
Lars,
I totally understand your point. Honest. What I'm doing is not scientific, that's for sure. Problem is, the world is not a lab, it's a marketplace. And as a participant of this marketplace, I have to bear in mind every opportunity. I have to care for my own benefit, not for Canon's, who needs to justify the R&D costs and whatnot.
At least I'm keeping my options relatively sane (in my own definition of the word): sticking to EF mount AF glass. Otherwise I might've opened a whole big can of worms by listing applicable alt glass.
p.4 #6 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
anandnvi wrote:
> You would be shocked to hear what people pay for a used Leica 28 mm 2.8 with manual focus and > of course without IS, only to get better image quality than the current 24-70 L.
These would be the same ones splurging on first-hand Ls i.e. you're reinforcing my point. Top $ does go to build quality and sheer optics (taken with the Leica Summicron 28mm 2.0.)
My point is that if the 28 2.8 IS delivers 120% of the image quality of the 24-70 L at 35% of the price, and 80% of the image quality of the 28 'cron at 20% of the price, what is wrong with buying the cheap prime?
p.4 #9 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
alundeb wrote:
My point is that if the 28 2.8 IS delivers 120% of the image quality of the 24-70 L at 35% of the price, and 80% of the image quality of the 28 'cron at 20% of the price, what is wrong with buying the cheap prime?
My friend, TS-E excluded, these are the costliest non-L primes ever (AFAIK).
p.4 #10 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
Of course these non-L primes are costly compared to previous non-L primes. You should run and buy those old primes as long as they are in the stores if you are satisfied with the quality.
Canon has not updated non-L primes for a long time. When they do, the price jump is predictable. This happens with every other category of lenses that Canon updates.
When i say "cheap" I mean compared to the introduction prices of recent L primes in the same or similar focal length.
p.4 #12 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
I'd consider it, but I admit I'm a bit put off by the price. Ironically I already own the 24L II (and I had the 24L before that, as well as both the old versions of the 24 and 28 2.8s)
I'm personally in a "cost-cutting" mode and "downgrading" where I can to pull in some money from gear I truly do not "Need" to own.
The 24L II is definitely the greatest 24mm lens that I have personally used for Canon and while I truly like having the ability to shoot at f/1.4 in the dark, if the IS would allow me to shoot at the same shutter speed and ISO I normally would then that is worth considering.
(Not to mention the several hundred bucks I'd have back in my pocket!)
What I TRULY want to see is an updated 50mm f/1.4, I have owned so many copies of that lens (as well as the 50L) and while it's pretty good, I just want a fantastic 50mm. It should be the EASIEST lens for them to make. Just improve the AF to full ring USM and give it a more modern / better build quality and I'd be happy.
p.4 #14 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
Orestis.Ch wrote:
I am. Because it's perfect for photojournalism and street photography. It'll probably be pretty amazing for landscapes too
+1 The cost of everything is going up considerably. Look at the jump in price in the 500 f4 from $6000 to nearly $10000. So a $350 lens is now $750 and the L version is $1000 more than that. Have you purchased a half gallon of milk, or dog food lately?
If the IQ is good at f2.8 it will be a much easier lens to carry around than its L or Zeiss ritzy brothers. And IS has made a tremendous improvement in my keeper rate. Not everyone needs f1.4, especially in a wide lens so I don't understand the scoffing that this lens is sooo slow at f2.8. We're not stuck with Kodachrome 64. And what good is a landscape where only one leaf is in focus. Why would anyone consider buying a big heavy expensive prime that's soft wide open? Just sayin' there are other opinions that are equally valid.
p.4 #15 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
All opinions are valid. Now, for a fun exercise.
Rank the following in decreasing order of unit sales (normalized to per lens within each lens type)
1. L primes, v2 prices
2. The new non-l primes I.e. What we are discussing here
3. L zooms, v2 prices
p.4 #16 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
Well, I'd say Canon has sold about the same number of 1DX, G1X, 24-70 f2.8 L II, and 500 f4 L II as the new 24 f2.8 non-L IS.
Seriously, my guess is that Canon sells more L Zooms than L primes, but I really have no way of knowing. There are so many varying market segments that have specific needs. I'd want to see real market surveys.
p.4 #19 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
anandnvi wrote:
Is anybody even seriously considering buying a slow prime wide-angle non-L $700+ lens?
Those who can afford it will always go L. In this FL range, that's the 24-70L or the 24 TS-E or the 24 1.4.
what if you use 24mm 95% at f/5.6+ and only 5% at f/1.4 then maybe the new one at half the price makes sense though? Maybe someone wants better but can't afford the 24 T&S II or needs something more general?
Those more on a budget are not going to drop $700 for a non-L prime. More attractive would be the 28-135IS or the 24-105L IS or L v1 prime second-hand.
Why not? WHy spend $800-$1000 on a 24-105L that delivers a ton of distortion at 24mm and lots of CA and mushed up edges on FF? Why spend $1000 and get avg IQ? Why not spend say $700 store price for a top quality 24mm instead? add cheap tamron 28-75 2.8 for the times you need zoom flexibility?
the 28-135 has pure mush at 28mm on FF even stopped down for landscapes and it's not as wide
Otherwise I might've opened a whole big can of worms by listing applicable alt glass. 