Archive 2012 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #1 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
michael49 wrote:
Agreed.
I bought my Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 distagon to use on my 5d for under $400 and its the sharpest WA prime I've ever used.
But it doesn't have Canon mount. It doesn't have any electronics or exif data that works. And you also have to buy an adapter to use it.
So you can't really compare it. See what the Zeiss ZE with Canon mount cost. I have 7 of those. They are great. But certainly not cheap lenses
p.5 #2 · 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.
Thats the canon idea I always had thoughts about being strange.
I have a zeiss 35/2.8 ZM lens. Costed around 700 euro with shade. Its not fast, has no extreme focal length and no L.
But its small, has excellent picture quality, almost no distortion, no problem with flare, no purple edges. Because its a rather easy lens design the quality can be high.
The build quality is the same as with the faster lenses from zeiss. So the only thing you choose is speed vs size (and sometimes even better picture quality)
With canon you don't had this option. If you want good build quality (and the best lens design/ coating ect) you have to go for the L lens. With mean fast, big and heavy lenses. If you want a slower lens with its quality's (size, weight, picture quality) you are forced to pick the cheaper lenses with worse build/ coatings and also with not that good picture quality because canon wants their L zoom/ primes to be the top.
So I would certainly be a customer. Even better if they introduced a 35/2 and 50/1.4 prime with L finishing. But for now these are also a step in the good direction.
p.5 #3 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
weeks82 wrote:
"The EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM lens is expected to be available in June for an approximate retail price of $849.99, while the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM lens is expected to be available in June for an approximate retail price of $799.99."
Man, $800 for non L lenses? They should fire all management there ...
p.5 #5 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
yauyi wrote:
what a ripped off, if they can implement IS to the cheap kit lens EFS 18-55 why the huge price jump for these two very slow prime?
this sucks!
My guess is because they are pricing them as high as they think they can get away with. High profits are not a bad thing.
That's actually a pretty clever idea: instead of scrapping those old AFD focus lenses, update them with $50 worth of USM and IS, and then price-position them some 30% less than similar L lenses. That way they get their economy line of lenses redefined nicely.
Feb 08, 2012 at 09:21 AM
Guest
Guest
p.5 #6 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
To be fair: the optical constructions are all new and probably much better in performance.
p.5 #12 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
If the image quality is really that good I will take a closer look once they are available. I place a lot of value on compact size these days.
I like being able to shoot with my 24L in very low light when the need arises, but if I'm honest, I find myself using my 35L or 50 1.4 in those situations more often.
I would have liked it if these new lenses were at least f/2, but we'll see once they're available how they behave.
p.5 #13 · Canon 24 f/2.8 IS And 28 f/2.8 IS Announced
Breitling65 wrote:
Man, $800 for non L lenses? They should fire all management there ... yauyi wrote:
what a ripped off, if they can implement IS to the cheap kit lens EFS 18-55 why the huge price jump for these two very slow prime?
this sucks!
Well, the 24 L costs $900 more, weighs 13 oz more, has a 1.8" longer minimum focus distance, requires a 77 mm filter as opposed to a 58 mm filter, but is 2 stops faster while the new 24 offers 4 stops of IS.
If you're rich, always work on a tripod, grab your lenses from a shelf instead of a pack, or really really like shallow DOF then choose the L. As for the cost, yes it makes me blink, but I haven't heard people complaining about the L prices with rhetoric like that above. If (a big if at this point) these lenses are as good at 2.8 as the L is at 2.8 then the cost of these are at least priced consistent with the L. The new 24-70 cost nearly twice the 24-105, is only one stop faster, and doesn't have IS, but the worst critique I've read of its price is "gulp".
They should fire all management there ...