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

	Moderated by: Fred Miranda
	Username   Password FM Forum Rules Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Upload & Sell    end    Archive 2012 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs

Tom K. Offline • • • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #1 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Here is a direct comparison of the specs of the old Canon 24-70 vs the new 24-70. Old: Focal Length 24 - 70 mm Aperture Maximum: f/2.8 Minimum: f/22 Camera Mount Type Canon EF Format Compatibility 35mm Film / Full-Frame Digital Sensor Canon (APS-C) Angle of View 84° - 34° Minimum Focus Distance 1.25' (38 cm) Magnification 0.29x Maximum Reproduction Ratio 1:3.44 Groups/Elements 13/16 Diaphragm Blades 8 Features Image Stabilization No Autofocus Yes Tripod Collar No Physical Filter Thread 77 mm Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.3 x 4.8" (8.38 x 12.19 cm) Weight 2.1 lb (953 g) New: Focal Length 24 - 70 mm Aperture Maximum: f/2.8 Minimum: f/22 Camera Mount Type Canon EF Format Compatibility 35mm Film / Full-Frame Digital Sensor Canon (APS-C) Angle of View 84° - 34° Minimum Focus Distance 1.25' (38 cm) Groups/Elements 13/18 Diaphragm Blades 9 Features Image Stabilization No Autofocus Yes Tripod Collar No Physical Filter Thread 82 mm Dimensions (DxL) Approx. 3.5 x 4.4" (8.89 x 11.18 cm) Weight 1.77 lb (803 g) Feb 09, 2012 at 05:45 PM

lovinglife Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #2 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Nice that it's a bit lighter. It's going to be an amazing lens..I'm glad it doesn't have IS. Includes a Super UD aspheric element which is very cool. The IQ should be world class. Feb 09, 2012 at 05:50 PM

Mike Ganz Offline • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #3 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... Feb 09, 2012 at 05:50 PM

elicious Offline • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #4 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs 9 blades, about time! Feb 09, 2012 at 09:40 PM

adrianb Offline • • Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #5 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Mike Ganz wrote: Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... yes...I bet some of you will have to sell a kidney to get an UV / ND filter for it Shame on you Canon ! Feb 09, 2012 at 10:54 PM

skibum5 Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #6 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs adrianb wrote: Mike Ganz wrote: Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... yes...I bet some of you will have to sell a kidney to get an UV / ND filter for it Shame on you Canon ! yeah 82mm filters is nasty BUT 82mm filters may be how it manages to get a better MTF plot at the edges than the 24 1.4 II prime so.... Feb 09, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Pixel Perfect Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #7 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs elicious wrote: 9 blades, about time! Should make for a close shave. Feb 10, 2012 at 12:59 AM

Tom Dix Online • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #8 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs looks to be quite an improvement. Be interested to seeing actual results. Feb 10, 2012 at 02:25 AM

Mike Ganz Offline • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #9 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs adrianb wrote: Mike Ganz wrote: Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... yes...I bet some of you will have to sell a kidney to get an UV / ND filter for it Shame on you Canon ! Only if one is a sucker for the "UV protection" scam... Feb 10, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Alan321 Offline • • • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #10 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs elicious, what's so great about 9 aperture blades instead of 8 ? Do you like having 18 points instead of 8 on the stars produced by small highlights ? I wish this lens had IS. I have found with my Nikon 24-70 (also considered to be a reasonably good lens) that VR (IS) is often needed in poor light. Why should I have to forgo using my sharper lens just because some clever lens designer (or marketer) reckons I don't need image stabilization ? Fact is that when I am shooting landscapes hand-held and darkness approaches, these nice f/2.8 lenses lose their advantage because they do not have IS. Then I can get better results from a lesser quality f/5.6 lens with a 4-stop IS in terms of handling camera movement and in terms of getting more DOF at the same time. So it seems to me to be a wasted opportunity to not provide IS in the new 24-70. Oh well. - Alan Feb 10, 2012 at 04:33 PM

Tom K. Offline • • • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #11 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Video of the news lens is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPoRCWnMER0 Feb 10, 2012 at 05:33 PM

Mike Ganz Offline • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #12 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs skibum5 wrote: adrianb wrote: Mike Ganz wrote: Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... yes...I bet some of you will have to sell a kidney to get an UV / ND filter for it Shame on you Canon ! yeah 82mm filters is nasty BUT 82mm filters may be how it manages to get a better MTF plot at the edges than the 24 1.4 II prime so.... Yeah...I'm looking at my substantial investment in 77mm Singh-Ray specialty filters and need to factor their 82mm replacements into any upgrade cost... All of my Canon L zooms take the 77mm filters...unless the 24-70 II is substantially and noticeably better than my late model 24-70L, I'll probably skip it and keep what I have. Feb 10, 2012 at 08:04 PM

skibum5 Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #13 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Mike Ganz wrote: adrianb wrote: Mike Ganz wrote: Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... yes...I bet some of you will have to sell a kidney to get an UV / ND filter for it Shame on you Canon ! Only if one is a sucker for the "UV protection" scam... I am, if you shoot by the ocean or blowing sand or embers, it's particularly a good thing IMO. I actually shot a post NCAA championship street celebration and the bonfire embers ended up permanently damaging the protective filter, seared blobby dots across it. Nothing that cleans off. Feb 10, 2012 at 08:12 PM

Juhku Offline • • Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #14 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs 82mm filter size and lens hood. Otherwise i'm sure it's better than old 24-70. Feb 10, 2012 at 10:13 PM

matanuska Offline • • • Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #15 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs adrianb wrote: Mike Ganz wrote: Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... yes...I bet some of you will have to sell a kidney to get an UV / ND filter for it Shame on you Canon ! Nobody here already owns a 16-35 MkII? Feb 10, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Mike Ganz Offline • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #16 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs skibum5 wrote: Mike Ganz wrote: adrianb wrote: Mike Ganz wrote: Shame about the 82mm filter diameter... yes...I bet some of you will have to sell a kidney to get an UV / ND filter for it Shame on you Canon ! Only if one is a sucker for the "UV protection" scam... I am, if you shoot by the ocean or blowing sand or embers, it's particularly a good thing IMO. I actually shot a post NCAA championship street celebration and the bonfire embers ended up permanently damaging the protective filter, seared blobby dots across it. Nothing that cleans off. I was referring to the "UV filter 100% of the time" crowd. Of course, its much like sex...use protection only when absolutely necessary. Feb 10, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Dave C Offline • • • Upload & Sell: On p.1 #17 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Wonder if Singh ray will come out with an 82mm vari filter, so I can spend another $440. Feb 11, 2012 at 08:41 PM

EB-1 Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off p.1 #18 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs Don't you all have a 16-35 II and/or a prime like the 24 TSE II that also need the 82 filters? The 150g lighter weight is great. EBH Feb 11, 2012 at 08:53 PM

	end FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Upload & Sell end

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Lost your password?