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

  

Archive 2012 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs
  
 
Tom K.
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · 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: Off
p.1 #2 · 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 · 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 · 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 · 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 · p.1 #6 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs


adrianb wrote:
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 · 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
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · 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 · p.1 #9 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs


adrianb wrote:
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
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Alan321
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · 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: Off
p.1 #11 · 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 · p.1 #12 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs


skibum5 wrote:
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 · p.1 #13 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs


Mike Ganz wrote:
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 · 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: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs


adrianb wrote:
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 · p.1 #16 · 24-70 - Old vs New - specs


skibum5 wrote:
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 · 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 · 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





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password