Upload & Sell: Off
Yakim Peled wrote:
Personally, I'd wait another year or so to sound so decisive. Canon has not become the photographic giant it is by making a series of bad decisions. Sure, there were some along the way (e.g. the 1D3 AF fiasco) but generally, most of its decisions were very good.
Thank you, Yakim.
Internet is an easy to use platform for individuals presenting their mind as everybodies opinion.
Is it really a failure not to do all what somebody wishes you to do?
Even they did not offer answers to my wishes and needs in the past before D600, Nikon seems far away from failing to me. They do very good for others. Same with Canon. They do/did what I wished/need (and they stil do). 5D III, 1D X, 6D look like fantastic (if not the best available) cameras to me I would imediatelly purchase, if I would not have to care about the price. Same with lenses.
If it is as good as I expect I would buy a 24-70 4.0 L IS as soon as possible at its asked price. If I can afford it. If not the question remains: Do they fail in decissions (about their lens range), quality or pricing, because they do not fullfill (or only in part) my wishes/needs? Is it my failure, not to be able to pay the price they ask, although I would like to get this (any) product.
If the new Canon zoom undercuts 24-105s IQ at any price I guess I would call it a failure, too.
I do not expect this will happen. Else in my opinion it is a great new lens that might fullfill many shooters needs (f. e. mine). If the price is not what one can or wants to afford it is not a sign of insight to say the manufacturer "fails".
Imo the new 24-70 L II is an amazing lens. I do not need it, neither want it (price, lack of IS).
Others purchased it and love it. I decided it is nothing for me. That does not mean, Canon failed in developing and producing it.