Anyone see these lenses? Redesigned semi-fast 24mm and 28mm F2.8 primes, both of which feature USM focus motors and image stabilization. Seems to me that this could be our first indication of the new Canon mirrorless camera, could it be a full frame? Just a guess, but what other reason is there for this lens combination? Figures I should be getting my NEX-7 the end of the week from B&H.
i don't have any clue how you equate slow wide primes to a mirrorless body. can you explain?
my guess is that they didn't have the "A" design team available to redesign a 35L as it was devoted to the 24-70 II and they had to keep their "B" team busy.
Canon simply updated 2 lenses in desperate need of updates (both dated to 1987) and an underwhelming update to a 3rd (the 24-70 should have been IS as well, but the update is still welcome as it should put Canon's go-to normal zoom back in competition with Nikon and Sony's superb 24-70's).
Very unlikely that this presages a mirrorless system, but hopefully this indicates that Canon is going to update the rest of its obsolete primes, namely the 35/2, 20/2.8 and 28/1.8.
Very interesting A and B teams, that's exactly my point none of this makes any sense. Why would anybody buy a 24 mm and 28 mm lenses with IS that's F2.8? I think your explanation lies in the mystery itself. With the new sensors being able to shoot images at 32,000 ISO f2.8 doesn't seem as slow as it used to. Maybe it is an APS-C, but why make a full frame lens for that? Maybe the IS is for all the unemployed intoxicated photographers that can't hold their cameras.
I can see updating the 24-70 with better optics and image stabilization to complement their new higher resolution sensors. What doesn't make any sense as the image stabilization in a 24mm lens. I agree with you on updating these primes it is totally overdue.
Feb 07, 2012 at 10:10 PM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
dennishh wrote:
Very interesting A and B teams, that's exactly my point none of this makes any sense. Why would anybody buy a 24 mm and 28 mm lenses with IS that's F2.8? I think your explanation lies in the mystery itself. With the new sensors being able to shoot images at 32,000 ISO f2.8 doesn't seem as slow as it used to. Maybe it is an APS-C, but why make a full frame lens for that? Maybe the IS is for all the unemployed intoxicated photographers that can't hold their cameras.
Why would people NOT buy IS lenses if they are f/2,8
Most of Canons IS lenses are f/2,8 or slower.
And why would they be an indication of the new Canon mirrorless camera
dennishh wrote:
Anyone see these lenses? Redesigned semi-fast 24mm and 28mm F2.8 primes, both of which feature USM focus motors and image stabilization. Seems to me that this could be our first indication of the new Canon mirrorless camera, could it be a full frame? Just a guess, but what other reason is there for this lens combination? Figures I should be getting my NEX-7 the end of the week from B&H.
Making a couple lenses designed for PDAF doesn't seem to point to a mirrorless camera that would likely have CDAF.
dennishh wrote:
Very interesting A and B teams, that's exactly my point none of this makes any sense. Why would anybody buy a 24 mm and 28 mm lenses with IS that's F2.8?
Because they're competing with even faster IS lenses. Sony, Pentax and Olympus all have IS lenses faster than f2.8 (via body IS for all three, albeit limited to the SLT line for Sony, or in the case of the Sony 50/1.8 OSS for E mount, optical IS)
Odd that they put IS in their updated midrange 28 prime but not in the updated 24-70/2.8. Maybe that would have made it even more of a monster (in regards to weight). Heres to another 20 years of people belly achin' for IS in this particular L lens.
bluetsunami wrote:
Odd that they put IS in their updated midrange 28 prime but not in the updated 24-70/2.8. Maybe that would have made it even more of a monster (in regards to weight). Heres to another 20 years of people belly achin' for IS in this particular L lens.
That wouldn't have been such a shame in itself - they could've always cooked an explanation of some sort - if it hadn't been for Tamron announcing their own, stabilized 24-70/2.8 lens the day before. I think that the Tamron deserved all the fanfare for yesterday, not any of the new Canons.
Lars Johnsson wrote:
Why would people NOT buy IS lenses if they are f/2,8
Most of Canons IS lenses are f/2,8 or slower.
And why would they be an indication of the new Canon mirrorless camera
My point is why at all? Just adds weight and cost to the lens, would rather have better quality optics instead of the IS personally. I shot with a Nikon 28 2.8 AI for years without any complaints about camera movement.
Thanks! I'm now at peace and will go back to work and try and stop thinking about all this. The five still live shot's I'm doing today will help. I do wish I could use the Nikon D800E though.
