gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.6 #19 · New Canon 35mm F2 IS and 24-70mm f/4L IS! | |
So, we'll have
- 24-70mm f/2.8 non-IS
- 24-70mm f/4 IS
- 24-105mm f/4 IS
If you want to cover 24-70 with f/4 and IS, why wouldn't you simply want the 24-105 f/4 IS and get 35mm extra "for free?" If you want/need f/2.8, why wouldn't you want the 24-70 f/2.8?
Why doesn't Canon put IS in the 24-70 f/2.8, keep the 24-105mm f/4 IS and be done with it? That provides a super lens covering 24-70 with all the bells and whistles, along with a versatile and high quality lens covering a wider focal length range. In practical terms, few who would be interested in the 24-70 f/2.8 would want the f/4 version, and few who would like the 24-105 would be wiling to give up the added focal length flexibility.
The 24-70mm f/4 IS may well be a wonderful performer, but given the other two lenses it sure seems like a strange thing to add when there are other places where Canon could make a bigger splash. Think of something in the ultra wide range for example...
Dan
adrianb wrote:
Aren't you guys tired of changing lenses? (I'm not being ironic and i'm referring to the fact that when you travel / work with many lenses you have to keep changing them back & forth from the body).
When you're coming back from a vacation or holiday or whatever, it's not like you're gonna need 20mp files sharp & crisp for the pixel peepers..... No,you're gonna come back with some nice pictures which you are gonna resize & then post to facebook,forums,web or whatever. You're not gonna make huge monster prints...
SO........why spend money on owning redundant lens combos ?
If I had a 24-105 F4L IS, this 24-70 f4L IS wouldn't interest me one bit.
I only shot a couple of pictures once with the 24-105 F4L IS, but to me this is a hard lens to beat, as a 'all round' / 'vacation' lens...coupled ,for low light situations,with a 50mm 1.4 or a 35mm f2..
If you're a professional photographer and earning your money this way, surely you'll need a lens like 24-70 2.8 (either I or II), and sometimes the IS cannot compensate for faster aperture (due to many, obvious reasons).
I realize that my judgement is purely subjective on this but: I don't get people who own so many lenses that overlap themselves (I don't know if I used the correct term,but you get the idea)...
there was somebody here saying that he owns the 35L , the 35 f2, and if the 35 F2 IS would be released ,he would get that too........c'mon.....
The more lenses I own/would own....the more confused I would be and it would make my lens-picking-decision harder..
Throw me a FF body and a 85L II to accompany my current 24L II, and I'm all set baby. event, landscape, portrait, you name it. Birding & sporting would be ruled out of course (can't really bird or sport with the 85L :| ) but for everything else, I'd get the job done..
Or since we're fantasizing, give me 5d2 + 1d4, and a 24L + 50L 
The other fact that I don't get is this urge......to get the 'latest' gear....I see people throwing away 1Ds3 bodies, 5D2 bodies , being obsessed with 5d3, 1dx, etc...
I will not use that old cliche that "you can't still take great photos with a 5D" (which it is true), but if I would have a competent body , I would put my money in some good glass. Not in too many lenses. The fewer, the better. and the better the lenses are,the better the results.. Bodies come & go.. lenses last longer and "get better" with each new body upgrade......Show more →
Edited on Nov 05, 2012 at 06:58 PM · View previous versions
|
? wheres the new 180L?
