Well, Im no expert on MTF reading, but that doesnt show stopped down lines at all?
"keep in mind that the black lines show the lens wide open while the blue lines show the lens stopped down to f/8"
Red = "the higher up the chart the 10 LP/mm line is (the thick lines), the higher the contrast reproduction capability of the lens will be."
Blue = "the higher up the chart the 30 LP/mm line is (the thin lines), the higher the resolving power and thus subjective sharpness of the lens will be."
David Baldwin wrote:
Can anyone tell me why they upgraded this lens?
Because they are trying to make a business selling 15-21 megapixel cameras. Better have some lenses that can actually fill all those pixels with good detail.
PetKal wrote:
Nancy, just temember, the 24L II will probably start retailing at $ 1,599.
A used MkI can be found for a 1/2 of that.
I doubt it, hotpants. Sounds more like MSRP than actual street price - and it'll drop after the "introductory period" further. It's not as much a niche lens as the 14L, so the economics will be a little different. Especially with FF becoming more and more mainstream (and the new 5D2).
But time (and reviews) will tell... The Zeiss 21mm Distagon still beckons.
"Better have some lenses that can actually fill all those pixels with good detail. "
Have to admit to finding MTF charts obscure. Do the MTF charts here suggest the new 24L will be significantly better?
I doubt the mkII will be optically better (in a substantial way) than the mkI. Maybe a bit in the corners and regarding CA's. But I do believe that the 24L II will have updated AF algorythms and a chip that will make it able to calibrate the AF by using very precise software. And with all those MP's flying around these days, everything that has the potential to make the AF more tight is a necessity IMO.
bobbytan wrote:
I do believe the 24/1.4L Mk II will be a little better than the older version BUT not nearly as good as the Zeiss Distagon 21/2.8 .....
Which for most 24L buyers is irrelevant since they're buying it for the 1.4 part.
asparkes wrote:
I just bought a MkI this summer. I'll have to ignore any more about this for a few months, or that dreaded buyer remorse will get to me.
UUGH! I just ordered the Mk1 from B&H last week and it arrived 2 days ago. Now I am wondering if I might even try to return it and get the new one in December. For me $1170 is a lot of money to spend on a now outdated lens.
I did take a few snaps around the house with it and it does seem quite nice. I am loving the wide angle wide open.
kinconorb wrote:
hopefully not the 400mm f2.8 IS or the 600mm f4 IS at least a couple more years haha Or I'll really be bummed
Don't worry, when Canon does replace both, they'll have the same type of stratospheric pricing as the 800 so the temptation would upgrade shouldn't be high (unless you have lots of $$$ to burn).
sivrajbm wrote:
According to RG's site $1699 and due in December.
I guess I'll be getting a MkI. Dang it Canon quit screwwing us.
Galbraith is probably right......$1699 to start with.
Very very seldom we overestimate the introductory prices of new lenses.
However, IMO such pricing shouldn't be a problem for most folks.
If you really have a new need for 24L, the Mk I's priced relatively reasonably should abound on the used lens market soon.
If you already own one, so much the better.
However, if you feel that you need the MkII because it's the latest, well then, pay your money, have fun and let us know how you like it.
Rolf_is_ROFL wrote:
UUGH! I just ordered the Mk1 from B&H last week and it arrived 2 days ago. Now I am wondering if I might even try to return it and get the new one in December. For me $1170 is a lot of money to spend on a now outdated lens.
I did take a few snaps around the house with it and it does seem quite nice. I am loving the wide angle wide open.
Unless the new features are a necessity for you, I'd stick with the MKI version. It's over $500 cheaper, and you have it now instead of waiting for December.
