wickerprints wrote:
Why did they even make a 70-300/4-5.6L IS? That confuses the hell out of me and I never would have expected such a move. And for $1500? You'd be better off with the 100-400, or a 70-200, or both.
My guesses, and only Canon knows for sure, is that the current non-L 70-300 IS lens is one of their top sellers. Now, they create a "premium" version they can charge more for and people will go for it. Almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because they charge more, it must be better, a-la a BMW...
For my shooting, the 100-400 is still a better choice. But for those people who may want something a bit lighter, and/or wider, and/or want 4-stop IS instead of the 2-stop in the 100-400, for a couple hundred less than the 100-400L (which is where I'm guessing it will settle to), the new 70-300L might be the ticket. I hope the 70-300 is good optically, even though it's not for me.
But, in the end, they really made it because they believe it will bring in a nice profit margin
Don't get me wrong, I would love to have the 70-300, but I could give up the extra 100mm on the long end and gain an extra stop or more throughout the entire FL AND save some coin ($500ish). Use that to buy the OG 300mm f/4.
RazorTM wrote:
Yes, but this new lens is an L and on par with the 28-300 and 100-400, which I did not even consider purchasing because I can't stand the push-pull zooming. I'm more interested in this new 70-300L.
The last 70-300 IS to come out has L-like optical qualities. It's no surprise the L version isn't push pull.
Well if they do indeed price this lens at $11K, I know why they are: because with a published MTF like that, there's really nowhere else to go in terms of sharpness. They certainly can't publish an MTF that is just equal to 1 across the entire image height, because only idiots would believe it. (As it is, an MTF chart like what we're seeing now is a bit suspect.)
So they price it as high as possible, because what are they going to do for an encore?
Who will be the first to post a comparison of the 400 f2.8L IS Mk2 + 2X TC Mk3 vs. the 800 f5.6L? That would be interesting to see, and could be part of the explanation of the 400 IS Mk2 price. I'm sure the 800 will focus faster than the 400+2X, but an IQ comparison will be interesting.
I am VERY, VERY eager to see the block diagrams of all the lenses they've announced. Apparently, Canon's EF Lens Work III has been revised for a 10th edition.
The new 400 2.8 IS II now becomes my ultimate dream birding glass, over and above any flavor of the 500 f4, 600 f4 and 800 5.6. I wish I was born with half a dozen kidneys.
I posted the MTF charts and weight/MFD comparisons (courtesy of online Canon materials) of the 400 2.8 IS II, 400 2.8 IS classic, and the 800 5.6 IS in our local birding forum.
RobertLynn wrote:
lol, I wonder how many people are going, where's my 24-70 IS!
exactly or 15-50 IS
or 50 1.4 ring-USM
(or even 100-400 Mk II or 400 f/5.6 IS)
they might come with the 1Ds4 announcement, only they just announced so many lenses I simply can't imagine more coming out this year....
i wonder if the 1Ds4 might not in fact be a early 2011 now??
maybe it will still come in sept. and maybe they push up 5D3 to early 2011 to arrive with 24-70 IS/15-50 IS? and then 7D2 next fall with a 100-400 Mk II?
sadly I think the non-L line is done for, probably never a working 50mm 1.4
Not one of these lenses will make any difference in my lineup or be considered for purchase. The only thing I might someday get out of it is a 300 f/2.8 IS v.1 if it drops in price.
?