Pixtus - Photography Forum, Photographers, Photo Tips

mchong75 · **Canon 24-70 II (coming) -** 02-06-2012, 09:09 AM

Coming very soon...

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II « Canon Rumors

Killjoy · 02-06-2012, 10:01 AM

If its supposed to be lighter than the V1, then why can't they put IS in it?

Furinox · 02-06-2012, 10:19 AM

This is good. Hopefully the optics have been improved.

Abel · 02-06-2012, 10:27 AM

looks like its a body design of a 24-105 f4.. meaning that the hood looks to be mounted on the lens end and not the body end the way the current 24-70 is...

so the V2 will have a much shorter and smaller lens hood as compared to the way it is in the current version. not sure if i like that aspect..

mchong75 · 02-06-2012, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killjoy

If its supposed to be lighter than the V1, then why can't they put IS in it?

Here's an alternative...can't see why Canon couldn't put an IS....

For Nikon, Tamron has just announced a
Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD full frame lens with mage stabilization.

Hopefully, Canon version soon...

Read more on NikonRumors.com: Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD full frame lens with mage stabilization announced | Nikon Rumors
Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD full frame lens with mage stabilization announced

liubros · 02-06-2012, 10:59 AM

I don't know if I like IS. For >100, you do need IS, but for under 70, do we? I have Sigma 17-70, the OS make image less sharp by a lot, I have OS turned off all time.

mchong75 · 02-06-2012, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by liubros

I don't know if I like IS. For >100, you do need IS, but for under 70, do we? I have Sigma 17-70, the OS make image less sharp by a lot, I have OS turned off all time.

Not sure why OS / IS would hinder the image sharpness....if and fact, it should help you to control camera / lens movement.

ptrd · 02-06-2012, 11:52 AM

^I remember reading that some do turn off IS on canon lenses because it could reduce IQ.

Also most IS's now have a feature to turn itself off when on a tripod / monopod.

On the same rumor site it was quoted that the IS would make the lense too heavy on a f2.8.

Nocturnus · 02-06-2012, 01:06 PM

I for one will not buy the new lens. For one, I just can't justify or afford it. I'll be getting a 70-200, but not sure if I'll get the non IS 2.8 or go with Sigma on that one.

I have a 24-70L now, and I'm happy with it.

crazeazn · 02-06-2012, 01:15 PM

bunch of clowns thought there would be IS on it. 82mm LOL

Jake · 02-06-2012, 01:45 PM

I'm glad to see it's going to be 82mm threads. Now it can share filters with the 16-35.
Too bad Canon couldn't do IS like Tamron did. Keep trying little canon, you'll get there!

Tom · 02-06-2012, 01:49 PM

Hopefully this one is actually sharp!

Jim Victory · 02-06-2012, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake

I'm glad to see it's going to be 82mm threads. Now it can share filters with the 16-35.
Too bad Canon couldn't do IS like Tamron did. Keep trying little canon, you'll get there!

This aspect of it would be nice. I hate having 82mm filters I can only use on one lens. I really like IS on my 24-105 so it would have been nice for lowlight stationary shooting handheld.

I'm with Tom if it isn't as sharp as the 70-200 vers.II I won't be buying it. No reason to get a lens that is no sharper then the current model when I have a great 24-105. The IS more than makes up the difference shooting stationary objects over the f/2.8.