Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon announces EF 35mm f/2 IS and 24-70mm f/4L IS lenses  (Read 926 times)
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1801



WWW
« on: November 06, 2012, 01:50:07 AM »
ReplyReply

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e024806f2095

"The EF 35mm f/2 IS USM lens is expected to be available in December for an approximate retail price of $849.99."

"The EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM lens is supplied with a lens pouch and reversible lens hood. It is expected to be available in December for an approximate retail price of $1,499.00."
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6819


« Reply #1 on: November 06, 2012, 04:22:59 AM »
ReplyReply

"The EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM lens is supplied with a lens pouch and reversible lens hood. It is expected to be available in December for an approximate retail price of $1,499.00."


I would be interested to know how it stacks up again the f/2.8 version. AF must certainly be better on the 2.8 but the IS system is tempting.
Logged

Francois
k bennett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1453


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 06, 2012, 06:31:34 AM »
ReplyReply

The 35/2 is tempting. The 24-70/4 not so much - I have the 24-70/2.8 and the 24-105/4, and I really like the extra reach of the 105mm lens. For me, 70mm on a full frame camera is not a particularly compelling focal length. Judging from the photos, I suspect Canon was focused on making the new zoom as small as possible so as to be a compact kit lens on the 6D.
Logged

Equipment: a camera and some lenses.
Bernd B.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 260


« Reply #3 on: November 06, 2012, 06:47:59 AM »
ReplyReply

For me the 24-105 IS was useless on my 5D. At 105mm f/4 it was so bad it brought it to the service for adjustment, but it didnīt help. It did even look as if there was some broken, but the service said it was ok. I sold it after just a few weeks for a 24-70.

The old 24-70 at 70mm at f/2,8 was lightyears ahead. A pity they did not announce a 24-105 f/4 IS version II. That would have made more sense to me.

Bernd

P.S.: Iīm back on Nikon since the end of 2008.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2012, 06:50:37 AM by Bernd B. » Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1928


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 06, 2012, 07:19:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I suspect Canon was focused on making the new zoom as small as possible....
The other possibility is that by reducing the zoom range they've been able to improve the overall optical quality over the 24-105. It's also possible that at f4 it could out perform the 24-70 f2.8 too.
If rumours of a Canon high mega pixel DSLR are true, they could do with a better performing mid-range zoom in their line up.

It will be interesting to see some real world tests.
Logged
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1065


« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2012, 08:52:55 AM »
ReplyReply

based on the IQ of the latest lenses released by Canon i'm very hopeful that the 24-70 will be a noticeble improvement over the 24-105 (there have been times when i've thought they should have labeled the 24-105 as 24-70 and kicked myself for wasting time shooting at the long end - handy for snapshots at 105 though).  with only 3:1 zoom should also have better IQ wide open - shouldn't be too hard to make a significant improvement over my copy of the 24-105 wide open
Logged
DaveCurtis
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 455


WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2012, 02:01:34 AM »
ReplyReply

I found the 24-105mm quite good from 24 to about 50mm. Distortion is reasonably high and so is CA comparred to Canons latest offerings. For an L series, 105mm was a bit of a coke bottle but still there if you needed it.

Logged

Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad