Comments on: Canon’s new 24-70mm f/4 Lens is Perplexing

By: Henrik Helmers

Henrik Helmers — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 19:39:00 +0000

Better image quality, improved IS, lighter, macro abilities. Apart from lacking one f-stop this looks like the perfect walk-around lens.

By: ceciliadelacroi

ceciliadelacroi — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:58:00 +0000

I WILL admit that Canon got the whole IS thing backasswards…… those of us who’ll be using the f/4 lens on a FF body on a tripod will have to turn off the IS anyway…..LOL……those who shoot weddings or other events handheld at f/2.8 are the ones who would’ve benefitted more from the IS, especially at 70mm.

By: ceciliadelacroi

ceciliadelacroi — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:13:00 +0000

[Excuse me if this is a double-post; the website seems to have eaten up my first post]
I agree with vc_scorpion. The 24-70mm’s lower zoom ratio (than the 24-105) will likely result in quicker AF. And those of us who like to shoot landscapes with lots of DOF will benefit from the f/4′s sweet spot (around f/8-11) over the faster lens’ sweet spot of around f/5.6-8. That, plus half a pound lighter, plus macro. And I’m guessing it’s waaay finer glass than the 24-105. We’ll see. Yes, the price sucks; I’m thinking of waiting till someone returns their near-new lens so I can pick it up “refurbished”.

By: ceciliadelacroi

ceciliadelacroi — Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:46:00 +0000

I agree with vc_scorpion. The lesser zoom ratio [than the 24-105] will likely also result in faster AF. And for those whose subjects include more DOF, the f4′s sweet spot (f8-11) will provide more DOF than the f2.8′s f5.6-8. That, plus half a pound lighter, plus macro. (I never see anyone complain about Canon’s 70-200 f4 lens.) I don’t like the price either; perhaps I’ll wait awhile until someone returns theirs in near-new condition and I can buy it “refurbished”. :)

By: Victor

Victor — Sat, 10 Nov 2012 14:05:00 +0000

I like this lens and already pre-ordered a copy from B&H. Leaving aside what other dislike is already evident. Less look at why I chose it. I don’t have a lens in this range for my 5Dmk3 only Pancake, 100L and 70-300L. So have a lens in this range is very welcome for me. 2/ it sharper then the 24-105 and will probably have better contrast similar to the 24-70 ii. 3/ it has a macro mode I’m very curious to check since I love my 100L. plus by the discription of the Hybrid IS , could be the same as in the 100L. 4/ this has to be the best 24-70L for travel because of size and weight. 5/ the Tamron has focusing issues and soft at 70mm while this lens will be much sharper and evenly throught the entire range ( no uneven sharpness ). 6/ Even after trying Sigma’s 50 f1.4 and 85 f1.4 I found so far only Canon lenses give all the full capabilities of the 5Dmk3′s AF system, while all the others I have tried so far do not. 7/ I use a T4i as my back up for now and having a crop body only extends my range with all my lenses including this one. And last but not least I do agree this lens is over priced. Should be in the range of 1100-1200, not 1500 USD.

By: Dave Palmer

Dave Palmer — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:40:00 +0000

Do they not have 4 flavors of the 70-200? how is this any different?

By: writersbloc

writersbloc — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 15:43:00 +0000

The 24-70mm ƒ/2.8 is now discontinued according to my B&H cart.

By: Shannon Wimberly

Shannon Wimberly — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:43:00 +0000

oh……. but its the red ring that captures my imagination…..

By: Martin

Martin — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 13:09:00 +0000

Canon seems to be applying the “underpants business” lately…
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/151040/the-underpants-business

By: Jan Viktorin

Jan Viktorin — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 12:39:00 +0000

While I understand all your concerns, I feel like I need to defend the lens a bit :)
I’m almost exclusively a landscape photographer – this means lugging a backpack on long hikes, using tripod for most of my shooting and often being in a bad weather. 24-105 is a great lens, but I do not need the 70-105 range – that’s where the 70-200 f/4 L IS comes in … so if I can get a smaller, lighter, better built lens that has even better image quality than the 24-105 with better stabilization for the times when I’m not using a tripod, I’m quite happy. And the added value of very short MFD and high maximum magnification is also great – I can leave the 100mm macro home on the trips where I usually take in “just in case”, and now that is some weight saving (yes, the image quality remains to be seen for macro application, but I’m an optimist :) )
I don’t shoot video, so I can’t comment on that, but if I were, I would use faster primes anyway, not the 24-105.
Yes, the price is steep, but for me, it’s more than justified… Heck, I’ve spent money on Zeiss wideangle that has no AF, is slippery as hell, freezing cold in colder weather, and I still feel like its one of the best investments I made … and I think this new 24-70 might be the next one …