# 24 - 70 f/2.8 L : When Is The New Version Expected?



## Fleetie (Nov 22, 2010)

Hi.

CR seems to have gone a bit quiet on this lens recently - unless I've missed something.

What is the current concensus on when it'll be out, and how much it might cost in the UK?

This lens will probably be my next purchase - and my first L-series

Thanks.

Martin - 7D , 50mm f/1.4 , 85mm f/1.8 ; Olympus OM40 50mm f/1.2 55mm f/1.2 135mm f/2.8


----------



## epsiloneri (Nov 22, 2010)

The most recent posts are:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/canon-ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-patent/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/10/lenses-in-2011-cr2/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/09/ef-24-70-f2-8l-replacement-cr2/

Standard expected announcement time has been in about "half a year from now" for the past year(s). Expected price in the UK Â£1400 based on sheer speculation combined with comparison on mark-ups for non-IS to IS versions of other lenses. Could be quite wrong, but should be within Â£1k-2k with high confidence.


----------



## PabloHoneySF (Nov 22, 2010)

I've been keeping an eye out as well ... the current version is around $1250USD right now at Amazon and I'm wondering if I should just pull the trigger at that price or just keep waiting. I have a few primes I am switching between and can wait.


----------



## jdgagne (Nov 22, 2010)

No way...useless 

or maybe for a mirorless system...

JD


----------



## scalesusa (Nov 23, 2010)

They likely have one all designed, but as long as sales are good on the existing model, there is little advantage to spending millions tooling for a new one with money so tight. 

Nikon dropped a whole bunch of new cameras and lenses a couple of years back, and was losing money hand over fist. They have still not earned enough profit to cover those losses, they have a very thin profit for FY 2011. Selling a lot of product is nice, but not if you aren't making a profit.


----------



## Fleetie (Nov 23, 2010)

Thanks for your thoughts, guys.

I'll keep hanging on for a bit. I'm not in a massive rush.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 24, 2010)

Fleetie said:


> What is the current concensus on when it'll be out?



Should be sometime just after the 6th Tuesday of the month, after pigs fly, or after the first snowball fight in hell. Take your pick.



A new 24-70mm has been 'coming soon' for at least two years now. If you want an L lens, don't wait...


----------



## Waleed Essam (Nov 24, 2010)

PabloHoneySF said:


> I've been keeping an eye out as well ... the current version is around $1250USD right now at Amazon and I'm wondering if I should just pull the trigger at that price or just keep waiting. I have a few primes I am switching between and can wait.



I've been waiting for over a year now, both for IS and for fear of getting a "bad copy" of the current version.

I became fed up of all the waiting, bought the current version from amazon for 1230 USD and got a perfectly good copy 

Couldn't be happier  although IS would be great on this lens @70mm, but for the price I bought it I have no regrets. And IF an IS version is released in 2011 it will be easy to sell mine used and not loose much, as I already got it for a great price


----------



## Osiris30 (Nov 24, 2010)

scalesusa said:


> They likely have one all designed, but as long as sales are good on the existing model, there is little advantage to spending millions tooling for a new one with money so tight.
> 
> Nikon dropped a whole bunch of new cameras and lenses a couple of years back, and was losing money hand over fist. They have still not earned enough profit to cover those losses, they have a very thin profit for FY 2011. Selling a lot of product is nice, but not if you aren't making a profit.



Nikon's loss of money had little to do with their new cameras and lenses and a lot more to do with the global economy and corporate structure. Nikon is *far* more focus (in a business sense) around imaging products. Canon has a much wider base and faired the best of the majors dollars wise.

And while I agree why replace something that sells, the 70-200 f2.8 Mk I was selling like no-one's business. The 24-70 is one of those Canon lenses that *needs* a replacement IMHO.


----------



## lbloom (Nov 24, 2010)

Is the 24 - 70 f/2.8 L a good lens to buy if you're tired of constantly switching between prime lenses? This seems like a lens that any L user should have anyway. IS would be nice. I may wait through the spring (with no pressing immediate need) and see what else surfaces about its replacement.


----------



## PabloHoneySF (Nov 24, 2010)

Waleed Essam said:


> PabloHoneySF said:
> 
> 
> > I've been keeping an eye out as well ... the current version is around $1250USD right now at Amazon and I'm wondering if I should just pull the trigger at that price or just keep waiting. I have a few primes I am switching between and can wait.
> ...



Thanks for your input, I saw that the lens went down to $1220 after going up a few days ago and just finally pulled the trigger today. It's a good price and I know I'll enjoy it until the IS version comes out (if ever). About 75% of my photos are of my kids and I'd hate to be missing shots and moments because I'm too busy switching lenses. The waiting for IS would have driven me crazy ...I know my husband is _already_ glad that I'll shut up agonizing over it


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Nov 29, 2010)

I see that Sigma, Tamron, etc. have lenses that are "sort-of-the-same" but none of them seem to have the same reputation for sharpness. They all cost less than half the price (some just a third) but it's not worth it for me. There is, however, also the EF-s 17-55 which looks a decent performer aside from a bit of distortion and not-perfect defocus characteristics (boke), and photozone's comparison of the 17-55 vs. the 24-70 throws some cold water on my enthusiasm for the 24-70 (for use especially on a APS-C DSLR). Perhaps I should say I've seen enough to point towards an upgrade of the 24-70 - if it's being outperformed by an EF-S lens (different market, different focal lengths, of course) then there is that.


----------



## fotografiasi (Nov 29, 2010)

I also tested both 17-55 2.8 IS and the 24-70 2.8 on my 50D. 3 people looked at the photos and the 17-55 produced a ted better photos. So until Canon does not come with a better lens for FF I will not switch to FF


----------



## epsiloneri (Nov 29, 2010)

fotografiasi said:


> I also tested both 17-55 2.8 IS and the 24-70 2.8 on my 50D. 3 people looked at the photos and the 17-55 produced a ted better photos. So until Canon does not come with a better lens for FF I will not switch to FF



But how do you know the 24-70/2.8 does not produce better photos on a FF than the 17-55/2.8 on the 50D?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 29, 2010)

fotografiasi said:


> I also tested both 17-55 2.8 IS and the 24-70 2.8 on my 50D. 3 people looked at the photos and the 17-55 produced a ted better photos. So until Canon does not come with a better lens for FF I will not switch to FF



Sorry, but that's a rather flawed comparison and if that's your only reason for not switching to FF then you're making a mistake.

Sure, the 17-55mm has better IQ than a 24-70mm when using both on a crop body. The smaller image circle of the 17-55mm allows that. But to be fair, you'd need to compare a shot with a 17-55mm on your 50D to the same scene shot with the 24-70mm on a FF body. I've done something similar - 17-55mm on 7D vs. 24-105mm on 5DII - and the FF wins by a clear margin.

Lots of people say they're waiting for a FF equivalent of the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS. The thing is, they forget that the camera is part of the equation. In fact, there's already a *better* lens than the 17-55mm for FF - it's the 24-105mm f/4L IS. Keep in mind that the crop factor applies to aperture (in terms of depth of field for equivalent subject framing) and to ISO noise as well. So, the FF-equivalent numbers for the 17-55mm would be 27-88mm f/4.5 - i.e., the 24-105mm is wider, longer, and faster, and still has 3-stop IS. Yes, you lose a full stop of light (the crop factor does not affect exposure), but if you need the shutter speed to be higher, you can just bump up the ISO since noise is 1.33 stops better on FF as well. 

So if you're waiting for a 'better lens for FF' it's time to stop waiting!


----------

