# Poll on new 24-70 f/2.8L mk.II



## K-amps (Feb 8, 2012)

Everyone has 3 votes: You get this the first time!


----------



## 7enderbender (Feb 8, 2012)

To add one more more option if I may:

I pass because given that it has more glass but is lighter is an indicator that it is yet another hunk of plastic that I'm not willing to shell out $2000 for. I'll try to pick up the original version while it's still available or keep my flimsy 24-105.


----------



## danski0224 (Feb 8, 2012)

The 70-200 IS II is pretty darn nice.

This 24-70 could also be pretty darn nice.

I'm reserving final opinion until some reviews come out.

If it is internal focusing, it moves up a notch on the want list. I haven't been able to figure that one out yet.


----------



## K-amps (Feb 8, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> To add one more more option if I may:
> 
> I pass because given that it has more glass but is lighter is an indicator that it is yet another hunk of plastic that I'm not willing to shell out $2000 for. I'll try to pick up the original version while it's still available or keep my flimsy 24-105.



True, but the older one has some plastic mounts inside in the focus mechanism that wore over time and has contributed to the original's hit/miss focussing. Many of those come back from Canon repair shops without any significant improvements. Hopefully the mk.ii has fixed this issue.


----------



## EYEONE (Feb 8, 2012)

I'd really love a 24-70 that matched the 70-200 f2.8 IS II in terms of IQ. It seems like this one will, or at least be closer. When the need for it comes up (i.e. mine breaks) I will replace my current model with version II. I'm happy with it. 

I still think it looks funny.


----------



## frisk (Feb 8, 2012)

The poll is missing the option: 

[ ] I am going to wait and see until I see a comparison against the Tamron 24-70 IS (VC) lens.


----------



## CrimsonBlue (Feb 8, 2012)

How about: i plan to buy it when the price comes down a bit, and IS isn't really necessary for this type of lens.


----------



## pharp (Feb 8, 2012)

premature - we really don't know what the street price is going to be. If it actually went for $1800 - would that make a difference?


----------



## sb (Feb 8, 2012)

How about this option:

"I pass because I don't use zoom lenses"


----------



## Dylan777 (Feb 8, 2012)

For me...

Pro: The size, weight and MTF chart looks good 

Con: Price and no IS

Buy it or not - it depends on how mrk II will perform in real life. Can't wait to see and hear reviews from the Pros and antienthusiastic shooters. Maybe a year from NOW


----------



## Dianoda (Feb 8, 2012)

I'm not a fan of the available answers to the poll, where's my "wait and see" option? Or "Maybe, if IQ is awesome and Canon puts it on rebate"?


----------



## lol (Feb 8, 2012)

I'll probably eventually get one (unless a 24-105 II comes out that is even better!) but it is low on my priority list of lenses to get. Certainly not before I evaluated the 200-400 extender whenever that's out.


----------



## Lyra Video Productions (Feb 8, 2012)

It would take a huge jump in quality (to go along with that jump in cost) for me to make the upgrade from the mk I. As I shoot a lot of video, had there been IS, well that might have been a different story... but as it is I just don't see this glass in my collection any time soon.


----------



## K-amps (Feb 8, 2012)

CrimsonBlue said:


> How about: i plan to buy it when the price comes down a bit, and IS isn't really necessary for this type of lens.



That is fine, and looking at the polls you will be one of the 6% who don't need IS.


----------



## ghstark (Feb 8, 2012)

I will not buy at this cost unless IQ is outstanding the cost isn't that bad the 70-200f2.8II cost me more and this one i would use more so let's wait to see how good it is first.


----------



## kennykodak (Feb 8, 2012)

curious, i hear that it has internal focusing but yet it has a lock for transport?
larger glass but lighter in weight?
IS isn't needed for this range but non L's 24 & 28 are released at the same time with it?
i'm confused...


----------



## lol (Feb 8, 2012)

kennykodak said:


> curious, i hear that it has internal focusing but yet it has a lock for transport?


Internal focusing is not the same as internal zoom. I'd guess it extends while zooming.


----------



## 7enderbender (Feb 8, 2012)

K-amps said:


> CrimsonBlue said:
> 
> 
> > How about: i plan to buy it when the price comes down a bit, and IS isn't really necessary for this type of lens.
> ...



I'm always happy to be the 1%


----------

