# *UPDATE* Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 29, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/08/canon-ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-pushed-back-to-october/"></g:plusone></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/08/canon-ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-pushed-back-to-october/"></a></div>
<p><strong>UPDATE

</strong>I have received two updates that a major store in Germany expects their first shipments of the new EF 24-70 f/2.8L II by the end of next week. This information was backed up by a CPS rep in another country.</p>
<p><strong>New ship date?

</strong>We and <a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/Canon_new_lenses.html" target="_blank">others</a> are hearing that the new Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II will not begin shipping until October 2012 at the earliest. Nothing has been officially mentioned by Canon as of yet.</p>
<p><strong>EOS Utility

</strong>You will see in the latest EOS utility the lens correction information has been added for the EF 24-70 f/2.8L II</p>
<p><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2470.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-11066" title="2470" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2470-575x480.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="480" /></a></p>
<p><strong> </strong><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r </strong></p>
```


----------



## squarebox (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*

kinda happy about this news, cause I was worried that this lens wouldn't ship before I went to Hawaii. Seeing that it slipped, means I made the right decision to pick up the 24-105L instead for the time being...

Still want this lens though...


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*


Take your time Canon. Just make sure the copy that you going to send me is a GOOD ONE.


----------



## davinci52 (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*

For me, as one who preordered back in February, this news is beyond inexcusable! Canon's photographic division must be completely inept. At this point, the ONLY thing keeping me with Canon is the TS-E 17mm. If Nikon comes out with a comparable lens, I'll switch in a heartbeat.


----------



## WightmanMedia (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*

I feel sorry for you all that have pre-ordered this lens. The news of this possible delay only gives me (and I'm sure many others) more time to save up for this lens, which in my opinion is overpriced, especially the UK market.


----------



## charlesa (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*

Canon's service is deteriorating and fast


----------



## papercutMS (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*

Although I share your frustration, good luck finding some of Nikon's more popular glass in stock at a reputable authorized dealers. Generally speaking, Canon's supply chain is superior to Nikon's. The grass is not always greener on the otherside. 



davinci52 said:


> For me, as one who preordered back in February, this news is beyond inexcusable! Canon's photographic division must be completely inept. At this point, the ONLY thing keeping me with Canon is the TS-E 17mm. If Nikon comes out with a comparable lens, I'll switch in a heartbeat.


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



papercutMS said:


> Although I share your frustration, good luck finding some of Nikon's more popular glass in stock at a reputable authorized dealers. Generally speaking, Canon's supply chain is superior to Nikon's. The grass is not always greener on the otherside.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It usually happens for me, that the lane which I'm currently not driving moves faster. After I switch the other goes faster. But here you can be on two lanes at once, so why complaining? The story with Canon's preoders isn't such for the first time I suppose? What about the learning curve? As long as people will preorder so many months before the release, Canon has no reason to keep the announced dates. If people won't preorder once or two, then Canon for the third time will reconsider when to announce new stuff to appear on the shelves. I think, that preordering is like playing a roulette - if you are lucky, then you get one but if you have to wait, then you can blame only yourself.
People were waiting how many months for 1DX? How long after the first delivery was it available for anybody? Was it worth preordering? All those complaints about light leak in 5d3 I think came from people who preordered. 
I really don't see any point in preordering AND complaining. If you preorder then don't complain, please...


----------



## keithfullermusic (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



marekjoz said:


> papercutMS said:
> 
> 
> > Although I share your frustration, good luck finding some of Nikon's more popular glass in stock at a reputable authorized dealers. Generally speaking, Canon's supply chain is superior to Nikon's. The grass is not always greener on the otherside.
> ...



people can and should complain all they want. canon says this is when your lens will be here. canon takes your money (and lots of it). you hold off on other things and make plans based off of when canon said your expensive lens will be ready. then, you don't get it.

so why shouldn't people complain? i'm confused? just because something tends to happen a lot doesn't mean you shouldn't complain. if there was a huge hole on a bridge, and it was there for a long time, should people not complain about so it doesn't get fixed? under your logic, they should just shut up.

i would think that people should start screaming bloody murder when they don't get this stuff. it will force canon to stop making these BS release dates, just to lock in customers. most software companies refuse to give release dates, because their are ALWAYS problems and dates get pushed back. they learned to only give a date when the stuff is ready - canon needs to do the same thing.

so i say, if you preorder and don't get it then complain, please...


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



keithfullermusic said:


> (...)
> 
> so i say, if you preorder and don't get it then complain, please...



I would rather say: don't preorder to make Canon rethink their announcement.


----------



## Luke (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



squarebox said:


> kinda happy about this news, cause I was worried that this lens wouldn't ship before I went to Hawaii. Seeing that it slipped, means I made the right decision to pick up the 24-105L instead for the time being...
> 
> Still want this lens though...



Hah, I did the exact same thing..
Was going to Hawaii.. had a preorder for the 24-70 II...
Ended up picking up a 24-105L for the trip anyways....

Just sold it though thinking September would be the ship date...


----------



## preppyak (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



marekjoz said:


> I would rather say: don't preorder to make Canon rethink their announcement.


Except then they prioritize the production of that lens even less, because half as many people have pre-ordered. Its more that you should not rely on anything until its actually released. I wouldn't sell off any gear to fund a new lens until I could buy that new lens in store, for example.

But, its more effective than complaining, as your rep on the phone is countries away from Canon's office, and it won't work its way up the food chain unless you have a specific technical glitch.


----------



## DB (Aug 29, 2012)

My EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Mark I has just appreciated another 50 bucks! Thanks Canon.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 29, 2012)

I am glad that I got Tamron 24-70mm VC. No more waiting...


----------



## DB (Aug 29, 2012)

Mark I's now $1,599 @ B&H, but $1,770 to $1,780 elsewhere (according to CanonPriceWatch)

http://www.beachcamera.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CN2470L&omid=200&ref=cj&tab=descript

http://www.buydig.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=CN2470L&omid=200&ref=cj&tab=descript


----------



## Viggo (Aug 29, 2012)

I traded my 24-70 for a 35 L way back, I don't really understand what's fun about 2.8 zooms, but I fully understand not all people think like me. 

Although I waited a very long time for the 1d X, I didn't for the 5d3, and the new flashes and 40mm was also pretty quickly released so it's not all bad. But I'm a big fan of people telling me when I order whatever, "you know, this will take 6 months" and suddenly it took three and I'm happy. Instead of telling my three days, and it's three months...


----------



## DanielW (Aug 29, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> I am glad that I got Tamron 24-70mm VC. No more waiting...



And how do you like it?


----------



## papercutMS (Aug 29, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> I am glad that I got Tamron 24-70mm VC. No more waiting...



I was definitely temped by this lens. It receives great reviews and considered at least on par with the Canon 24-70 f2.8 Mk I in terms of IQ and has VC to boot! However, having the zoom ring turn the opposite direction was the deal breaker for me.


----------



## canonian (Aug 29, 2012)

UN-FREAKIN-BELIEVABLE 

It better be worth the wait, Canon,


----------



## Axilrod (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



WightmanMedia said:


> I feel sorry for you all that have pre-ordered this lens. The news of this possible delay only gives me (and I'm sure many others) more time to save up for this lens, which in my opinion is overpriced, especially the UK market.



I'm pretty sure they found some issue with the lens after the announcement, would you prefer them send you a defective one?


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



Axilrod said:


> WightmanMedia said:
> 
> 
> > I feel sorry for you all that have pre-ordered this lens. The news of this possible delay only gives me (and I'm sure many others) more time to save up for this lens, which in my opinion is overpriced, especially the UK market.
> ...



I'm pretty sure they found out after the announcement, that they need finally close the design and think about the production. Oh wait a minute. They found some issue? So it was a not tested prototype? I think they counted on research data from Curiosity but this spiritless robot melted the wrong stone and NASA has to find another one - this is the real reason for delay. And as we all know data connection with Mars is so sloooow....


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



marekjoz said:


> Axilrod said:
> 
> 
> > WightmanMedia said:
> ...



My 2cents: I'm thinking cancel my pre-order and wait even more maybe couple months after 1st patch. ;D ;D ;D


----------



## iaind (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



marekjoz said:


> Axilrod said:
> 
> 
> > WightmanMedia said:
> ...



Your forgetting about the pre-production model accidently left at Tranquility Bay by Apollo 11 in 1969. 
As soon as UPS or Fed-Ex deliver it production can start


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



iaind said:


> marekjoz said:
> 
> 
> > Axilrod said:
> ...



So this is the real reason nobody went to the Moon for so long. It's just a secret plan to fight against the Japanese economy!

*UPDATE from the last moment: President Obama just confirmed on reddit in his IaMA that there will be investments in space program, so there still is a hope we'll see 24-70 II and not our kids only: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/z1c9z/i_am_barack_obama_president_of_the_united_states/c60n05h*


----------



## Sony (Aug 29, 2012)

*Re: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II Pushed Back to October?*



davinci52 said:


> For me, as one who preordered back in February, this news is beyond inexcusable! Canon's photographic division must be completely inept. At this point, the ONLY thing keeping me with Canon is the TS-E 17mm. If Nikon comes out with a comparable lens, I'll switch in a heartbeat.


Do you want a comparison? Nikon D800 was announced prior to Canon 5DMKiii. My brother pre-oderd D800 right the first place, and I did the same with 5DMKiii. It means that I placed oder after him. I got mine on late May, and my brother got his on mid July. It's the fact.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Aug 29, 2012)

Viggo said:


> I traded my 24-70 for a 35 L way back, I don't really understand what's fun about 2.8 zooms, but I fully understand not all people think like me.
> 
> Although I waited a very long time for the 1d X, I didn't for the 5d3, and the new flashes and 40mm was also pretty quickly released so it's not all bad. But I'm a big fan of people telling me when I order whatever, "you know, this will take 6 months" and suddenly it took three and I'm happy. Instead of telling my three days, and it's three months...



What's fun about 24-70 zooms? They're fun to have if you're being paid a lot of money to shoot a wedding.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 29, 2012)

DanielW said:


> cliffwang said:
> 
> 
> > I am glad that I got Tamron 24-70mm VC. No more waiting...
> ...


I like this lens a lot. The IQ is sharper than my old Canon 24-70mm MK1. I think people complain that it might have onion bokeh. However, I haven't really seem that yet. By the way I am not a PRO, so I don't really think I will be so picky for the onion bokeh in few photos in my life. I really like the IQ and VC feature of this lens.
HOWEVER, if I was a PRO, I would just wait for Canon 24-70mm MK2. For PROs you are making money from your clients, so you should use the best gear for your clients.



papercutMS said:


> I was definitely temped by this lens. It receives great reviews and considered at least on par with the Canon 24-70 f2.8 Mk I in terms of IQ and has VC to boot! However, having the zoom ring turn the opposite direction was the deal breaker for me.


I think you won't feel any inconvenience for the opposite direction for zoom ring. When you are turning the zoom ring, you will adjust the direction to the correct way. At least there is no problem for me.


----------



## DanielW (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> DanielW said:
> 
> 
> > cliffwang said:
> ...



That's great news!
Thanks!


----------



## pwp (Aug 30, 2012)

Viggo said:


> I traded my 24-70 for a 35 L way back, I don't really understand what's fun about 2.8 zooms, but I fully understand not all people think like me.



You're right, there are millions of photographers who don't think like you. Along with the 70-200 f/2.8isII, the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 16-35 f/2.8 will represent the core kit for a startlingly high percentage of working photographers across the planet. Peek into a pro photographers bag and you'll be likely to see two bodies and the three f/2.8 zooms. 

-PW


----------



## brett b (Aug 30, 2012)

pwp said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > I traded my 24-70 for a 35 L way back, I don't really understand what's fun about 2.8 zooms, but I fully understand not all people think like me.
> ...



+1


----------



## Viggo (Aug 30, 2012)

Oh absolutely!

I know that very well, that's why I wrote that I fully understand the 2,8 zooms :

I just think those lenses document, not get that type of IQ I love from fast primes. 

And it's the reason I sold my 70-200 mk2 also and got the 135. The 70-200 never made me smile, the 135 just does exatly that, every time.

So for me (and I see a lot of other amateurs here that wants the 24-70) I don't get it when you can have a lens like the 35 L.´in stead.


----------



## fiend (Aug 30, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Oh absolutely!
> 
> I know that very well, that's why I wrote that I fully understand the 2,8 zooms :
> 
> ...



I have only 2 zooms, but will buy me a third one later on, the 24-105 due to the comfort of the zoom when traveling. I've sold my 24-70/2.8 for the 35/1.4 and dont miss it at all.
When I shoot weddings I use one body with 16-35 (or 35/1.4).. and the 70-200/2.8 IS II or the 85/1.2 or 135/2.0 on the other body depending on the situation.

Just got back home from a travelshoot in Turkey and I had the 16-35/2.8, 50/1.8 and 135/2 and I think I missed a lot of shots switching between lenses all the time. A 24-105 would have been better than the 50/1.8 on these locations and my 135/2 with 1.4x is quite nice and the 16-35 is awesome 

But the 24-70/2.8 I don't miss att all..


----------



## pakosouthpark (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> I am glad that I got Tamron 24-70mm VC. No more waiting...



what is that like comparing to the old canon 24-70?


----------



## M.ST (Aug 30, 2012)

A few preordered lenses for CPS platinum members hit the german market until the next two weeks.


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (Aug 30, 2012)

”Hopefully” it is only Canon Sweden that has the delay (see http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9011.msg162594). When the new Canon 500 and 600mm lenses started to arrive, shops in Denmark hade them in stock before Canon Sweden started to ship them to shops in Sweden.


----------



## Heavyweight67 (Aug 30, 2012)

If the cost hasn't changed from the $2000 up then October is fine by me, just a little more saving time, that said, the delay of this lens and some other Canon QC issues, I will be sitting back and waiting for a few months...
On numerous occasions I have had to stop myself buying the Mk1 to use in the interim, but I keep reminding myself that "apparently the wait will be worth it"....fingers crossed.
I have that zoom range covered with the EFs 17-55 2.8, on my 7D, but, the 5D3 is my goto camera once the sun sets...
I guess like many things Canon (recently) time will reveal all.


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 30, 2012)

canonian said:


> UN-FREAKIN-BELIEVABLE



That's why I did a poll some time ago, and even then trust into Canon seemed limited - only about 25% believed in the announced mid-September delivery date :-> http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=7859.msg143492#msg143492



Heavyweight67 said:


> but I keep reminding myself that "apparently the wait will be worth it"....fingers crossed.



Given the delay and the price it just has to be stellar ... or what? People will buy it anyway, even if it doesn't combine the 24L, 35L and 50L in one lens. That's because the mk1 is phased out, very expensive when used and the Tamron isn't an alternative because of the slower af. So until the new patented 24-70L with IS arrives people are out of options.


----------



## M.ST (Aug 30, 2012)

Update:

Canon (CPS) told me a few minutes ago, that Canon delivers the EF 24-70 II until next week from the europe stock to the CPS merchants.

If this really happens. We will see.


----------



## kaihp (Aug 30, 2012)

M.ST said:


> Update:
> 
> Canon (CPS) told me a few minutes ago, that Canon delivers the EF 24-70 II until next week from the europe stock to the CPS merchants.
> 
> If this really happens. We will see.


This is the first time I've missed a "Like" button here (and I'm not even on FB).


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 30, 2012)

Viggo said:


> Oh absolutely!
> 
> I know that very well, that's why I wrote that I fully understand the 2,8 zooms :
> 
> ...



-1....I understand the IQ of prime. I have friends (pro wedding for 15yrs), all 4 of them have mrk II on pre-order. They all using mrk I. Their kit to all wedding 2 bodies, 50L, 24-70, and 70-200 mrk II plus flashes.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 30, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > color=red]So for me (and I see a lot of other amateurs here that wants the 24-70) I don't get it when you can have a lens like the 35 L.´in stead.[/color]
> ...



Agreed. I do have the 35L, but still see a need for the 24-70 II. There are simply times when the flexibility of a zoom is necessary. The f/1.4 is great for creative effects, yes, but for low light use, f/2.8 plus the high ISO capabilities of the 1D X/5DIII will be very nice.


----------



## canonian (Aug 30, 2012)

M.ST said:


> Update:
> 
> Canon (CPS) told me a few minutes ago, that Canon delivers the EF 24-70 II until next week from the europe stock to the CPS merchants.
> 
> If this really happens. We will see.



I hope that this also means US dealers will get the lens next week and begin shipping to people (like myself) who pre-ordered. 
I've got a bunch of jobs coming up in Sep & Oct where this lens would be really useful.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 30, 2012)

pakosouthpark said:


> what is that like comparing to the old canon 24-70?


IQ is slightly better my old Canon 24-70. The best part is the VC. My son is 2 year old. I don't use flashlight when I take his pictures because the flashlight hurts kids' eyes under 5. The illumination in my house are not good enough and always slow down my shooting speed. The VC really brings a lot of benefits to me. I think people like me taking a lot of photos at home may really like this lens.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> The best part is the VC. My son is 2 year old. I don't use flashlight when I take his pictures because the flashlight hurts kids' eyes under 5. The illumination in my house are not good enough and always slow down my shooting speed. The VC really brings a lot of benefits to me.



Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible. So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s. If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible. So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s. If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.


I am not talking about subject motion. I tried to avoid taking photos in low speed and when my son is moving. You do take many photos in low speed shoot when your subject is not moving, don't you? I really wonder if anyone taking photos only when your subject is moving?


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible. So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s. If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.
> ...



Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 30, 2012)

marekjoz said:


> Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.



I forgot sport and wildlife photos. However, I think 24-70mm for sport and wildlife photos is too short.


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> marekjoz said:
> 
> 
> > Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.
> ...



There you are anyway in most cases above 1/750s, so IS doesn't matter too much. It helps somehow in targeting through viewfinder and while panning, if it provides mode 2.


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible. So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s. If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.
> ...



My 2cents:
Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing etc....has more meaning then still shooting.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:



> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Except that IS (aka VC) does nothing to help with subject motion - it works by allowing you to handhold at a slower shutter speed than would otherwise be possible. So, three stops of IS/VC at 70mm, on a FF body, means you can handhold down to 1/8 s. If your living room is dimly-lit, a 1/8 s exposure with VC means your furniture will be nice and sharp...and your 2 year old son will be a blur.
> ...



Sure, I take lots of pictures with static subjects - buildings, mountains, etc. I also take lots of pictures where the subject is moving, and I want to capture that sense of motion - waterfalls, traffic, sports/action, etc. 

The thing is, when the subject is a person, they're always moving (well, the live ones, at any rate). If you're trying to capture that motion - blur to indicate movement - fine. But, even an adult holding still as they pose for a photo is going to have slight, involuntary movements that will reduce sharpness. Kids are even worse. Generally speaking, you need a shutter speed of around 1/60 s or faster to stop that involuntary motion (you can sometimes get away with 1/30 s or 1/15 s it you fire a fast burst and get lucky with a frame or two). IMO, that is why Canon felt no huge need to add IS when they updated the 24-70mm - it's the 'wedding/event lens' and that means shooting people, and that means 1/60 s or faster, and with a 70mm lens, that negates the utility of IS in those situations (granted, I don't agree - just suggesting that's what Canon may be thinking).



Dylan777 said:


> Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing etc....has more meaning then still shooting.



To a point, yes. But usually you want a shutter speed that captures a sharp face (sharp enough, at least) but moving extremities. Since the extremities move fast (relatively), something on the order of 1/60 - 1/125 s usually works well for that. If the face is a blur, too, it's usually a throw-away shot.


----------



## acoll123 (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> marekjoz said:
> 
> 
> > Almost all sports and wildlife photos look better if subjects are moving, at least "somehow" moving. No action in playfield or sleeping bird in most cases are not fascinating.
> ...



I am hoping mine gets here before basketball season (end ) - I use it when I can sit under the goal or corner of the court even - great for under the basket shots. I'm not too upset about the delay - more time to save up for it.


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 30, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> My 2cents:
> Picture of a kid in action - playing sports, dancing etc....has more meaning then still shooting.


Agree. I usually shoot with my Sigma 50mm F/1.4 when my son is dancing. However, kids are not always in action and I have no chance to change lens. That's why VC bring me benefits sometimes. I still don't get why people think VC(IS) is not important.


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > My 2cents:
> ...



IS is important but if it would make the price 30% higher but benefits from it (IS not price) would not sacrifice it frequently enough, then why include it? If you would be about to buy it - which version would you choose: 24-70 II for 2500$ or 24-70 IS for 3300$ assuming they had the same optics?


----------



## cliffwang (Aug 30, 2012)

marekjoz said:


> IS is important but if it would make the price 30% higher but benefits from it (IS not price) would not sacrifice it frequently enough, then why include it? If you would be about to buy it - which version would you choose: 24-70 II for 2500$ or 24-70 IS for 3300$ assuming they had the same optics?


I think we are off topic now. I mention VC(IS) feature because pakosouthpark asked me the comparison between old Canon 24-70mm and Tamron 24-70mm. I guess most people here reply post without checking the old post. Tamron 24-70mm VC is 1299, not 3300.
Guys, please check all posts before you reply.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> I think we are off topic now....Guys, please check all posts before you reply.



The topic is that the Canon 24-70 II is likely delayed. Again. Or is that still? Regardless, once you've acknowledged that, and perhaps complained that this seems to be Canon's new normal, where else is there to go but off topic?!?


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 30, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > My 2cents:
> ...



I can see the benefit of VC(IS) in slow shooting, but not fast shooting. I'm speaking on 24-70 II not ZOOOOM lens. Glad you happy with your. I'll wait for mrk II


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 30, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> cliffwang said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Don't go off topic! You were warned ;D


----------



## tron (Aug 31, 2012)

OK then something on topic: There is a CR3 that 24-70 II will be available by October 2013 (or 2014?) ;D


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 31, 2012)

tron said:


> OK then something on topic: There is a CR3 that 24-70 II will be available by October 2013 (or 2014?) ;D



It should be a CR3 that there'll be a 24-70/2.8 IS before 2014 and 2/3rds of the people buying the non-IS version now will upgrade. People spending $2000+ for a standard zoom will pay $3000+ w/o flinching, too - and there always is the "off" button for IS:

Even if the IS version is a little worse optically in the corners or something (why should it?), on this level 2/3rds of users won't even notice: "Hey look, I just took some snaps of my kids, and see the blurry bokeh in the corner?".

But I admit I'm absolutely curious to see the first real review, af speed will be stellar of course, but will iq really rival the sharpness primes stopped down to f2.8, what about ca/vignetting, is the bokeh like on the 135L? When the lens arrives by xmas for the rest of us we'll know!


----------



## M.ST (Aug 31, 2012)

Delivery to the CPS merchants in Germany starts definetely next week. This is CR3 and reported a few times in the last two days by Canon Germany (CPS) and Canon Europe (CPS).

But I don´t think that Canon is able to fulfill all preorders. CPS members (platinum) are the first who get the lens. 

I read a lot of IS. => You don´t need an IS. I am happy with my prototype of the lens without IS. If you want the best image quality and you shoot architecture, landscapes or available light use a good tripod with a gearhead like the Manfrotto 405. If you want to make videos get a tripod with a good video head. For sports, weddings and travelling you don´t need an IS.


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 31, 2012)

M.ST said:


> If you want to make videos get a tripod with a good video head. For sports, weddings and travelling you don´t need an IS.



This has been discussed all over, but I cannot resist to argue that esp. for traveling IS is very handy because you won't want to carry around a sturdy tripod & gearhead! This makes it a "pro" lens for people willing to be prepared to get the best iq shots - same for video: tracking moving objects w/o IS at all requires heavy, expensive stabilization gear people won't have lying around to get some clips of their kids running around.

And as written before I'm so curious if the "best picture quality" means "ever, across all lenses" or "in comparison to other f2.8 zooms in this range".


----------



## M.ST (Aug 31, 2012)

For private use a IS make sense if you shoot videos and stills. 

If you have a 60D get the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS lens instead of the EF 24-70 II (or get the Tamron if you want IS).

But I think that 24-70 mm is not a good range for APS-C.

No zoom lens (with some exceptions) can reach the image quality of a good prime lens. But for travelling a zoom lens is the best if you don´t want to carry a lot of bodys and lenses with you.


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 31, 2012)

M.ST said:


> If you have a 60D get the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS lens instead of the EF 24-70 II (or get the Tamron if you want IS).



Of course, only hardcore enthusiasts would want to get a 24-70 exclusively for a crop camera... but the problem with the 17-55 is that it's not sealed and you can't use it when you upgrade to ff.



M.ST said:


> But I think that 24-70 mm is not a good range for APS-C.



... but if you have a ff/crop camera mix, the 24-70 range imho isn't that bad - the wide end may be limiting sometimes, but on the long end many tele zooms start at 70mm so an overlap like with the 24-105 is convenient, but not necessary.


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 31, 2012)

M.ST said:


> (..)
> 
> No zoom lens (with some exceptions) can reach the image quality of a good prime lens.
> (..)



If the topic came to primes again: is this 35 f2/0 really so bad: link to DTP?


----------



## almograve (Aug 31, 2012)

They must have a really hard time building those babies...
I just hope that they will guaranty build quality from day one...
I start wondering if it would not be a bad idea to let the first batch go when it becomes available....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 31, 2012)

M.ST said:


> You don´t need an IS. For ... travelling you don´t need an IS.



Maybe _you_ don't. Please don't tell me what _I_ need.

Maybe I'm just lazy. You're right, I don't need IS. I should just bring an RRS TVC-33 and BH-55. I'm sure they'll let me take that big tripod and set it up in dimly-lit museums, candle-lit cathedrals, etc.


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 31, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> M.ST said:
> 
> 
> > You don´t need an IS. For ... travelling you don´t need an IS.
> ...



For travelling I prefer to be equipped with ABS and ESP.


----------



## 2n10 (Aug 31, 2012)

If I am traveling I want IS because I will not allocate enough time to make sure the picture comes out perfect and I am not likely to be at my steadiest since I am trying to pack as much fun into the trip as possible.


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 31, 2012)

2n10 said:


> If I am traveling I want IS because I will not allocate enough time to make sure the picture comes out perfect and I am not likely to be at my steadiest since I am trying to pack as much fun into the trip as possible.



For this purpose, the Tamron 24-70 should do fine, too - at least it's $1000 cheaper and thus it's only half the catastrophe if it gets damaged.



almograve said:


> I start wondering if it would not be a bad idea to let the first batch go when it becomes available....



For once, I have to speak up for Canon: obviously they delayed the lens the last time due to beta testers' feedback (whatever that was), and given the total delay anything other than a 100% perfect qc would be a total marketing disaster.

The one possibility is that the cps samples they're shipping now are hand-picked and there might be another slight delay for the normal customer - say until September 2013 or so


----------



## Luke (Aug 31, 2012)

2n10 said:


> If I am traveling I want IS because I will not allocate enough time to make sure the picture comes out perfect and I am not likely to be at my steadiest since I am trying to pack as much fun into the trip as possible.



I too find it difficult to compose a steady shot when I'm bouncing up and down with excitement!
I really wish this lens had IS, but I'm buying it anyways... The added weight is inconsequential for me compared to capturing the memories...


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 31, 2012)

M.ST said:


> Delivery to the CPS merchants in Germany starts definetely next week. This is CR3 and reported a few times in the last two days by Canon Germany (CPS) and Canon Europe (CPS).
> 
> But I don´t think that Canon is able to fulfill all preorders. CPS members (platinum) are the first who get the lens.
> 
> I read a lot of IS. => You don´t need an IS. I am happy with my prototype of the lens without IS. If you want the best image quality and you shoot architecture, landscapes or available light use a good tripod with a gearhead like the Manfrotto 405. If you want to make videos get a tripod with a good video head. For sports, weddings and travelling you don´t need an IS.



-1........Without tripod, "IS" can be usefull for low light shot - shutter speed 1/40 or slower.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

Luke said:


> I too find it difficult to compose a steady shot when I'm bouncing up and down with excitement!
> I really wish this lens had IS, but I'm buying it anyways... The added weight is inconsequential for me compared to capturing the memories...


I agree ... I too wish 24-70 L II had IS ... I'll be buying it anyway, but most likely during Christmas otherwise I'll have to wait till July 2013.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> M.ST said:
> 
> 
> > Delivery to the CPS merchants in Germany starts definetely next week. This is CR3 and reported a few times in the last two days by Canon Germany (CPS) and Canon Europe (CPS).
> ...


Yup ... mere mortals like me need IS, coz I hate climbing sand dunes in the desert with a tripod in my hand ... the same applies during my family vacations ... most of my vacations are in a tour bus, sightseeing new places and it is convenient to have IS ... that is the reason why I like 24-105 L IS ... but if 24-70 f/2.8 had IS I can do so much more with the DOF.
I know it is wishful thinking but it would be AWESOME if Canon made 24-105 f/2.8 L IS. ;D


----------



## Marsu42 (Aug 31, 2012)

Rienzphotoz said:


> most of my vacations are in a tour bus, sightseeing new places and it is convenient to have IS ... that is the reason why I like 24-105 L IS ...



Sounds like you could be better off w/ the more flexible 24-105 and a real fast 1.4 prime anyway? Or the newer light primes with IS. Truth is for travel a 24-70 might not cut it due to the small zoom range. But still no excuse for Canon to cut IS from the 24-70, that's why I believe they have an IS version in the pipeline, too.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > most of my vacations are in a tour bus, sightseeing new places and it is convenient to have IS ... that is the reason why I like 24-105 L IS ...
> ...


Yes I agree, 24-105 is more flexible and that's why I use it on vacations ... but many a time I see situations where I wish the 24-105 was an f/2.8 lens, since that does not seem to be possible (at least not in the near future), I would like to see a 24-70 f/2.8 with IS ... I tried the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC at the local store but somehow I was not really convinced with its performance (too spoiled by the Canon L glass I guess). All I can do now is hold on to my 24-105 and wait for the day when Canon releases 24-70 f2/8 L IS version.


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 31, 2012)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > M.ST said:
> ...



I take 2 ;D


----------



## wickidwombat (Aug 31, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...


Yeah for sure this lens is second on my lens dream list after a 35-85 f2L IS


----------



## marekjoz (Aug 31, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Rienzphotoz said:
> ...



We'll have them both in twenty years when finally sensors won't be flat but spherical like lenses are


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Aug 31, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Rienzphotoz said:
> ...


Hmmm ... 35-85 f2 L IS? if that comes true, Canon will price it so much that I'd have to sell my family jewels ;D


----------

