# New canon 24 2.8 USM - consumer or Pro ?



## koolman (Feb 14, 2012)

I have a 550d and I find myself using primes, 35L, 501.4, 60mm efs, smayang 85mm MF lens.

I'm missing something wider.

I really like quality primes and was saving up for a zeiss 21 2.8 or a canon 24L.

Now the new 24 2.8 USM showed up. My feeling is that it will be another "consumer lens" aimed a video primarily (the IS indicates this) and nothing special as far as IQ compared to the above.

Is it worth waiting for ?


----------



## vuilang (Feb 14, 2012)

you got a good set of lenses.. 24L vs 35L wont make much difference. Try to upgrade your body first then ur 35L will become 24L on ur current crop body.. (assuming your 550d is 1.6x n you're upgrading to either FF or 1.3x)


----------



## Dianoda (Feb 14, 2012)

Not sure if the new Canon 24mm f/2.8 IS is worth waiting or not. It is somewhat appealing - small, lightweight, USM AF, probably pretty sharp, and IS is always convenient - but the price is really quite high for what it is. I know a big part of that is just the exchange rates finally catching up, but still, it's pretty hard to see a US$350 lens replaced in the lineup with a US$850 lens.

If a full manual lens and size are not major concerns for you, I'd recommend checking out the samyang/rokinon 24mm f/1.4. B&H currently has it for pre-order at $700. I have the rokinon 35mm f/1.4 and it's an exceptional optic regardless of price (once stopped down to f/2.8 and beyond). I've also used the 24L II and it is a very nice lens - great if you need AF, but there are better options out there for pure IQ (24mm TSE f/3.5L II, the 21mm Zeiss you mentioned).

vuilang makes a good point - foregoing a new lens and getting a full-frame body instead is another option to consider.


----------



## koolman (Feb 14, 2012)

Dianoda said:


> Not sure if the new Canon 24mm f/2.8 IS is worth waiting or not. It is somewhat appealing - small, lightweight, USM AF, probably pretty sharp, and IS is always convenient - but the price is really quite high for what it is. I know a big part of that is just the exchange rates finally catching up, but still, it's pretty hard to see a US$350 lens replaced in the lineup with a US$850 lens.
> 
> If a full manual lens and size are not major concerns for you, I'd recommend checking out the samyang/rokinon 24mm f/1.4. B&H currently has it for pre-order at $700. I have the rokinon 35mm f/1.4 and it's an exceptional optic regardless of price (once stopped down to f/2.8 and beyond). I've also used the 24L II and it is a very nice lens - great if you need AF, but there are better options out there for pure IQ (24mm TSE f/3.5L II, the 21mm Zeiss you mentioned).
> 
> vuilang makes a good point - foregoing a new lens and getting a full-frame body instead is another option to consider.



Thanks for the feedback. Because I mostly use the camera casually - size and weight are a concern. I dont see myself carrying around a FF body for casual use. Hence I'm "stuck" with crops untill they make FF's lighter and more mobile (this will come I assume).

The samyang 24 - is a very good idea. I'm going to check it out.

Thanks


----------



## dstppy (Feb 14, 2012)

koolman said:


> Dianoda said:
> 
> 
> > Not sure if the new Canon 24mm f/2.8 IS is worth waiting or not. It is somewhat appealing - small, lightweight, USM AF, probably pretty sharp, and IS is always convenient - but the price is really quite high for what it is. I know a big part of that is just the exchange rates finally catching up, but still, it's pretty hard to see a US$350 lens replaced in the lineup with a US$850 lens.
> ...


Not sure about your camera, but my 5DmkII isn't that much bigger than my 60D -- any reason you've shied away from Zooms? The 15-85mm is a really nice lens and is 'everything but' an "L" lens in terms of build quality and IQ.

I, too, am curious what the two new primes are going to emerge as . . . hopefully they'll be the same high-quality as the better EF-S lenses they've released the past few years instead of the mass-market stuff.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 14, 2012)

koolman said:


> I have a 550d and I find myself using primes, 35L, 501.4, 60mm efs, smayang 85mm MF lens.
> 
> I'm missing something wider.
> 
> ...



Wide on a 550D is about 15-18mm. Even 24mm is not very wide. With the lenses you have, spending the money to get a 5D MK II will give your existing lenses a much wider angle of view. Even then, you might want 24mm and 17mm.


----------



## Hillsilly (Feb 15, 2012)

Hi, I've seen the comment that this lens is designed for video use in a few places. Is that simply because it has IS? Or is there something else that Canon has incorporated to optimize it for video use? 

I've been intrigued by this lens, too. I've been thinking about picking up a small, wide lens for a while. But the old 24mm didn't seem any better than some of the zooms that I have and the price of the 24L didn't really excite me. This new f/2.8 might just fit the bill. Luckily, I'm in no rush to do anything and can wait for a few reviews to come out. From some of the comments that I've seen, image quality should be very good and it will be interesting to see if it is comparable with the 24L. With USM and IS, I think it could be a winner (especially if the street price is a bit lower than the $850 everyone is quoting).


----------



## jrista (Feb 15, 2012)

koolman said:


> I have a 550d and I find myself using primes, 35L, 501.4, 60mm efs, smayang 85mm MF lens.
> 
> I'm missing something wider.
> 
> ...



Personally, I've found that Zeiss lenses use inferior multicoatings to recent Canon lenses, which results in worse...often MUCH worse...lens flare. If I had to pick any particular lens and my options were Zeiss or newer Canon, even if the size had a slightly better MTF, I'd pick the Canon. The significant improvement in multicoatings and greatly reduced flare would always be more valuable to me than better resolution but the possibility of intrusive, contrast-eating flare.

That aside, I'm not sure you would find a huge difference between the 35mm and a 24mm (its 36° vs. 50° FOV, or around 28% gain.) You would probably find something like the EF 8-15mm L Fisheye or EF 14mm L being far more valuable from an FOV standpoint... @14/15mm, you gain around 53% more FOV.


----------



## Axilrod (Feb 15, 2012)

If you want truly wide on an APS-C sensor go with the Tokina 11-16mm, it's a great lens and a great value.


----------



## Axilrod (Feb 15, 2012)

dstppy said:


> Not sure about your camera, but my 5DmkII isn't that much bigger than my 60D -- any reason you've shied away from Zooms? The 15-85mm is a really nice lens and is 'everything but' an "L" lens in terms of build quality and IQ.
> 
> I, too, am curious what the two new primes are going to emerge as . . . hopefully they'll be the same high-quality as the better EF-S lenses they've released the past few years instead of the mass-market stuff.



You're right about the size of the bodies, but with all the primes he has I think he would be disappointed with the 15-85's sharpness. It's a decent lens, but I would say that the 17-55 f/2.8 IS is the one that's closer to an L lens. Also he'd have a lot of focal length overlap. 

Like I said, if he wants wide the Tokina 11-16mm would be a great choice. But if you can live with the variable aperture or just want to stick with Canon the 10-22mm is a good alternative.


----------



## renozi (Feb 15, 2012)

Hey guys, first post here. I'm also interested in the new 24mm IS. If I'm doing group photos, landscapes, and astrophotography is it worth it to wait for the 24mm? I'm debating between this and the 17-40mm L which I've owned once before.



Canon 5D Mark II | 35mm f/1.4 | Sigma 85mm f/1.4 | 580EX II


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Feb 15, 2012)

koolman said:


> The samyang 24 - is a very good idea. I'm going to check it out.



There's a review of the lens in lenstip.


----------



## akiskev (Feb 15, 2012)

Hillsilly said:


> Hi, I've seen the comment that this lens is designed for video use in a few places. Is that simply because it has IS? Or is there something else that Canon has incorporated to optimize it for video use?


I wouldn't say that this is designed for video for a simple reason. Focus travel is so "packed" that it will make manual focusing tricky while filming.
I'm not saying that it will be bad for video.. It has IS after all.

For example the old 24 L FD would be more easy to manual focus with..


----------



## dstppy (Feb 15, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> dstppy said:
> 
> 
> > Not sure about your camera, but my 5DmkII isn't that much bigger than my 60D -- any reason you've shied away from Zooms? The 15-85mm is a really nice lens and is 'everything but' an "L" lens in terms of build quality and IQ.
> ...


That's true; if you are used to primes, zooms seem kind of toyish  I can't complain about the sharpness of the 15-85 though; vignetting and barrel distortion, well maybe  

I haven't used my 10-22mm enough to figure out if the zoom creep is my fault or the lens. I almost got a 17-55 f/2.8 IS then got the FF body, so I'm glad I didn't shell out the cash 

------------------------
A lot of recommendations here for 3rd party zooms; anyone had any focus issues? Read something on LR written by Roger that MFA is best to have with 3rd party lenses and Canon.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Feb 15, 2012)

koolman said:


> I have a 550d and I find myself using primes, 35L, 501.4, 60mm efs, smayang 85mm MF lens.
> 
> I'm missing something wider.
> 
> ...



For $850 it's got to be pretty decent when it comes to IQ I'd think. The MTF charts look fairly similar to the 24 1.4 II ones at f/8. Might be a way to get sharp edge to edge on FF for half the price or less of the 24 1.4 II, 24 T&S II, zeiss 21, 24-70 II. I'm a little bit stunned that it used no UD elements in it, just a single aspheric.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Feb 15, 2012)

koolman said:


> Dianoda said:
> 
> 
> > Not sure if the new Canon 24mm f/2.8 IS is worth waiting or not. It is somewhat appealing - small, lightweight, USM AF, probably pretty sharp, and IS is always convenient - but the price is really quite high for what it is. I know a big part of that is just the exchange rates finally catching up, but still, it's pretty hard to see a US$350 lens replaced in the lineup with a US$850 lens.
> ...



Hmm if you are sticking with APS-C and don't need f/1.4 DOF then why bother with either of these primes? Just keep using your Tamron 17-50 2.8. Unless you got a bum copy that lens should deliver stunning edge to edge sharpness at 24mm. You may as well call it an L lens.

And how is a pocket full of primes more convenient for casual shooting than your Tamron zoom?? The 24 1.4 II and Samyang 24 1.4 alone are both heavier than your Tamron 17-50, I believe.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 15, 2012)

Canon has apparently had video in mind as well as stills for the lenses. They are definitely not high end video lenses, but Canon has been showing them mounted on the C300.


----------

