5D3 made this possible

Started May 25, 2012 | Discussions thread
Guy Lerner
Senior MemberPosts: 1,770
Re: uhm
In reply to Tom Melanson, May 26, 2012

I agree - I don't buy the argument that IS would have spoiled the IQ of the 24-70, but then I'm no expert on optical design. It probably would have made it heavier and at least $500 more expensive, so maybe it's a compromise Canon felt it had to make. If the IQ matches the 70-200 II I'm sure all will be forgiven.

Tom Melanson wrote:

Guy Lerner wrote:

As an aside, if you want an example of where IS on a 24-70 would be handy, this is it. Still bummed the new lens won't have it, and hoping the optical quality coupled with the 5D3's high ISO prowess will make up for it.

You and me both! The only saving grace (hopefully) is that Canon felt that the ultimate quality would have been compromised by IS. (Then again, it didn't seem to hurt the 70-200 MkII.)
But, yeah. IS on the 24-70 workhorse would have been sweet!
(See equipment list under 'profile')

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow