Did I miss something ?I keep seeing post stating that the new 24-70 does not have IS.All three of the new lenses have IS. I knew that it was coming because they were redoing their whole L line.I am fine with my 24-70 and 24-105 L lenses 2300 bucks is a lot of money in 2012 but so was 1399 back in 2004 but you have to decide if the lens will set you apart from your competition and make money for you. I came to that conclusion in 2004 and I have never regretted that decision .I was doing more wore back then. If the work picks up again I would not hesitate to purchase the lens because I could sell my lens for a good price and my jobs would pay for the new lens.If I was shooting as much as I was then I could not allow my competition to have the equipment edge on me.My camera equipment ,each piece is a tool to make money for me.
Direct link |
Posted on Feb 7, 2012 at 21:19:01 UTC
as 41st comment
| 2 replies
Ok I recant my first post I miss read the print.It does not have IS .Now I see what I missed.
Did I miss something ?I keep seeing post stating that the new 24-70 does not have IS.All three of the new lenses have IS. I knew that it was coming because they were redoing their whole L line.I am fine with my 24-70 and 24-105 L lenses 2300 bucks is a lot of money in 2012 but so was 1399 back in 2004 but you have to decide if the lens will set you apart from your competition and make money for you. I came to that conclusion in 2004 and I have never regretted that decision .I was doing more wore back then. If the work picks up again I would not hesitate to purchase the lens because I could sell my lens for a good price and my jobs would pay for the new lens.If I was shooting as much as I was then I could not allow my competition to have the equipment edge on me.My camera equipment ,each piece is a tool to make money for me.