DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

24-70 / 4L IS II

Started Oct 15, 2015 | Polls thread
J A C S
J A C S Forum Pro • Posts: 20,544
Re: Surprisingly poor performance...

halfwaythere wrote:

J A C S wrote:

I voted "yes" and I see that so far, the majority voted that way. I would gladly trade the extra reach of the 24-105 for a more efficient IS with the IQ of the 16-35/4, for example, and better 24mm. The current one does have better 24mm and IS but disappoints overall.

I'm sure nobody would mind a better lens overall but at what cost? I think Canon knows there's no viable market for an expensive 24-70/4 IS. There may be a market for a 24-70/2.8 IS if the optical quality is not compromised by the addition of IS.

I am not sure that making a better lens is more expensive. The 16-35/4 is not so expensive, for example.

Lets look at the 24-70 picture right now:

Canon 24-70/2.8 II - 1800$

Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC - 1100$

Canon 24-70/4 IS - 900$

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow