24-70 / 4L IS II

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.

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$

Assuming that Sigma is going to make a 24-70/2.8 OS in the sub 1500$ region where would an updated 24-70/4 IS slot in? Keep in mind that the Tamron is not that far of the 24-70/2.8 II optically.

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$

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?

The premise of this thread is closer to the cost of the current 24-70 / 4L IS than to the 24-70 / 2.8L II.

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.

And, of course, Canon still refuses to implement IBIS.

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$

Assuming that Sigma is going to make a 24-70/2.8 OS in the sub 1500$ region...

Sigma has said they have no such plans in the near future (same goes for a 70-200 / 2.8A OS).

...where would an updated 24-70/4 IS slot in? Keep in mind that the Tamron is not that far of the 24-70/2.8 II optically.

And yet, the Sigma 35 / 1.4A is "not that far off" the 35 / 1.4L II optically, yet how many will opt for the 35 / 1.4L II over the 35 / 1.4A despite the Canon lens being twice the cost of the Sigma lens?