New lenses from Canon

[Donald]

Have the Canon users noticed the annoucement of three new lenses. No mention of the 24-70 II having IS.

The EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM zoom is an update to the EF 24-70mm f2.8L USM, while the EF 24mm f2.8 IS USM and EF 28mm f2.8 IS USM are the world’s first (according to Canon research as of February 2012) wide-angle prime lenses to feature optical Image Stabilizer (IS) technology.

[rpcrowe]

This news is kind of diasppointing. I had expected a 24-70mm f/2.8L IS lens. That would have been great news for the full frame shooters of this world. Of course, I am perfectly happy with my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS for my 1.6x cameras. Some folks might think that IS capability in a lens of this focal length is not important and that it is just icing on the cake. However I have found that the IS capablity makes my 17-55mm f/2.8 lens a very viable low light glass...

I am equally disappointed that the 24mm and 28mm lenses introduced have only a lukewarm f/2.8 aperture. If Canon had introduced them as a 24mm or 28mm; f/1.8 or f/1.4 IS lens, they would be super low light lenses. As such, however, my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens covers both these focal lengths and has an f/2.8 aperture and IS capability. Of course, a full frame shooter could not use the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens That lens is just one of the reasons I remained withthe 1.6x format...

Here I am talking like I was in the market for a new lens. I am not. The only lens I would love (but it is far to pricey for my slim wallet) is the 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4x lens. Now that is a quantum leap forward, not just a ho-hum upgrade like the 24-70L ii and 24mm and 28mm f/2.8 IS lenses!

OTOH, I saw the writing on the wall last fall and sold my 24-70L before its replacement came out and its used prices dipped. I bought my 24-70L right after the 24-105mm f/4L IS lens came out. Lots of photographers dumped their old faithful 24-70L lenses in favor of the new kid on the block. The price of the 24-70L on the used market took a momentary dip because of supply and demand. I actually bought my 24-70L low and sold it while the prices were still decently high. I used mine for a couple of years and made a decent profit when I sold it (at a good price for the buyer also) to a member of my camera club who shoots full frame only.

[Colin Southern]

Have the Canon users noticed the annoucement of three new lenses. No mention of the 24-70 II having IS.

The EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM zoom is an update to the EF 24-70mm f2.8L USM, while the EF 24mm f2.8 IS USM and EF 28mm f2.8 IS USM are the world’s first (according to Canon research as of February 2012) wide-angle prime lenses to feature optical Image Stabilizer (IS) technology.

Thanks Donald - I did miss this one. Looks like no IS is correct on the EF24-70mm F2.8L USM II.

[Donald]

Hopefully there may be a reduction in the price of the original version or there may be some good ones come on to the second hand market.

EOS Magazine has put out a briefing sheet

[Donald]

B & H have got the new 24-70 up on pre-order -$2,299.00

Wex Photographic in the UK have it at £2299.00

???????????????? The Pound/Dollar exchange rate hasn't gone to 1:1 so far as I'm aware.

[rpcrowe]

Donald, I suspect that the equivalency in prices might have a great deal to do with the U.K. import taxes. I have noticed that a lot of photo gear seems to have a very close relationship to the price in dollars here in the USA and the price in pounds in the U.K., despite the fact that 1 US dollar = 0.6294 pounds sterling or to say the same thing in a different way; 1 British pound sterling = 1.5889 US dollars.

I have never, however, seen the number in a U.S price in dollars exactly equal to the number in a British pound sterling price. Either this was a unique coincidence or a typo.

The lens is still pretty darned expensive no matter whose currency is being used to buy it. I bought my used 24-70L for $850 USD several years ago and sold it for $950 last fall.

[Colin Southern]

The B&H Price sounds about right. Either it's a typo, or Wex are being a little optimistic / overly-agressive in their pricing! Although having said that, some dealers do try to take advantage of the fact that there's usually a supply shortage initially.

[Colin Southern]

The lens is still pretty darned expensive no matter whose currency is being used to buy it. I bought my used 24-70L for $850 USD several years ago and sold it for $950 last fall.

It's about normal for an L-Zoom. I think the street price of the old model was around $2200 (NZD) (Prob $1800 USD at a guess) - old model has been slowly falling in price over the past few years.

Don't know if I'll upgrade or not - I don't use the 24-70 all that much, and when I do, it still produces tack sharp results.

[herbert]

The 24-70 looks like a revolution in terms of sharpness. The MTF charts appear to indicate that it is as sharp wide open in the centre as the old version was at f8, at the edge it is as sharp at f2.8 as the old lens was in the centre. The charts show that it should be sharper than the stunning 70-200 f2.8 mark II at 70mm wide open.

Factoring in the lack of IS and new 15% lighter weight the lens appears to be designed to shoot things that are moving in low light (weddings, event photography). In this case you will want at least 1/60 or 1/125 shutter speed so IS is of less benefit. Stabilisation is great. However Canon must have thought the compromise in weight, image quality or cost not worth it.

Combined with the new ISO capabilities of the 1Dx you have a statement from Canon on who they think their most important market is for their current technology. If they think they will make the most money doing this then too bad for those who want something different.

I certainly want one. I certainly don't want to pay for one.

I can't figure out a use for the small IS primes though. Perhaps a great low profile lens for street photography. Red rings around big lenses attract attention. Alternatively if they produce good results when stopped down they could be for landscape photographers who are out without their tripod.

The small primes replace some of the oldest lenses in their range (although the 24mm is a new focal length for that aperture [ed: this is incorrect, thanks to WW for pointing this out]). Perhaps we can expect some other primes to be refreshed over the next few years. There may be something coming for everyone to be pleased.

Alex

[Colin Southern]

Hi Alex,

I wonder if "the plan" is more to entice new buyers, or more to persuade existing users to upgrade? In real world terms, "it's sharper" sums it up in just 2 words, but at the end of the day, of what benefit is the additional sharpness to 98% of photographers when (a) correct sharpening makes a far bigger difference, (most photographers don't sharpen correctly as it is), and (b) most photographers already throw away 95% of an images data when down-sampling for online display, and / or (c) have data that's unresolveable by the human eye in small to medium sized prints. Or put another way, will it make any difference to the quality of photos being created by 98% of users when compared to the existing lens -- IMO I'd have to say "probably not".

[William W]

Factoring in the lack of IS and new 15% lighter weight the lens appears to be designed to shoot things that are moving in low light (weddings, event photography). In this case you will want at least 1/60 or 1/125 shutter speed so IS is of less benefit. Stabilisation is great. However Canon must have thought the compromise in weight, image quality or cost not worth it.

I concur with your guesswork.

The new (lighter weight) 24 to 70 is a bull’s eye for the Photojournalism / Available Light / Events Markets. Also add to this the disgruntlement with the AF on the existing 24 to 70, from many working Events Professionals.
The 24 105 IS satisfies the IS requirements, for the moment.

***

I can't figure out a use for the small IS primes though. Perhaps a great low profile lens for street photography. Red rings around big lenses attract attention. Alternatively if they produce good results when stopped down they could be for landscape photographers who are out without their tripod.

I think you are a little off the mark with option 1, the 35/2 is innocuous enough and the 24/2.8 and 28/1.8 are quite acceptable if you don’t want a red ring- but think the second idea certainly is along the correct line of thinking . . .

A Wide Angle lens with IS will sublime for shots where a tripod is not allowed and Flash will not assist - and that is one (boutique) area where both the EF-S 17 to 55/ 2.8IS and the 24 to 104/4 IS get a truck load of good press from users, with the travel bug.

I expect Canon know that a small, inconspicuous, wide lens, with IS, will be marvellous for those who seek out Churches and Museums, etc and it will still be a good lens, for other stuff too.

It occurs to me the new 24IS and the 28IS will be in the relationship logic to existing lenses as my mention of the 24-70 and the 24 105IS, above.

We will have the very fast 24/1.4 and the 35/1.4 and we will have the slower 24/2.8 IS and slower 28/2.8IS.

There is a clear parallel to the relationships of these three pairs of lenses:
24 to 70/2.8 MkII :: 24 to 105/4 IS ≡ 24/1.4 :: 24/2.8IS ≡ 35/1.4 :: 28/2.8IS

***

The small primes replace some of the oldest lenses in their range (although the 24mm is a new focal length for that aperture). Perhaps we can expect some other primes to be refreshed over the next few years. There may be something coming for everyone to be pleased.

Aside: - there is an EF24F/2.8 lens available, it has been around for a long time.


WW

[Splatsworth]

I really don't understand why they have put IS on the 2 primes yet not bothered to put it on the zoom, doesn't make any sense to me although they are all nice lenses

[herbert]

Hi Colin,

It is true that a good sharpening workflow can work wonders. However the new lens really is a lot sharper according to the MTF charts. It will be a much better place to start your sharpening workflow.

One 'problem' with super sharp wide aperture lenses is that they really point out when your technique is off. This can get depressing when you are having a bad day. Maybe that is a reason to downgrade.

The plan to entice new buyers is probably always the top strategy. The fight against Nikon and the rest will continue. This strategy drives the multitude of 'cheap' DSLR bodies as entry points for photography. Once gear acquisition syndrome takes over you have too many lenses and investment to ever switch. It is then that the trickle of upgrades that keep you happy.

Alex

[rpcrowe]

I certainly agree that, "A Wide Angle lens with IS will sublime for shots where a tripod is not allowed and Flash will not assist - and that is one (boutique) area where both the EF-S 17 to 55/ 2.8IS and the 24 to 104/4 IS get a truck load of good press from users, with the travel bug."

However, IMO, a 24mm or 28mm f/1.8 or even better, f/1.4, lens with IS would be superior for this type of useage AND a 24-70mm f/2.8L lens would beat the pants off the primes for this type of shooting bcause in museums you cannot often choose exactly from where you want to shoot. The zoom allows you to crop in the camera when you cannot foot-zoom. A 24-70mm f/2.8L IS lens on a full frame camera would also be better for low light shooting than the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens on a 1.6x camera because of the higher ISO capability of the full frame cameras.

Regarding red rings attracting attention... Perhaps they might from other photographers but, I will bet that the average non-photographer on the street doesn't have the foggiest idea of the significance of red rings.

Slightly different subject along the same line. We often hear that the "white" Canon "L" glass attracts attention.

I don't really think that all "white" lenses attract that much attention. I always shoot "adoption" pictures when a new family comes to pick up the rescue dog that they have adopted. I will usually shoot these pictures with whatever lens is on my camera at the time. I get more comments about my camera gear when my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS lens + lens hood is used than when my 70-200mm f/4L IS + round screw-in hood is used. People see the large hood and that big 77mm "eye" looking at them and are impressed. The 70-200mm f/4L IS lens with the smaller screw-in hood and smaller, 67mm, front element doesn't seem to impress people as much! At least I don't get that many comments about my camera/lens when I shoot with the 70-200L...

[Colin Southern]

I'm wondering if there is some technical reason(s) as to why Canon can't add IS to fast wide-angle glass? They may not see it as being beneficial (from a technical perspective) but you'd think that these days they'd almost do it for a "placebo effect" if for no other reason.

[William W]

I'm wondering if there is some technical reason(s) as to why Canon can't add IS to fast wide-angle glass?

The 24L and 35L do have large Dia. glass in a relatively short barrel length, maybe this relationship is a factor.

WW

[herbert]

I'm wondering if there is some technical reason(s) as to why Canon can't add IS to fast wide-angle glass?

I have been wondering about this so I tracked down the lens diagrams for the various lenses. If you look at the following links for the wide aperture primes there does not appear to be a lot of room for the IS unit:

14mm f2.8
24mm f1.4
35mm f1.4
16-35 f2.8

Not much room for any extras in these (although perhaps the 16-35 does have some space).

Compare that to the wide angle EF-S lenses with an IS unit:

17-55 f2.8 IS
15-85mm f3.5-5.6 IS (labelled IS unit)

Or the recently replaced EF lens that now features IS:

28mm f2.8

But the old 24mm f2.8 does not have room for much at all:

24mm f2.8

They must have redesigned this quite a bit to get an IS unit inside.

Now here is the interesting one. There appears to be room in this lens for an IS unit:

24-70 f2.8

For comparison here is how the IS unit looks in the 24-105 and 70-200:
24-105 f4 IS
70-200mm f2.8 IS (labelled IS unit)
70-200mm f4 IS

So there was room in the old 24-70 for an IS unit. We know it is possible because Tamron recently announced a stabilised 24-70mm f2.8 lens. Also there were rumours of a 24-70mm IS prototype in use. This has not (yet) made it to production. I imagine that Canon will only do so if and when Nikon bring out such a lens. Perhaps the super improvement in IQ for the new 24-70 came at the cost of filling up the lens with glass. We will have to wait for the lens diagram to find out.

Alex

[Dave Humphries]

It occurs to me there may well be a technical/engineering/commercial reason why all IS lenses seem to be fitted in lenses no faster than f/2.8. Presumably, to fit one in to a faster lens, would require larger diameter elements in the IS unit, that means more weight for the IS motors to shift about, which means larger motors and that means a whole new production line to make them.

[PBelarge]

I shoot the current 24-70 a lot, did I happen to say "a lot".

A lot of landscape/architectural shooters use this lens and they use it on a tripod.
Here are the reasons I think that IS was not installed on the new version.
1. $$$, it would obviously cost an arm and a leg, instead of just the arm it now costs.
2. Additional weight
3. As I mentioned, a lot of people do not need the IS due to the nature of how they shoot it.
4. With today's cameras (and I think Canon is thinking of tomorrow's cameras) the IS is not as critical for the speed as the ISO capabilities have increased so much.

Also I read the mention of the slow aperture of the other two lens. The wide angle lenses are not shot at the fast speeds, as the depth of field is too shallow for most applications.

These are just a couple of my thoughts, please do not take it as I am telling you I know why Canon did this.

[William W]

I have been wondering about this so I tracked down the lens diagrams for the various lenses. . . etc

Thank you. Very interesting. Bookmarked.

WW