Why no 24-70 IS yet?

[c jensen]

<p>I'm baffled at why Canon doesn't put this lens out. Seems like, anecdotally of course, the non-IS version is one of the most popular L lenses. I've seen plenty of comments on this forum of owners of that lens saying they will upgrade if the IS version ever comes out. Easy money for Canon I would think.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>The longer they wait, the more people will buy the non-IS version, then even more people will upgrade when they finally release the IS version!</p>

<p>It's not like you have much a a choice if you want a high quality fast wide to normal zoom that covers full frame for an EOS DSLR. If the non-IS version is selling well, why shoot yourself in the foot by bringing out an IS version?</p>

<p>If people really want IS there's the 24-105/5L IS so Canon have the market covered. Then when the 24-70/2.8L IS finally comes out they'll have some of those people "upgrading" as well!</p>

[steven_f1]

<p>According to <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com">www.canonrumors.com</a> Canon is working on it. Possibly for release early next year. However they are sometimes wrong.</p>

[c jensen]

<p>Bob - yep I'm one of those with the 24-105 who will upgrade if they ever release it. I'd sure like the 2.8.</p>

[jeffrey_synn]

<p>Eh, Canon's been "working on it" every year for years according to rumors. Eventually, Canon will do it and everyone will say "AHA I told you so!" despite the fact that the same "this year" prediction has been going on since at least 2006. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.</p>

<p>They'll release one when sales of the current 24-70 slows to a crawl or a year or three after Nikon releases one first.</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>With both a 24-70 and a 24-105 IS on hand, I'm not sure what I'd do if a 24-70 came about. Maybe nothing, too many dang lens already, LOL. I'd think about it though...</p>

[mars c]

<p>One of the reason I suspect is that, The Nikon version dont have IS either.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>Most rumors eventually come true. Like the fabled EF 400/5.6L IS. One of these days.....</p>

<p>I'm sure Canon is working on a lot of things that won't see the light of day until market conditions are right.</p>

<p>As someone else said, the best way to get Canon to release a 24-70/2.8 IS is to get Nikon to release a 24-70/2.8 VR. A Sigma 24-70/2.8 OS and Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC would probably also shorten the development time!</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>I think this lens is due eventually. It makes sense but who knows when it will happen. I have the 24-105 and I won't make the switch as I'm happy with my current setup.</p>

<p>Like Bob, it's the 400mm f5.6L IS that I'm waiting for. I have the 300mm f4 which will be sold instantly as soon as the 400 comes out.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>I wish they would make it so I could pick up a cheap non is version. </p>

[bobatkins]

<blockquote>

<p>I wish they would make it so I could pick up a cheap non is version.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What is "it"?</p>

<p>You can already pick up a "cheap" non-IS 24-70/2.8L and 400/5.6L, where "cheap" means it's probably at least $500 less expensive than the IS version will be (if and when it appears).</p>

<p>I don't think any lens launched with IS will also be introduced without IS. The will be no cheap non-IS version of the 24-105/4L for example. For that you're looking at something like the 24-85/3.5-5.6 or the 28-135/3.5-5.6 as the closest options.</p>

 

[sam_zaydel1]

<p>I would think that with shorter lenses benefits of IS become less pronounced, and, this is just my guess, but I believe Canon is, to a degree, concerned about the sales of a short IS lens versus the same lens in a non-IS form. It all comes down to money. After all, most of their IS offerings are at the longer focal length...</p>

[tdigi]

<p>Bob I should have said used. Many will be dump their non IS versions to get the IS. IS is nice but I could easily get by without it. I guess if they did find a way to make the 24-70 smaller and or lighter I would jump on it.</p>

[mark_ethridge]

<p>I agree with Tommy. I already have the 24-105 so I'd be spending a lot just to get an extra stop. If I could get it cheaper though...</p>

[matthias_meixner2]

<p>Probably there is not enough room for the IS element in the current design, and creating a totally new design takes its time.</p>

[diego_di_michele]

<p>I have both 24-105L and 24-70L and I would sure trade those for a 24-70 f/2.8 IS. The IS is worth for me for video shooting on my 5D.</p>

[mattb1]

<p>I agree with a lot here, I'd get the IS version. And I'm not buying the non-IS used or new. Mostly for the reason Diego said, for video. It realy helps the hand held video and I hope to do a lot more video clips and don't want a lens that will be bad for video. If I only did regular photography then IS wouldn't matter much to me.</p>

[kenny_c]

<p>With all the new cameras hitting higher ISOs, who needs IS? </p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>As Kenny says - why do we need IS on the 24-70 F2.8. I am perfectly happy with mine as it is - especially now I am shooting digital. I find IS useful on the 300 F2.8 - I can handhold the EOS 300 F2.8 IS easily whereas my old (Film) FD 300 F2.8 needs a bright day and care for handheld use. The 24-70 F2.8 works in low light (with a 5DII at ISO 1600 1/60 and F2.8 equates to EV 5). The main advantage of IS on the 24-70 appears to be for static subjects in low light - situations where a tripod is a better altenative as you can use MLU and a remote release which IS does not allow. I understand the video point but for still images I am interested to understand the need for IS on this lens. My 24-105 had IS but the 24-70 that replaced it does not and I cannot say that I miss it.</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>With both lens on hand, I can see a big difference shooting borderline hand holdable shots. Even with the extra stop the 24-70 results are often motion blurred compared to the 24-105.</p>

[peter_j2]

<p>If Canon releases a 24-70/2.8 IS, then they may as well upgrade and release the following with IS: 24/2.8 and 28/2.8. </p>

<p> </p>

[mark from thailand]

<p>Bob: "As someone else said, the best way to get Canon to release a 24-70/2.8 IS is to get Nikon to release a 24-70/2.8 VR. A Sigma 24-70/2.8 OS and Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC would probably also shorten the development time!"</p>

<p>As our expert on the subject, are you saying Canon tend to wait to follow, rather than lead with innovation?</p>

[alemar_calambro]

<p>Well in canon rumors it seems they will come out with it. I do not know if it is a credible source however some of the things the site do post are real and are usually the first to report on new canon things. If they do come out with it I for one will be the first in line for the glass and it will replace my 24-105 glass. One other thing I also hope for canon to make is a 10-24 or a 10-30 wide angle glass. </p>