24-70 2.8 IS yes or no

[Sinh Nhut Nguyen]

weight will not be a problem, price will be (at least for some)


24-70 f/2.8L IS, why not? It compliments the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS very well.

[Fast Glass]

They don't have to discontinue the 24-70mm, Canon could have two versions of thislenslike the the 70-200's line-up. That way there is more variety for people to choose from. One for those that can't afford the new IS version or don't need ISand the otherthat want the best.


John.

[Dave Johnston]

but a new IS version would maybe mean a price drop of the non IS making it affordable for me

Although I agree this would be fantastic. I doubt having IS added would mean a price drop of the existing 24-70. If anything I would see the older model staying at the same price and the new model being in a different, and much higher,price category altogether.


... but I suppose we can dream... cant we? [:P]

[Rodger]

Haha then dream I will!

[Keith B]

To me the 24-70 is the best value L lens. It is my most used lens by far and the least expensive L lens in my kit.

[Benjamin]

I personally see no reason for it but what do you think




Positives
IS
Low light
Redesigned
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

I owned this lens for 2 years. In terms of improvement in optics, I would wish Canon to make this lens more usable wide open. Wide open it is a little bit soft, unlike the Nikon one...


IS will certainly be a plus. I feel reluctant to shoot with this lens at speeds lower than 1/15 at wide angle and 1/40 at long end. With IS i would imagine that I can at least half this speed with ease.

[twistedphrame]

For me, I'm not sure how much IS would help really.


I can shoot fairly reliably from 1/10-1/40 or so through the range with a good keep percentage. If i'm hiking or going out specifically for shooting I've got my tripod and I don't mind taking the time to set it up (stills and things).





I just don't see the little bit more hand-hold-ability that IS would allow being worth the $500 more or however much it would be.