Does anyone know of any rumors of this lens?, I dont want to buy the 24-105mm only for the new version to be released.
Also rumors of a 6d mark II?
Does anyone know of any rumors of this lens?, I dont want to buy the 24-105mm only for the new version to be released.
Also rumors of a 6d mark II?
I've never heard of any rumors regarding an update to the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM.
Keep in mind, even if an update were released, it doesn't make the original model useless. The EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM is an extremely useful general purpose lens. It's a lens I use surprisingly often even though I have many other lenses to choose from. And considering its grey market price (a little more than half of MSRP), it's a real bargain.
I think the discounted pricing reflects that the 24-70 f4 is really a decent lens, when matched w/ a 70-200 f4 puts together a much greater range and superior optics, as well as, Sigma brought one (sporadically) to the market.
24-105 if very useful range and I have many shots w/ it. lately though I have been 16-35 as my most often "normal" lens.
Having said all of this For $650 I do think it is a very good lens value
If you see me with a wrench, call 911
I have my doubts that you will see a replacement for it, at least anytime soon.
The 6D II, will soon be the 5D III. Just as the 6D replaced the 5D II once the 5D III was released.
Your best bet is to watch the price of the 5D III fall and grab one when they get cheap enough.
I want a replacement to the 24-105mm f4 because I dont like the image quality of 24mm on full frame.
I want a 6d mark II is because the 6D dont have on demand lcd graphics in the view finder and 97% view finder coverage, while the nikon d600 have 100% view finder coverage plus on demand lcd graphics for the same price.
I dont know yet which full frame I want to buy yet, though I know what I want since I have the canon 7D.
Too bad the 5DS is an expensive camera, that would be great for detailed landscapes pictures!
By the way, I used the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM paired with a 5D III for a photobooth at an honors banquet I shot this past weekend. The long focal range made it really easy to frame various groups from 1 - 9 people. The setup was definitely a hit at the event and the images turned out great.
For such a great lens, it sure doesn't get a lot of love. Anymore, anyway. Granted, it's got loads of distortion at 24. So does my 24-70/2.8L II. CA? Yes, that's Canon feature it seems. It's also a bit soft, at least according to my Reikan FoCal software tests when compared to my other lenses.Originally Posted by Sean Setters
However, more than once I've used this lens when also shooting with the 24-70, and been fooled when looking over my shots in Lightroom.
Honestly, if I've got to look at the EXIF data out of the corner of my eye - because everybody knows which lens is obviously better! - then I'm not fooling anybody including myself. Especially when I'm pixel peeping! And that's what I've got to do to see the difference. Ok, there's other telling factors such as a slight color difference from the newer Canon lenses (I'd guess something to do with the coatings), and a lack of micro contrast and less flare resistance.
This is why I've kept this lens. You can't beat the focal range. It's got IS. It's fairly small, light and compact. Most importantly it's got the red ring, which gives a handicap photo improvement factor of about a 5-7%. It's documented! And as Sean mentioned, for the nearly giveaway price in kit form it's really a no brainer. This is my "throw it on the camera when running out the door" lens. If I don't know what I'm going to run across it fits the bill most all of the time. Not once have I come back with a full card and said "boy, I wish I had my 24-70" instead.
If Canon decided to update the lens, they'd really have to outdo themselves. Their lenses have gone from some of the best to the best IMO. With the new 5Ds cameras it makes sense why they've upped their game since 2010. A new 24-105 will be a lot more expensive, I'd guess that $1600 would be about right, so probably more knowing Canon! And, it would be worth it.
Of course, there's the Sigma 24-105. A spectacular lens, and a moose. For $900 it's certainly the way I'd go if the Canon were the same price. (I'm a big Sigma fan). But with the low prices I'm seeing posted for the EF 24-105/4 L IS from time to time, I think it's a bargain and highly recommended.
Edon, as far as the 6D, I think laying hands on one is the way to go before making a leap. I've never let "on paper" specs sway my decision, although I admit it can be hard sometimes! When it first came out - I nearly went back to Nikon. The AF looked terrible. I couldn't believe they would do this! Since I wanted to move to full frame, the time was perfect to switch back. However, after shooting with Nikon for about 25 years, well I gave up on them for more than one reason. This includes owning a service bureau/photo studio (I know what you're thinking and no, I hired people that could actually take pictures!). I've always admired Nikkor optics, but Canon has a wider range at better price points. That's one reason I went with Canon when I started with digital. (Although I did pick up an Elan II 35mm film camera when autofocus was becoming viable just to see what the hubbub was)
And now, Canon is making the best modern lenses out there. Period. I am so glad I didn't get the D600 I can't tell you. I like things that just work. Plus, Canon came out with their RT flash system. Suddenly, they've got an upper hand where Nikon used to have it. Canon may be very conservative when it comes to specifications and "cutting edge" performance, but I'm glad to be invested in this system, and more so in the past month! All of this stuff is going to trickle down. I have a feeling there's some more tricks up their sleeve as well. So I'll deal with a stone-age sensor and a tiny hole to look through.
There will be a 6D MkII, probably not too far off. But, expect it to be expensive. Who knows what sort of features or specs it will have. I'd pick up a 6D again at the prices I'm seeing in a heartbeat. Of course, I always like to buy my stuff halfway through its lifespan or later. Kinks are worked out and prices are lo-o-o-w.
Just my humble 2¢
I was considering the 6D and I can get it at $1,200US on ebay, I also conisidered the Sigma 24-105mm f4 and the differences in image quality based on Brian's image comparisons on full frame, is the Sigma has better 24mm while canon has better 105mm, though its likely I would go with canon, which from Brian's reviews and comparisons for me is a better lens, especially with weather sealing.
If I go with a 5D Mark III, it would be for business or I could spare the money, $2,200US on ebay.
Right now I have no money to buy anything full frame, I plan to buy the Canon 600ex for my Canon 7D, and I have 2 lenses, 15-85mm and 40mm pancake, both great lenses.
By the time I save money maybe the 6D Mark II and a EF 24-105mm f4L IS II USM would be announced.
If that happens and both of them improves how I want them to improve, I would save the extra for them.
The bad thing is though, I have to pay an additional 38% VAT+DUTY for all camera gear to import to my country Trinidad and Tobago, unless I could get my bro in the USA to bring them in.
Anthony you right though, Canon does make the best lenses out there, and what I see are the best ergonomical DSLR cameras, best noise reduction and white balance.
In the mean time I buy more gear for my 7D and I plan on buying the cheap EFS 55-250mm, if I like that focal length for my Canon 7D I would like the EF 100-400mm IS II lens for full frame.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote