Seems official: Canon EF 24-105mm F/4L

[kahheng]

The 28-105 is good enough for a FF, unless you use it to shoot newspapers. :think:
But there's not enough profit margin for Canon compared to a brand new L lens mah.
As for FF consumer DSLRs? Yes it'll happen, at least most of us will live to see that day.

The current 28-105 is simply not good for FF models. I use a full frame Canon. Tried and tested. It's a great mid-quality lens for film though, especially as a travel lens.

The folks who use a 1Ds or 1DsII don't shoot newspapers.......

 

[jeff49er]

Tempting but have to see the price lah. Weight at 670g is wonderful :thumbsup:

 

[sehsuan]

eeeee

another telescopic lens design...

 

[RCheah]

The current 28-105 is simply not good for FF models. I use a full frame Canon. Tried and tested. It's a great mid-quality lens for film though, especially as a travel lens.

The folks who use a 1Ds or 1DsII don't shoot newspapers.......

I knew that somebody was going to respond saying it's not good enough. I guess "good enough" is subjective.
And for people who can afford FF DSLR, of course it's unlikely they'll be using 28-105.

 

[fWord]

Now why the hell did I buy the 70-200mm f/4?:bsmilie:

If this lens does indeed become reality, then it would encompass my photography sweet spot (about 26mm), plus give an added telephoto ability.

 

[mpenza]

hmm.... 670g, 77mm filter. I have a spare UV that could fit would probably get it if the price is not too high. I prefer it without the IS though (so that it'll be cheaper).

 

[kahheng]

I knew that somebody was going to respond saying it's not good enough. I guess "good enough" is subjective.
And for people who can afford FF DSLR, of course they won't be using 28-105. :bsmilie:

And you don't make sense :bsmilie:

 

[kahheng]

I prefer it without the IS though (so that it'll be cheaper).

I concur.

 

[user111]

question: does the barrel extend and protrude outwards like the 24-70L when zoomed??

 

[majere2sg]

question: does the barrel extend and protrude outwards like the 24-70L when zoomed??

It stated Inner focusing, ring USM and new AF algorithms for fast and quiet autofocusing.. so guess not ?

 

[RCheah]

And you don't make sense :bsmilie:

Fine, let's leave it as that. No point continuing to go OT or starting personal attacks.

 

[RCheah]

question: does the barrel extend and protrude outwards like the 24-70L when zoomed??

Yes, from the picture it does seem like so. If it's internal zoom, the overall length of the lens is probably going to be much longer.

At least it's the "normal" way of zooming, shorter when wide, longer when tele.

 

[majere2sg]

Yes, from the picture it does seem like so. If it's internal zoom, the overall length of the lens is probably going to be much longer.

At least it's the "normal" way of zooming, shorter when wide, longer when tele.

Guess I was wrong that Internal Focusing = Internal Zoom.. Wonder what kind of hood it going to use, maybe like 28-135.. was not stated in the website..

 

[hazmee]

It looks similiar to the 17-40L.

 

[DEADMETAL]

Lets make a poll see how many Canongrapher will buy it :think:

 

[EiRiK]

It stated Inner focusing, ring USM and new AF algorithms for fast and quiet autofocusing.. so guess not ?

inner focusing simply means the front element will not rotate when focusing
not neccessarily that the barrel will not extend during zooming.

 

[jeff49er]

Lets make a poll see how many Canongrapher will buy it :think:

If the price is right, I buy

 

[John Tan]

Canon's new budget standard zoom

At least it is a EF and not an EF-S mount. A bit late in coming behind its 17-40mm and 70-200mm F/4 brothers, it would be interesting to see if its image quality lives up to the other F/4L zooms.

Thanks for your link.

 

[John Tan]

too bad it is not f2.8

At least it is faster than f2.8...IS = 3 stops faster ...f4 = f2 right?

 

[Russ]

SGD 1,550-1,650 (extrapolated from Canon Australia website prices)