topic Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM in EF & RF Lenses

Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Choreo — Mon, 11 Feb 2019 07:41:03 GMT

Does anyone know what the original price of this Version-1 lens was?

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

shadowsports — Mon, 11 Feb 2019 15:11:19 GMT

$1349

History:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_24%E2%80%9370mm_lens

Some say the v1 is better than the II, but you are still talking about a 12 yr old lens. Much has changed. The coatings on the optics for one.

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Choreo — Mon, 11 Feb 2019 16:02:25 GMT

Thanks!

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Waddizzle — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 01:29:56 GMT

@Choreo wrote:
Thanks!

That price on Wikipedia is probably incorrect. The article lists two different prices for the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM. One price is probably the list price, while the lower price could be a “sale” price. Remember, bits and pieces of their articles are frequently written by different authors.

Try looking up old reviews on the camera. They typically report the list price.

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Choreo — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 01:35:03 GMT

I own that lens and I bought it new from B&H, but it was probably 10 years ago or longer and I have no records going back that far. Looking at ebay it does not look like it retained much value anyway.

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Waddizzle — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 03:41:12 GMT

@Choreo wrote:
I own that lens and I bought it new from B&H, but it was probably 10 years ago or longer and I have no records going back that far. Looking at ebay it does not look like it retained much value anyway.

I think that might be why they sell the gear on eBay. It is worn out, or not working properly. Reputable resellers are selling used lenses for $600 to $900, depending upon condition and available accessories.

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Tim — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 07:00:49 GMT

Hello Choreo,

The Canon internal web site lists the 2002 estimated street price for this lens to be $1,800.

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ebiggs1 — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:50:04 GMT

There actually were three lenses of this 'type'. I have had all three plus the offerings from the third party companies. Canon first was the Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens. Then the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens, with improvements that included weather sealing and an additional 4mm of wide angle focal length. It ended the 28-70L's reign as king of the general purpose lens. Now there is the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens. It has improved upon the version I lens with notably improved image quality. Actually I thought the 28-70L was sharper then the first 24-70L

The Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens has high quality build with smooth focus and zoom rings. It is the same as the 1st 24-70mm L. The 28-70L and 24-70L both extend to its longest overall length at its widest FL with the 24-70 L II this changed.

This is how I woud rank them.

1>Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens is undisputed King of the 24-70's.

2>Yeah, if you can't have that top lens any of these will do.

3>Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

4>Canon EF 28-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens

5>Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Lens

6>Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art Lens

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ebiggs1 — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 16:02:20 GMT

In use, however, 99% pf your real world photos, you will not be able to tell a difference So what is the big difference? For one thing all you lens manufacturers the zoom ring belongs next to the camera. Not the focus ring! Geeze. Next it build quality and here again Canon wins this hands down with the current 24-70mm f2.8L 2 the best. You may ask why I didn't mention Nikon's entry? That is because it is way over priced and way underwhelming for what you expect from a company like Nikon. All the others do as well at a much more attractive price point.

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

RobertTheFat — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 21:24:49 GMT

@ebiggs1 wrote:
In use, however, 99% pf your real world photos, you will not be able to tell a difference So what is the big difference? For one thing all you lens manufacturers the zoom ring belongs next to the camera. Not the focus ring! Geeze. ...

I don't disagree at all, Ernie. But I can't help pointing out that one of the lenses that you (and I) recommend most heartily, the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM, has the rings arranged the other way.

Re: Original price of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

ebiggs1 — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:07:02 GMT

"...has the rings arranged the other way."

I know, I know! You would almost think some of these lenses are not designed by, or perhaps for, photographers. Another of my all time favs the ef 28-135mm has it backwards. Maybe Canon and the others need to have actual "working" photographers give some input. Still the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens is a great lens. The focus ring is too narrow and way too close to the zoom ring.