Why not? It will probably have better optics and better IS. One of the great things about Canon's lens lineup is the variety you have with the 70-200's. You have 2 f/4 versions and 2 f/2.8 versions both IS and Non-IS. They are all at different price points. So you can buy what you can afford. If they continue to sell the 24-105, you now have 3 options. the 24-105 as the cheapest, the 24-70 f/4 IS in the middle, and the 24-70 f/2.8 II at the high end.
I'm sure some of those are in the works as well. But, I can understand why they focus more on the 24-70 as it is a range with much more demand for it and they would be able to sell a lot more of them and make better profits. I know a lot of people are still waiting for the new 200-400 but most consumers probably won't be able to afford it.
Honestly I really don't understand Canon's new strategy in increasing prices on their new products. The new 24-70 F4 is pricy, let's be fair. I can buy a used 24-70 f2.8 for just a bit less. Even the new 35mm is the same, I would pay a bit more for the L version. Can someone please explain or speculate how the new lenses justify its pricesl
I thought the idea of a 24-70 f4 IS was a good idea. Small, light, probably better IQ than the 24-105 so it would be the next kit lens in FFs. The idea of making the 24-70 line sort of like the 70-200 line sounded like a good idea....At least they aren't giving up the 24-70 spot to 3rd party makers since the 24-70i is discontinued and the 24-70ii is >$2000 and Canon wouldn't have anything price wise to compete..
Then I saw the price.... ouch. So it went from "cool idea" to "What? Huh? How? Why?".