Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS “Unicorn” Lens in the Works?

Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L IS Rumors

For the better part of a decade, there have been rumors and wishes spread around the interwebs for a 24-70mm f/2.8 IS lens to come about from Canon. Recently, we’ve seen Tamron introduce such a lens that is available for Canon DSLRs. Despite its positive reception, it’s still not a Canon L lens.

A lot of Canon shooters figured all hope was lost when Canon introduced the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS lens earlier this Fall. For many, this was not the lens they were hoping for and the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens with Image Stabilization seemed like a pipe dream even more than before.

However, new rumors of the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS lens point to an actual announcement in the next 18 months – most likely around the end of next year. Canon Rumors reports that two sources have confirmed the lens’ existence and that it really will make it to market.

Is theĀ EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS lens the one you’ve been waiting for? What are you willing to pay for it? (BTW, my guess would be that it retails just south of $3k given the $2300 retail of the current non-IS version.)



  1. says

    Now *that* is the lens I’ve been waiting for!

    Time to start saving. Of course, by the time it comes out, will mirrorless cameras be more of an option?

    I’ll just have to wait and see.

  2. Scott says

    Sorry, I don’t get it.
    It’s not wide enough for APS-C, and not long enough for full frame.
    Why would anybody be excited about this?

  3. Jurek Jerry says

    Why do these lenses cost so much? Are they made from platinum? I am just glad that I have an APS-C camera. I have a choice in how much I want to spend. My 60D did not cost as much as some lenses do. H A P P Y H O L I D A Y S 2 0 1 2 / 2 0 1 3 !

  4. Radek says

    I guess wedding photographers who have to shoot in dark churches might want it. I’m not interested. Might consider it if price is below $1000, but it’s not gonna be a case.
    I just can’t understand why Canon is multiplying those short zooms, there will be 4 almost identical lenses now.
    I am still praying they would finally announce affordable long zoom, say 100-400 Mk II, or 200-400 or even 300-500. Yes I know, they are making that 200-400 or something with build in teleconverter, but only few lucky guys in the world actually seen it, plus price is gonna be astronomical so we might actually say there is no such lens. Come on Canon. Can you make something like Sigma makes for long time already for price that would not make serious amatours faint?

  5. says

    the lens would fit between the 16-35 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8. However, I would only want to spend at most $2300. Less would be really nice, even $2000 is a lot. Take the 24-70 f2.8 w/o the IS and price it at half what it is currently selling for.

    I would love to stay with Canon all the way, however, I am getting ready to retire. Canon can make their money by selling at a high cost and thus needing fewer items or sell at less cost and sell a ton of items. Lower cost would blanket the world with Canon products.

    I checked the cost of the Tamron lens – $1300 – if I can’t see a difference why spend more money. I guess I will have to go with Tamron. Besides, I do not want to wait until the end of the year.

  6. Scott Kasden says

    My 24-105 covers it and it is already paid for! I had the f4L version and wasn’t that in love with it,

  7. AJ says

    Nopes, I am not a wedding photographer and for portraits I am happy with it as I never go without my strobes …. Rather if I save that much I will add more to buy 70-200 f/2.8 L IS ….