Why don’t many 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses include image stabilization?
Asked 12/27/2010
3 views
2 answers
0
I haven’t seen Canon or Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses with image stabilization, and I’m wondering why. Is there a technical limitation that makes stabilization difficult in this type of lens, or do manufacturers skip it because the added cost and size aren’t worth it at these focal lengths and aperture?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
10
I offer up the following reason, which is pure conjecture on my part:
- It's not all that effective at those focal lengths and people with FF cameras know this and don't feel they need IS in any case.
FF owners are more likely to have fast primes for the sort of situation when you need IS.
I doubt it's a technical limitation given the existence of the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS. My gut feeling is the plethora of IS lenses designed for crop cameras are partially gimicks, or to placate those who are upgrading from compacts with IS who don't want to lose the feature as they would see it as a "downgrade".
The other option is the manufacturers simply haven't got round to it yet as full frame lens development isn't a priority. Time will tell if this is a the case.
Originally by user1375. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1375
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
It’s probably not a technical limitation. Stabilized fast standard zooms do exist in similar ranges, so the main reasons are more about design tradeoffs and demand.
At 24-70mm, stabilization is generally less critical than it is on telephoto lenses because camera shake is less visible at wider focal lengths. At the 24mm end especially, many photographers can hand-hold at relatively slow shutter speeds without much blur. The f/2.8 aperture also already helps in low light, reducing the need for stabilization compared with slower zooms.
That said, stabilization can still be useful near 70mm, which is why some longer standard zooms such as 24-105mm lenses often include it. For a 24-70mm f/2.8, manufacturers may decide that adding stabilization would increase size, weight, complexity, and cost for a benefit many buyers don’t consider essential.
So the short answer is: not impossible—just historically seen as less necessary in this lens class, especially compared with telephoto or slower zoom designs.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why aren’t 24–70mm zoom lenses made with very fast apertures like f/1.8?
Why did Nikon release slower-aperture Z/S-Line lenses before faster ones?
Why are zoom lenses faster than f/2.8 so rare?
Will 24-70mm primes become less common as 24-70mm f/2.8 zooms improve?
Do you need image stabilization on a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens?