p.5 #4 · Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II tested by Roger Cicala
Fred Miranda wrote:
Roger, how did the 24-70 II compared to the 24 TS-E II in the corners? It's hard to think that the zoom would have higher resolution.
Fred, it was the 24-70 II was sharper in the center and central 1/2, about dead even outside of that.
With Imatest we're measuring about 90% of the way to the corner, but not the absolute corner, though. I'm like everyone else, waiting for a good reviewer to shoot some infinity landscapes or such to tell about the absolute corners.
p.5 #6 · Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II tested by Roger Cicala
Food for thought: Canon currently has some EXTREMELY high resolution sensors in development that are not practical in today's market. Since its not feasible to use 100+ MP cameras right now, might as well revamp the lens lineup to be prepared when it is feasible down the road. That's why the push is on to update the lenses.
If you think you're going to sit on your old lenses forever you might not be real happy with them in a few years.
p.5 #7 · Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II tested by Roger Cicala
out of curiosity..and not to be difficult...didnt the gentleman from lensrentals also say the tamron 24-70 is sharper and a better lens than the canon 24-70 v1?It is one of the reasons I bought a tamron!
p.5 #14 · Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II tested by Roger Cicala
Pixel1970 wrote:
Food for thought: Canon currently has some EXTREMELY high resolution sensors in development that are not practical in today's market. Since its not feasible to use 100+ MP cameras right now, might as well revamp the lens lineup to be prepared when it is feasible down the road. That's why the push is on to update the lenses.
If you think you're going to sit on your old lenses forever you might not be real happy with them in a few years.
This update was not designed for potential 100MP sensors. It's a pro's work horse lens and was in need of an update irrespective of what is or is not coming down the track IMO.
p.5 #16 · Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II tested by Roger Cicala
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Yeah, but the OZ dollar has sky-rocketed since 2003 and the US plummeted.
Heck in 2005 the Canon 600 f/4L IS had an RRP of $21000 in Australia, I nearly fainted when I saw the prices of the superteles. 300 was $10K
That is absolutely correct and the pricing was just silly as we can purchase gear from USA, Pay freight, GST and sundry taxes and still have a very much cheaper product. I think I saved $6000 on my 600mm.
That said I do not purchase my gear from USA anymore as in some cases we are cheaper plus I need to support my local dealer and the Australian economy as well
p.5 #17 · Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II tested by Roger Cicala
pcho wrote:
That is absolutely correct and the pricing was just silly as we can purchase gear from USA, Pay freight, GST and sundry taxes and still have a very much cheaper product. I think I saved $6000 on my 600mm.
That said I do not purchase my gear from USA anymore as in some cases we are cheaper plus I need to support my local dealer and the Australian economy as well
Perry
I haven't bought a new item from US for a few years now, not just because I work for Canon, but because I can get them on ebay from the powersellers or grey cheaper than US prices. Once the US prices were so much lower it wasn't funny. I could fly to the US, buy the lens, have a 2 week holiday, fly back and save several thousand dollars. No longer the case at all.
p.5 #19 · Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II tested by Roger Cicala
My significant other just showed up with a B&H box and I had no idea what it was until I opened it up minutes ago. This should be fun! Unfortunately I sold my old version one a few months back so I won't be able to do a careful side-by-side comparison this time around. However I'm betting this copy will not disappoint. Canon seems to be on a roll lately with new lenses.
Hmm... What is with the new hood mount? Actually looks kind of nice....
?
