Upload & Sell: Off
got to muck around with a few copies of various lenses (I think more than ever that copy variation is real, saw some clear diff between 17-40, etc. that said, it's complex, lenses may not be universally better but only on certain parts of the frame or even only at certain depths in scenes at certain parts, since oddly, field curvature affects appeared to differ between copies at times, trying to pick the perfect copy might easily drive one mad, I believe one could cherry pick better copies, but it would be a LOT of complex (as I said can't just test a single edge or the center, need to test all over, need to test charts and various real world scenes to also see how field curvatures work, etc. tricky stuff), time consuming work, many copies, and maybe it's easiest to jsut forget it all unless you notice something really bad)
I think there may be something to some 24-70 II being a bit sharper than others, center frame area, f/2.8-f/4 or so.
Even the worst were still almost as good as the 70-300mm L at center frame 70mm though and the 70-300mm is about the best there is there other than the 70-200 2.8 IS II. Wost 24-70 II at f/2.8 was like a 70-200 f/4 IS at f/4 70mm. Best is already better at f/2.8 than the 70-300mm L (f/4) and noticeably better than the 70-200 f/4 IS at f/4 and I think must be a match for the fabled beyond fabled 70-200 2/8 IS II.
At the edges it's not a match for the 70-200/70-300 top lenses though, my 70-300L clearly beats it at f/4 and f/6.3 at the extreme centered edge at 700mm, but just 1/8th in from the edge, the 24-70 IIs are close already. So it is still decent for landscapes at 70mm and should be superb for portraits. The better at 70mm 24-70 II copies are crazy sharp near center frame f/2.8 70mm.
Better at 70mm 24-70 IIs appear to peak in sharpness before f/6.3, while the worst appear to peak closer to f/6.3 (f/6.3 was sharper than f/4 on some copies, the ones a touch less sharp at f/2.8, and yet f/4 was sharper than f/6.3 on the copies sharpest at f/2.8, note on those copies f/6.3 was still just a hair sharper than f/6.3 on the worst at 70mm copies; far centered edge differences at 70mm appeared to be less noticeable than center frame differences copy to copy actually).
(Not sure but it might be that the super sharp at 70mm f/2.8 center frame copies tend to also be crisper for subjects close in and blurrier, at least on one of the edges for objects farther away near with some sort of odd field curvature. Have to look things over, but for now, it's time to prepare for the Yankees! So you will have to wait a day or more for my detailed comments and tests on everything, 24mm, 28mm, more 70mm.)
It seems to show some LoCA under intense conditions at 70mm in the corners, but no worse than anything else, at 24mm it seems free of LoCA under such touch circumstances for landscapes.
Edited on Oct 09, 2012 at 12:04 AM · View previous versions