I used the Tamron for a while and was really happy with the results. IQ is essentially the same as the 24-70L... the downsides are that it is plastic construction (I think), not nearly as robust as the L. I also found that the focus was slow and noisy... and got slower as lighting conditions got worse.
If you're a hobbyist that is planning to use this lens in walk around conditions outside... I'd say that none of the drawbacks would effect you.
That new EF 24-70/4L IS looks really good. Otherwise, get the original 24-70L -- there should be quite a few available soon, and it's certainly a step up from the 28-70L.
I had a 28-70L a while back and just hated it .
Maybe my copy was a dud but as well as not being that sharp wide open it had a really 'nervous' bokeh .
I ended up getting a 24-105L which was much better , although that struggled when I changed from a 40D to a 7D (I have a 17-55 now which is heads above the L )
Oh and I also have a 28-75 which I would not even give room in the bag. That thing couldnt AF its way out of a paper bag indoors , the 24-105 maybe a stop slower but at least it locks focus
But on FF I'd give serious consideration to a Tamron VC 24-70 . I've also seen some good reports of the HSM version from Sigma .
But if you don't mind the variable fstop then the 28-80L is a peach of a lens . It's the MDP's little bro
Another vote to get another 28-70L. The ones I have had (still have one) are sharper than the 24-70L wide open. Not sure how it stacks up against the Mark II.
Dave
I would seriously just go and try some Tamron 24-70 VC's. Most reports I've seen say IQ is in between 24-70L mk I and mk II and you get VC. Otherwise the 28-75 is also a great lens and can be found very cheap on fleabay. Mine was better than the 24-70L I tested.
I have a 28-70L as well. Mine's also showing it's age. Like you the 24-70L v1 isn't an option.
I upgraded to the 70-200 2.8 IS v2 last fall and couldn't believe what an amaing difference the v2 made. Given that my options were either a used 28-70 (which would likely be suffering the same fate as my beloved 28-70L) or a new 24-70L v2 (which has had the same makeover as the 70-200 v2). I've decided to purchase the 24-70L v2.
Choosing any lens other than a Canon L is completely out of the question.
There is a 24-70L f/4 IS for $1500 if you don't mind loosing the f/2.8.
Good luck and let us know which way you went.
There's no doubt that replacing the venerable 28-70L isn't an easy task. The original 24-70L was a dog. The new 2.8 v2 is proving to be the first lens to improve on the quality of the original (28-70).
I would go for the 28-70L in a sec... I got mine for years and the pictures are so sharp... Last Year, when visiting New York, my bag was opened and the lens plunged hard from 5 feet on the concrete at Times Square and bounced a few times... Took it back, tried it and work since as nothing ever happened... just a little knock on cap... I broke my 15L, my 35L and my 16-35LII with only tiny shocks...
This lens is solid as a rock and accurate as hell.. Think I would look for another one if mine wouldn't work anymore.. or may be try to find a place where they could perform repair.. So cheap to find used ones ..
Good luck Gheller
Gheller -- The newest 24-70L II is built really well (see Roger's tear down on the Lens Rental site), and getting outstanding reviews for sharpness and IQ.
The original 24-70 is not as good of engineering as the new, but it was an improvement over the internal mechanisms of the first and second 28-70s.
I've been checking my 24-70L in anticipation of a new 24-70L II test unit arriving next week from CPS. I'll do more comprehensive A-B comparison at that time. But for now, I'm still impressed with the sharpness I get from the 24-70 original at wide open. These shots are wide open on 1D Mark II (so, some 1.3X edge cropping, but otherwise these are full frame except the last one) at ISO 100, 70mm, 70mm, 50mm, and 65mm.
)