Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 end

jctriguy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

michael49 wrote:
jctriguy wrote:
.....Not everyone buys used camera gear, so the price for those people is 1100 vs 1500. I would guess that a significant majority of people buy gear from actual stores.
....

Well, then those individuals will have to continue to suffer from their "gotta buy a new lens" snobbery I suppose. I've bought most of my lenses used - here, of course.

I bet there is a relationship between the number of new and used lenses sold. If everyone bought used, there would be no used lenses to buy.

Mar 07, 2013 at 03:12 AM

melcat
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

boingyman wrote:
I think for people that are into landscape/cityscape that really want the excellent IQ (sharper edges, good distortion/vignetting control

If the vignetting really doesn't go away at 24mm no matter how much you stop down I would consider that a serious problem for landscape. It's between 1 and 2 stops, yet in landscapes one often wants an additional stop or two to correct polarizer effects in the sky, excessive dynamic range etc. In fact that was the thing that most caught my eye from the results of the review in the OP.

, 9 blades that produce beautiful 18 point sunstars)

I think I know where this meme came from, but in any case I can't stand the effect. Wasn't it last popular in the 1970s?

...cheaper than the 24-70 2.8 II

It depends a bit how robust it is. Cheaper to buy one lens that lasts.

Smaller size is also nice as well.

Weight is actually more important than size for landscape.

Mar 07, 2013 at 12:24 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

melcat wrote:
If the vignetting really doesn't go away at 24mm no matter how much you stop down I would consider that a serious problem for landscape.

All lenses in this category vignette to at least some extent, yet all can work as landscape lenses. I shoot a lot of landscape subjects using the 24-105 (since the lens was first introduced) and the 24-70 v.2 (a few months) and I don't find vignetting to be much of an issue.

1. In the majority of photographs you don't even notice it and no correction is necessary.

2. Since it is most apparent at the largest apertures, and much landscape is done at smaller apertures, you'll rarely if ever see the worst case amount of vignetting.

3. Sometimes (more often than you might expect) a bit of vignetting can enhance the photograph. (It is a long story that I won't recite here, but often photographers actually burn down the edges and corners in post.)

4. The vignetting is easily eliminated (in most cases automatically, if that is your choice) in post when using software that includes lens profiles.

I think I do get the value proposition of the 24-70. Compared to the 24-70 f/2.8 it is less expensive, and that probably makes in appealing to some who associate the 24-70 focal length with "pro" lenses. It does provide a welcome and useful close-focusing ability. The IS gives it one advantage - for at least some photographers - over the 24-70 f/2.8. Its smaller size/bulk is valuable to a number of photographers.

However, I still have a hard time seeing its value overall against the other two existing 24mm-whatever L zooms. Few who believe they would want the 24-70 f/2.8 L will be willing to go with this lens instead, aside from a few who primarily want the IS and the close focusing. Few who rely on the 24-105 will want to give up the 70-105mm focal length range, and few will find any real world improvement in their photographs related to differences in optical performance.

I feel like the f/4 24-70 looks like a fine lens - well designed and with a fine feature set for some photographers. The problem, at least right now, seems to me that the arguable advantages that it might offer will likely seem compelling to only a small number of photographers when the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-105 f/4 IS are the alternatives.

Mar 07, 2013 at 02:38 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

The mentioned focus shift only occurs in macro mode? Did I get this right?

Ralph

Mar 07, 2013 at 08:30 PM

melcat
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

gdanmitchell wrote:
All lenses in this category vignette to at least some extent,

Where did I say I did or would use a lens in this category? I have the focal lengths otherwise covered.

In the majority of photographs you don't even notice it and no correction is necessary.

I suppose you mean you don't notice it.

The vignetting is easily eliminated (in most cases automatically, if that is your choice) in post when using software that includes lens profiles.

You are rather missing the point here. It isn't that it can't be corrected, it's that if you want to increase the brightness in the corners by a further 1-2 stops for any other reason you will, with a Canon body, run into problems doing so, because there just isn't 4 stops headroom.

I am happy for you if your personal style happens to suit the lens defects on offer, but I prefer to make my own artistic decisions.

Mar 08, 2013 at 08:26 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

gdanmitchell wrote:
In the majority of photographs you don't even notice it and no correction is necessary.

melcat replied:
I suppose you mean you don't notice it.

No, I wrote precisely what I meant. Photographers and viewers won't notice it, and in many cases some vignetting works to focus attention on the central portion of the image - the reason that many photographers/printers have and continue to employ the option of burning down edges a bit.

gdanmitchell wrote:
The vignetting is easily eliminated (in most cases automatically, if that is your choice) in post when using software that includes lens profiles.

melcat replied:
You are rather missing the point here.

Don't think so.

melcat wrote:
I am happy for you if your personal style happens to suit the lens defects on offer, but I prefer to make my own artistic decisions.

Classy: "... your personal style happens to suit the lens defects..." Somehow, I suspect that your "happ[iness] for" me may be a bit less than genuine... ;-)

And you are, of course, free to make any decisions you want and I would not suggest otherwise.

Despite the sideshow, the primary thrust of my reply to your earlier message was directed toward your assertion regarding vignetting at 24mm for landscape photography, as follows:

melcat wrote:
If the vignetting really doesn't go away at 24mm no matter how much you stop down I would consider that a serious problem for landscape.

Take care,

24-105mm f/4 L IS:

This image is copyrighted by the owner

Edited on Mar 09, 2013 at 01:05 AM · View previous versions

Mar 08, 2013 at 06:07 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

Looks to me like it is a serious problem for landscape NOT to use a 24-105 ...

Mar 08, 2013 at 07:18 PM

StillFingerz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #8 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

twistedlim wrote:
I cannot replecate the focus shift in the macro mode. My lens seems fine. It seems fine all the way around.

Thanks Rich, perhaps the focus shift issue is a QC problem with the lens. If your lens does not exhibit the bad behavior then maybe it's something Canon can adjust/fine tune. Let's hope your lens isn't the exception...

Mar 08, 2013 at 07:49 PM

Dan-O
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

I used to lug around a 24-70 f/2.8 L, a 70-200 f/2.8L and a 1v in a DryZone 200 and a metal Bogen tripod with 3-way pan/tilt head all day - ouch! Now my mantra is to get the weight down, so I like the considerably less weight of the 24-70 f/4 IS paired with a 70-200 f/4 IS and carbon fiber tripod (for landscape work) and DryZone Rover. I am thinking about a 6D now that prices are becoming more attractive. I do agree twith other posters that the 24-70 f/4 IS is too expensive, and feel it should be closer to $1100-$1200 tops. Hopefully CPS can fix whatever bugs crop up in the initial production run and the factory can adjust going forward if it is a systemic issue in production.

Mar 09, 2013 at 03:12 AM

skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

Ralph Conway wrote:
Looks to me like it is a serious problem for landscape NOT to use a 24-105 ...

Mar 09, 2013 at 05:33 AM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

It was a joke to melcats comment and Dans answer, skibum.

Edited on Mar 20, 2013 at 04:03 PM · View previous versions

Mar 09, 2013 at 08:45 AM

15Bit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

The 24-70mm f/4 does look like a hard sell with the 24-105mm still available at 60% of the price.

Mar 09, 2013 at 01:05 PM

Cphoto1954
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #13 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

I was one of the few who were actually quite excited about the announcement of Canon’s new 24-70 F4 IS lens. For me it seemed like a good replacement for my current 24-105 F4 IS lens. I was hopeful for it to be a better performer all around with newer IS, nine blade aperture and better quality at 24mm.

So when it arrived in my local camera store I tested in the real world (for me) against my current lens. With the exception of how it performed at 24mm I was thoroughly disappointed with it. At 24mm it was a sharper and much better in the corners for sure.

I tried both close and mid-range subjects at 35mm, 50mm and 70mm setting at F4, F5.6 and F8 and did the same setting (same subjects) using my existing 24-105.
I had seen some reviews that it was not very sharp at 50mm. Well that was an understatement it was not acceptable to me at 50mm even stopped down to f8.

So, sorry Canon – if you had a lens close to what the 2.8 version is you would have gotten my money, yes even at the current price without any rebates involved. It is hard to believe that they actually let an “L” lens that performs this poorly get out there. Heck if your 2.8 had IS I would buy it now (at its current price of course).

Mar 20, 2013 at 03:29 PM

Mike Liu
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #14 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

I had higher hopes for this lens too (maybe comparable to 24-70II?) but at the current price and with the reviews so far, very hard sale given how much the 24-105L is going for nowadays.

Mar 20, 2013 at 03:45 PM

Massimo Foti
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS reviewed at Photozone

Cphoto1954 wrote:
I was one of the few who were actually quite excited about the announcement of Canon’s new 24-70 F4 IS lens. For me it seemed like a good replacement for my current 24-105 F4 IS lens. I was hopeful for it to be a better performer all around with newer IS, nine blade aperture and better quality at 24mm.

I was feeling pretty much the same. In the end I am keeping my 24-105 and I just ordered a 24mm IS.

Massimo

Mar 20, 2013 at 04:04 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end