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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2013 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?
  
 
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


There seems to have been almost no threads exampleing this new lens .

I know initial reports said it was very lacking in the middle of the range , but was that just the early ones or is it still the case ?

Anyone got examples between it and the 24-105? And or the Tamron 24-70 2.8 .
I gather the Tamron is very good but vignettes heavily on FF


I'm just thinking aloud at the moment but I'm considering a FF sometime in the future . And my current 17-55 is great on the 7D so I'm wanting something that can at least offer better (I'm not sure the 24-105 is a step up) and MUST have IS



May 02, 2013 at 07:07 AM
Chris Fawkes
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


No sorry.

I don't know why anyone would buy one over a 24-105 though.



May 02, 2013 at 08:58 AM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Chris Fawkes wrote:
No sorry.

I don't know why anyone would buy one over a 24-105 though.


I wouldn't but I bet some might prefer it for the better performing IS/AF and maybe to save a little bulk.



May 02, 2013 at 09:08 AM
Chris Fawkes
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


That's most likely right.

I don't own either but I would take the 24-105 if I was going to choose.



May 02, 2013 at 09:17 AM
eyal.ma
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


A couple of friends of mine are shooting videos with DSLR rigs using 5D3s.
They had the 24-105 because of the IS.

Now they are using the 24-70 F/4 when they don't need 70-105.
For them, the IQ is a win.

I don't know exactly why they didn't get the tamron, except that they tested them and decided to go with the canons instead.

So it does have its place. Not for most, as they aren't really cheap, but they are useful.



May 02, 2013 at 10:29 AM
godfather
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


It looks like a great lens and I'm ready to buy. However, I'm not going to pay more for the lens vs a 24-105. So if Canon ever does a 45% off deal on the lens (via cash back, black friday, refurb etc) I'll pick one up. I'm not a professional so I'll wait until the lens comes to me.


May 02, 2013 at 10:56 AM
maxx9photo
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Here's my take if Ihave to choose, actually i chose option # 2.

1. Canon 24-70/2.8 mkII
2. Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC
3. 24-105/4
4. 24-70/4



May 02, 2013 at 11:15 AM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


I kind of question this lens at its price point also. If it were an inexpensive alternative, like the 17-40 f/4, it would be a good alternative, but in its present price range, it doesn't seem to me that there will be a very large market for it.


May 02, 2013 at 11:32 AM
jchin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Why? I think the 24-105/4L is a much better deal, especially if you can find someone selling it from their "5D3 kit" here on FM.


May 02, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Yeah at the moment the price of the new lens is way too high . I can't see it staying up that high if its not selling well . The 24-105 being the kit lens keeps its price well below msrp .

But part of the question is in the IQ of the lens . I mean unless the 24-105 suddey changes into great lens when mounted on a FF body I just don't see the attraction .
I have it and it was ok to decent on my 40D but my 17-55 pulls its pants down and smacks its bum on my 7D . So maybe the pixel density of a 10mp crop (about 5d3 range) is that lenses limit . But I can't help thinking that if I lump up for a 5D3 I'd want something a lot better than my 17-55 , which it seems is a hard target . No the 24-70mk2 is not an option , I'm sure it's a true great but price and lack of IS are the deal breakers on that .



May 02, 2013 at 02:07 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



nburwell
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


I considered the 24-70mm f/4, however, after thinking about it for some time, I decided that my 24-105mm more than meets my needs anyway. The only reason I was thinking of the 24-70mm is because, I usually go to my 70-200mm f/4 lens for anything 70mm and more since it's sharper and gives me better IQ over the 24-105mm.

-Nick



May 02, 2013 at 02:43 PM
Vox Sciurorum
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


I have one. Not much to say. Light comes in one end and goes out the other. If you turn the rings the lens moves. Mounted on a 5D3 it generates images. The images are less distorted than those from the 24-105. I can focus close up so I don't feel naked without my macro lens. My images near 50 mm are dominated by depth of field effects rather than lens effects, but contain sharp edges in the in-focus parts.


May 02, 2013 at 05:53 PM
Tom Dix
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


I tried it and enjoyed it. Better iq than my 24-105 lighter and on my 5d3 and 1ds3, faster to focus.
$1400 is a tad too high for me, and I do enjoy the added reach of the older zoom.
Around $1200 will be a buy it price for me. Very solid zoom.



May 02, 2013 at 08:41 PM
timbop
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Yeah at the moment the price of the new lens is way too high . I can't see it staying up that high if its not selling well . The 24-105 being the kit lens keeps its price well below msrp .

But part of the question is in the IQ of the lens . I mean unless the 24-105 suddey changes into great lens when mounted on a FF body I just don't see the attraction .
I have it and it was ok to decent on my 40D but my 17-55 pulls its pants down and smacks its bum
...Show more

And therein lies the rub - there IS NO FF equivalent of the 17-55IS. You have to give up something - f/2.8, IS, IQ, or a bunch of cash. I kept my 7D longer than I wanted to purely for the excellent 17-55. The 24-105 is a nice lens, but my copy at least is not as sharp as my 17-55 was. Some day I will probably get the 24-70/2.8 II, but not until the price gets more reasonable - and of course I will be giving up a ton of cash AND the IS



May 02, 2013 at 09:11 PM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


^^^
I think your are probably correct Tim . 2.8 and FF is the better move as that at least offers a difference from the crop combo . Unfortuantly at the moment that leaves the stabilised options down to 1 .
Maybe sigma can come the rescue and bring out a 24-70 2.8 OS 'A' line lens in the near future .
If they can come up with 35/1.4 type IQ at a decent price then they would have a sure fire winner



May 03, 2013 at 12:20 AM
jorkata
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


godfather wrote:
I'm not a professional so I'll wait until the lens comes to me.


Hehe, same here.

The relatively compact size of this lens is appealing to me.
But I'll consider it only when the price drops to $1050 or lower.
At its current price, we are just not meant to be together .



May 03, 2013 at 12:23 AM
Tom_W
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Vox Sciurorum wrote:
The images are less distorted than those from the 24-105. I can focus close up so I don't feel naked without my macro lens. My images near 50 mm are dominated by depth of field effects rather than lens effects, but contain sharp edges in the in-focus parts.


I did overlook the distortion advantage over the 24-105, as well as the close focus distance. This lens is almost at macro at 70 mm with a 0.7X magnification.

Still priced a little steep for me, but I wasn't fair at discussing its advantages.



May 03, 2013 at 12:59 AM
geniousc
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


I don't think I would touch one until I seen tests confirming that it is sharp throughout the zoom range. So far 2 respected lens testers have proclaimed it to be not up to standard at 50mm. It would be a nice lens without that little problem.

Gene



May 03, 2013 at 01:14 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Chris Fawkes wrote:
No sorry.

I don't know why anyone would buy one over a 24-105 though.


better IQ (other than perhaps RIGHT at 50mm) with a lot less distortion at 24mm and better edges across much of the range and better centers too (again perhaps not RIGHT near 50mm, but supposedly it's a fairly narrow window where it goes worse like just 45-55mm or something but better 24-45 and 55-70, apparently), built-in (if limited) macro
(smaller/lighter)

price is kinda rough now on it though, I wonder how it compares to the tamron (larger/heavier, but f/2.8)

i have not used the 24-70 f/4 IS myself though

i found the 24-105 a bit disappointing

24-70 II is nice (the copy variation in DOF placement is a bit interesting at the price, that said you can easily enough get a copy that is better than the other lenses in the range even it it might take many to get one that does everything the best this design can do)

didn't try the tamron 24-70 VC (have their old 28-75, it is actually clearly sharper across the frame than the 24-105s I tried, altough it obviously lacks IS and has less range, the AF is also decidedly slower and on FF near 75mm it gets some odd double bokeh at the edges which is a bit ugly if certain obejcts fall at certain spots within the DOF, got it for only $275 new I think but I believe they cost more now) (also have their 17-50 2.8 non-IS which is awesome on aps-c, bit faster af then the 28-75 even a bit more contrast and bit less tamron cast but the very farthest corners are a touch softer but it just deep corners)



May 03, 2013 at 03:22 AM
Vox Sciurorum
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Add up points from the following lists, one point for each statement you agree with. You must buy the lens which scores the most points. In case of a tie buy both lenses. If you agree with the two first statements and not the rest you should buy the f/2.8 instead of either f/4.

24-105: * I want approval from people on the Internet * I shoot a lot in the 80-105mm range * I am price-sensitive

24-70: * I shoot mostly in the 24-70 range * I want to shoot extreme closeups without bringing another lens * I am weight-sensitive



May 04, 2013 at 02:18 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password