Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  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 ?

  
 
saneproduction
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


The 17-55 IS is a truly great lens and I can see holding onto the crop format. Of course due to sensor size focal length equivalence, DOF is about equal to a 24-70 F4 IS on a 5DIII and you can more than make up the stop in ISO.

I went 24-70 II with my 5DIII and I am absolutely blown away. It has a super special look, the images just pop more than even my L primes in some cases. I just don't need IS at those focal lengths as I don't like subject motion blur and keep the shutter speeds at 1/125-1/250. If it is too dark I grab a prime. I don't really understand what people use 1/60-1/30-1/15 for unless they are doing intentional motion blur for band photography or handheld night architecture photographs.

I suppose I just don't have a good understanding of how IS is critical at this FL but I am interested to hear good reasons for it.



May 04, 2013 at 11:08 AM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


Thing is Sane my man
The general consensus before the 24-70 mk2 came out was that it would have IS . And after it was announced the overwhelming chatter on here and many other forum was a shock that it DIDNT have IS and how could canon justify the price without it .

And why the thinking that having IS in such a lens (its a comment I've seen from a few on here) would have a detrimental effect on the IQ ? I just don't get that . Is the 70-200/4 with IS a worse performer than the non IS version? (hint NO) . Was the little 18-55 EFs IS worse than the old non IS (hint again NO) same goes for all the big whites , the 35/2 , 24/2.8 & 28/2.8 . . Oh add the 100 macro in that list as well

Infact the only IS lenses that can really be considered even a little bit worse than their non IS version is the 300/4 & 70-200/2.8 (mk1) .
But I think in the 300/4's case they went for a much more complex design (it has loads more elements/groups and not all the extra will be the IS) probably to get the focus much closer .

As has been said a few times before its better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it . . There is always the little switch that turns it off




May 04, 2013 at 01:15 PM
AaronNegro
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Anyone actually have and USE the 24-70/4L ?


That's my take but...I believe the 24-70 f4 will be dropping price more than any other Canon lens in the next few years.


May 04, 2013 at 03:15 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.