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       3      
4
       end
  

Archive 2013 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!

  
 
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


OntheRez wrote:
Dan, while everyone rants back and forth about lenses - just got to say - that's a truly fine image, and I don't really care what tool you used to create it. The stillness of the water and your rendering of it are stunning.

Robert


Thanks, Robert! :-)

Dan



Jul 27, 2013 at 08:52 PM
dgdg
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


OntheRez wrote:
Dan, while everyone rants back and forth about lenses - just got to say - that's a truly fine image, and I don't really care what tool you used to create it. The stillness of the water and your rendering of it are stunning.

Robert


+1



Jul 28, 2013 at 08:48 AM
Daan B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


skibum5 wrote:
Maybe it depends what you shoot too. Do you end up with lots of fine forest detail against clouds/sky at the far upper corners at 24mm? Because 24-105 can toss out a lot of PF in such scenarios while the 24-70 II is astonishingly clean, even better than the 24 1.4 II prime in that regard!

And if you look at lab measured lateral CA it DOES measure out to have a good bit at 24mm, twice as much or more than many of the others.

I tried three even fearing I was getting bad copies too. Maybe all three were on
...Show more

I didn't give an advice, just an opinion. Even so, when checking the resolution charts@ f/8 of both lenses at Photozone, the differences are minimal. So, it isn't all about resolution. But even the CA's, distortions and vignetting are pretty similar, except for 24mm. At 24mm the 24-70L II is a better performer. However, at 105mm the 24-105L is better. I guess it depends on your needs and what you shoot. The 24-105L still costs one third of the 24-70L II...



Jul 30, 2013 at 03:06 AM
UCSB
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


My second refurb copy of the 24-70 II came in today. This copy has checked out fine and I'm sending the first lens back. Just wanted to let anyone considering a refurb copy know that it is possible to get a good copy. This is my second Canon refurb. The other lens was the 100 L Macro. It is very nice lens also. I noticed on a note in the box with the 24-70 II that the warranty on the lens was ONE YEAR. I then went to the Canon online store and noticed that the refurb lenses all have this one year warranty.


Aug 01, 2013 at 01:48 AM
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


I can't believe we have people saying the 24-70L II is not a good landscape lens. After owning one for 6 months I be a monkey's uncle if it's not an excellent landscape lens, with very good corner and edge performance. I thought my 24-105L was good (barrel distortion at 24mm aside), but the 24-70L II is a step above in IQ. But I do miss that extra 35mm. I wish the 24-70L had of become a 24-85L as a compromise.


Aug 01, 2013 at 06:35 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


Daan B wrote:
I didn't give an advice, just an opinion. Even so, when checking the resolution charts@ f/8 of both lenses at Photozone, the differences are minimal. So, it isn't all about resolution. But even the CA's, distortions and vignetting are pretty similar, except for 24mm. At 24mm the 24-70L II is a better performer. However, at 105mm the 24-105L is better. I guess it depends on your needs and what you shoot. The 24-105L still costs one third of the 24-70L II...


Any yeah it certainly depends upon what you shoot, your needs, how picky, etc. nothing wrong if you love the 24-105L.

(I do have to say that the PZ results do not really show a minimal difference between the 24-105 and 24-70 II, they are often 200-500 points apart! which is VERY easily noticeable in real world, trivially easy to spot, consider that you can tell even just 50-100 points apart and that much of time people argue about lenses differing by only 50-200 apart. Again it depends upon your needs, but many, especially for landscape, do pay a special attention to the near 24mm zone since they have plenty of other options to sharply cover higher ranges anyway, getting a top 24mm is often key in this case, this was the first zoom to every truly pull that off to prime-like levels for the picky photographers.)



Aug 01, 2013 at 07:33 PM
Tony B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


I like the 24-70vII & am happy with its IQ across the range in relation to what I paid & in comparison to the price of the original model.



Aug 02, 2013 at 03:31 AM
Daan B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


skibum5 wrote:
Any yeah it certainly depends upon what you shoot, your needs, how picky, etc. nothing wrong if you love the 24-105L.

(I do have to say that the PZ results do not really show a minimal difference between the 24-105 and 24-70 II, they are often 200-500 points apart! which is VERY easily noticeable in real world, trivially easy to spot, consider that you can tell even just 50-100 points apart and that much of time people argue about lenses differing by only 50-200 apart. Again it depends upon your needs, but many, especially for landscape, do pay a special
...Show more

In practice, also when counting in PP, differences are minimal to me. The differences are greater when using the 24-70L handheld with low shutterspeeds or the 24-105L with IS.

The 24mm is important to landscape shooters. But just like many people have other options for the longer focal lengths, 24mm is also already covered by a few number of excellent lenses.

But to give this a rest... if you need the best performance at 24mm and your only choices are the 24-70L II or the 24-105L the 24-70L II has the better specs. But again, if you need 105mm or IS...



Aug 02, 2013 at 12:04 PM
UCSB
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


I've had my 24-70 II for just under two weeks and I have taken a little time to see how it compares to some of my other lenses. It is really a unique lens. I am getting prime level sharpness on my copy ... 135 L sharpness. Not seeing the minimal differences when compared to the 24-105 L ... the differences are significant. But, I like the 24-105 L and will be keeping it. It is not that the 24-105 L is bad, it is that the 24-70 II is exceptionally good. It can produce much better images than the 24-105 and I had gone through three copies to get my copy of the 24-105 and it was calibrated by Canon under CPS. Anyway, just wanted to contribute a little feedback. One last thing, as hard as it is for me to say this, the lens' performance does support a higher price. I am happy that I figured out how to pick up one.

Edit: My comments on the 24-70 II and 24-105 are only based on looking at each lens wide open and at various apertures down to 5.6. My primary interest is event and portrait shooting. Not trying to comment directly on the landscape discussion above.



Aug 12, 2013 at 02:57 AM
SchnellerGT
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


Funny. I am checking on this thread for the first time in many weeks. I didn't expect it to be on the top of the first page!

Anyway, I just got back from yet another trip with the 24-70. It continues to impress. Compared to the 24-105, I can only say that I have bought (and then sold) it twice, never impressed with it. The 24-70II will have to be torn from my cold dead hands by comparison. It ticks all my boxes. It is a zoomable prime with wonderful flare control, CA control, colors, sharpness, etc. Many of my shots have that "3D" pop to them. Truth be told, I have not picked up my 85/1.8 since getting it. If I need something longer than 70mm, I just pop on the 135L. They make for an amazing travel combo and relatively light-weight bag.

As for the lack of IS, I can say I have taken only maybe a half-dozen shots where it would have come in handy. Otherwise, I think going forward with say a 5D MkIV in a few years, bumping the ISO high enough will make needed IS nearly irrelevant.





Aug 12, 2013 at 06:30 AM
Kolor-Pikker
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


SchnellerGT wroteIt is a zoomable prime with wonderful flare control, CA control, colors, sharpness, etc. Many of my shots have that "3D" pop to them.
Zoomable prime... I think that reflects my view of this lens too, and I've only had it for a couple of days now. It's that strange feeling when you're looking at a backlit shot and see no CA or fringing, and then realize that you shot wide-open with a zoom (that isn't white).

As for the lack of IS, I can say I have taken only maybe a half-dozen shots where it would have come in handy. Otherwise, I think going forward with say a 5D MkIV in a few years, bumping the ISO high enough will make needed IS nearly irrelevant.
Once I get my dirty hands on a 1Dx, I'll just leave it on Auto-ISO and be done with having to worry about ISO forever, IS doesn't help to stop motion anyway. IS actually made me foil some shots every now and then by making me feel too secure about the shutter speed I was using, resulting in sharp backgrounds and blurred subjects.



Aug 12, 2013 at 10:05 AM
Invertalon
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · 24-70 2.8L II: Impressive!


I rented the 24L II a few weeks ago after pondering over that lens for years... I have owned the 24-70 II since release, so I was excited to see how they compared.

Sadly, I was greatly underwhelmed by the prime... The zoom is better in terms of resolution, CA and the rendering (contrast/colors). The prime really is only good for the f/1.4 IMO, the zoom is better everywhere else, easily.

I did return my first 24-70 II though after I noticed it was de-centered. Right side of the frame was always hard to get in focus (and never really did get very sharp). I exchanged and my new copy is flawless. Dead even with my eyes on both sides/edges/corners of the frame. I did have to get the front element replaced when I noticed scratches behind the front element, and then when I got that back the focus ring made a spring noise (weird). They repaired it again and has been perfect ever since... It is just incredibly sharp end to end and focus is so fast. Nothing NOT to love about this lens. Even the weight is great... It did not feel any heavier than my 24-105 prior, honestly.



Aug 12, 2013 at 10:21 AM
1       2       3      
4
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       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.