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

  

Archive 2014 · EF 24-70L II vs I

  
 
Max10
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · EF 24-70L II vs I


Could you share your experience of EF 24-70L II vs old version in terms of color and contrast?

I don't own both versions together. The new version is definitely sharper than the old one. But somehow I like the images from previous version better than II. It’s just me.



Jan 24, 2014 at 05:47 PM
honsten
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · EF 24-70L II vs I


With my limited and perhaps subjective experience with both these lenses, I found the mk1 version to be quite soft at the long end at infinity and generally lower contrast.
The mk2 version was better in every way and behaved more like a good prime.
I suspect the older one was in need of a service or could have been dropped because I get plenty of amazing photos from this lens from various photographers every week. Get what you can afford, I say.



Jan 24, 2014 at 05:58 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · EF 24-70L II vs I


Max10 wrote:
Could you share your experience of EF 24-70L II vs old version in terms of color and contrast?

...somehow I like the images from previous version better than II. It’s just me.


Maybe it's nostalgia.

I've used both extensively. Like you, not concurrently. I think any "original capture" differences in colour and contrast quickly fall away with minimal post-processing.

If you're comparing OOC (out of camera) jpeg image properties, then you have to ask, "was it the same camera?".



Jan 24, 2014 at 06:04 PM
ggreene
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I never had them together either so it's hard to say but certainly I don't see anything that sticks out as far as how the two zooms render color/contrast. I shoot RAW so I have LR presets for all the venues that I shoot in and as jcolwell said probably easily equalized in post.


Jan 24, 2014 at 06:32 PM
bin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I dont see much difference in terms of color/contrast. The II is just a bit sharper especially into the corners and a bit less fringing but that's about it.


Jan 24, 2014 at 09:30 PM
rebelshooter
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I have not shot the version II, but it is hard for me to imagine it being much better that the original. Unless I got an unusually good copy, it is amazing.



Jan 24, 2014 at 09:44 PM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · EF 24-70L II vs I


rebelshooter wrote:
I have not shot the version II, but it is hard for me to imagine it being much better that the original. Unless I got an unusually good copy, it is amazing.


Don't let your past experiences limit your future experiences.



Jan 24, 2014 at 09:48 PM
jamato8
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I had my version I adjusted by Canon twice so it was right on. Even with that, the II, for me, mine, is sharper and has better contrast and sharper form one end to the other. My II also had to be sent in to get it right. Almost all my Canon lenses have been.


Jan 24, 2014 at 10:00 PM
Eyvind Ness
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · EF 24-70L II vs I


In addition to the apparent sharpness improvements already mentioned, the new one installs a new standard in AF speed and precision (using it with my 5D3)! I was prime shooter for many years before picking up the 24-70II, just to see what the fuss was all about. Now I know


Jan 25, 2014 at 02:24 AM
Daan B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I have used both, but never did a direct 'controlled' comparison. So, take this with a grain of salt (I do have images to compare however). My take: the mkII is sharper wide open and has sharper extreme corners in the wider focal range (even at larger apertures). Contrast of the mkII is more punchy. I can't detect a huge difference in BG rendering (bokeh) and colors. Maybe the mkII has slightly lower CA's, but I am not sure here.

The mkII is known to loose sharpening over time. It has something to do with loosening mechanics and the effect of that on AF. Canon know how to fix this. But it is a design flaw. I believe Lensrentals has an article on that...



Jan 25, 2014 at 04:42 AM
KiboOst
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I have now sold my v1 and never done direct comparison but:
My v1 was tack sharp at [email protected] in center, but rather soft at 70mm even @f8

The v2 is razor sharp entire frame, at all focal length, entire focal range. This is a no brainer at what focal length/aperture you are, it will deliver. This make a big difference.

Also, colors are a bit better, more like my 135/2, and contrast is better globally.
It is also a bit lighter.
It is a smaller at 24mm with the smaller lens hood, but I'm not fan of the design extending at 70mm. I have always to get it back to 24 before putting it in the bag (I always let lens hood on). But not a big deal, and totally nonsense regarding IQ.

The v1 was a good performer, the v2 is a zoomable prime !!



Jan 25, 2014 at 05:15 AM
Richard Nye
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I've owned both and now just the vII. I like the vII images better. More contrast and colors seems more vivid. I rarely used my vI because of size/weight/IQ ratio. The vII gets used much more. I would have never taken my vI out to do landscapes, but I was blown away by a recent landscape I shot with my vII. I will try to post it when I'm at my computer. VII is a prime buster.






Edited on Jan 25, 2014 at 04:10 PM · View previous versions



Jan 25, 2014 at 10:03 AM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · EF 24-70L II vs I


I had a 24-70 V1, and returned it because I was not impressed on my 5D. I have also had and sold a 24-105, and 17-40. Never could get sharp infinity or corners/edges with these lenses using af or manual focus.

My 24-70 mk2 and 16-35 mk2 are working great on my 5d3. But I am not sure the older lenses were really bad. The new lenses with a 5d3 in live view are much more predictable for focus. I have also learned more about focus over the years, most recently about field curvature and the need to focus off center with UWA.

But the fact is, I sold a 24TSE, 35 f1.4 and a Zeiss 50 f1.4 after buying the 24-70, mk2. I considered it a good alternative to those primes.

It would be interesting for me to try one of these older lenses on the 5D3 using my current focus methods.





Jan 25, 2014 at 11:48 AM
Eyvind Ness
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · EF 24-70L II vs I


Ben, how do you now avoid leaning trees with the 24-70mk2?


Jan 25, 2014 at 12:12 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · EF 24-70L II vs I


Eyvind Ness wrote:
Ben, how do you now avoid leaning trees with the 24-70mk2?


Thats why I kept the 17tse. The uptilted angle starts getting important below 24mm. I can always use the 1.4x on my 17TSE but seldom need it.

It was also a matter of economics. Shift was more needed at 17 than 24 and I could not keep or carry both.



Jan 25, 2014 at 02:52 PM
Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · EF 24-70L II vs I


If you look at the most detailed stats available, and ignore the possibility that photozone.de could have tested a bad copy and the missing field curvature data,
v1 = http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/528-canon2470f28ff?start=1
v2 = http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/773-canon2470f28mk2ff?start=1

v2 is better at the wide end for resolution by 10-15% but at 40mm and 70mm the v1 is better on the edges and the v2 is better on the centre.

v1has less barrel distortion but not enough that it makes a difference and I would call it same
v2 has less vignetting but not enough that it makes a difference and I would call it same
v1 has less ca throughout.

All of these observations are visually consistent on

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=101&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=787&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

Which leads me to my conclusion, v2 is better at wide open short end, and v1 is better at the long end, and in between they are pretty close.

So if you tend to use a 24-70 at the short end (24mm) its worthwhile to upgrade to the v2.

[I tend to use my primes (ts24, zeiss 25/2) at this range ( and like my 24-105 for 70-105 range and IS) and have decided not to upgrade. Because ts24 at 24mm
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/603-canon24f35tse2?start=2
has lower barrel distortion by 1/2
has lower vignetting by 1/3
has similar resolution to 24-70 ii
has 1/3 the ca distortion

And it shifts which eliminates much of the need to fix leaning trees

And zeiss 25/2 has:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/713-zeiss25f2eosff?start=1
f2 and hard stop at infinity which makes it my nightscape lens
lower barrel by 1/3
same vignetting at f2.8
similar performance at resolution f2.8 ( with the zeiss look]
1/3 the ca
which again is confirmed visually in
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=780&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=787&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

]



Jan 25, 2014 at 03:32 PM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

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.